Thanks for your lengthy reply, CJ.
I'll comment in your post to keep it a little easy to read.
"C J Campbell" <christophercampbell@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:2008051108324911272-christophercampbell@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On 2008-05-11 02:48:06 -0700, "Focus" <focus@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> said:
>
>> ****tugal seems to be flooded with birds: I hear them everywhere, but I
>> can't
>> see them!
>> So I found some other wildlife that might be interesting for you:
>>
>> http://photos-of-****tugal.com/Wildlife/
>>
>> Comments welcome.
>> (Please be gentle: they are my first wildlife attempt ;-)
>
> A good start -- I think I see what you are trying to do here, so I have
a
> few comments.
>
> First of all, toss anything that has a blurry head or eyes. We all get
> those pictures; few of us show them. That particularly means head or
eyes
> obscured by brush, trees, or whatever. Remember, in wildlife photography
> you are likely to take hundreds of shots, but only one will be THE shot.
In these cases, the blur is caused by some tree or twig in front of the
animal and I did that on purpose.
> You will notice that deer have this maddening habit of standing with
their
> bodies in the shade and their heads in sunlight. So you either get a low
> contrast picture with over-exposed heads and under-exposed bodies, or
you
> get something where you can't see part of the animal at all. Small
wonder
> that people want to shoot them with real weapons instead of cameras! I
> think they are deliberately mocking us.
It might be much more rewarding too: I tastes both animals and they are
great! ;-)
> Well, I expose for the highlights if I have to, but understand, these
will
> not be your best shots. They sure are not mine. Generally, if you have
> enough patience, the animal will either move fully into sun or all the
way
> into the shade, but he will stay there for only a few seconds. Have the
> camera set to motor drive and when you have him where you want him, let
> 'er rip.
I don't see that much shade. Could it be a problem with the monitor?
Gamma maybe?
Unless others agree.
> You are doing good at getting close enough for environmental shots like
> these. You will eventually want to get closer for ****traiture, but have
> patience with that. Get the technique down with the environmental shots
> first.
I haven't decided yet what I like more: ****trait or this "landscape" way.
> A good way to practice is to use the Moose Peterson teddy bear training
> tool: get three teddy bears: a white bear, a brown bear, and a black
bear.
> Then photograph them together (preferably using a 200mm lens and, say a
> 70mm lens) in all kinds of light against dark, light and neutral
> backgrounds, lit from the front, with back lighting, and with light
> overhead. Bracket your exposures in 1/3 stop increments to a full stop
> both up and down. Keep careful notes on which exposure is which. Then
> compare the results. This will calibrate your eye and your camera to get
> the exposure you want in almost any kind of lighting.
I'm 100% sure you're right, but I don't have the patience to do all that.
I'll just learn "on the fly" ;-)
> One thing you will learn is that the background, if it is dark, will
often
> drop out entirely if the animal is properly exposed. Great if you are
> trying to get rid of a distracting tangle of brush behind a jack rabbit.
> Terrible if you are trying to show the animal's environment. Things to
> remember when you are trying to express your artistic vision.
I had a feeling the camera was not very consistent with light measuring
and
color.
Strangely enough, nobody seems to see that. Some pictures the grass looks
more green, others more blue. Some pictures are light, others dark. This
was
a big problem with the trees (other post) and also when I made pictures on
a
****p on the river in Lisbon. Two shots of the same scene in rapid
succession, gave two very different shades of light.
Although the 40D is very sharp for a 10 MP camera, I decided to exchange
it
in favor of the Sony A350. After looking at the JPG's of the 40D, I
understood there are no in camera JPG's that I like at all. The better
consistency in light, the tiltable screen and a few other things made me
go
back.
For now that's it, because the people at the store where I exchanged the
camera's, don't like me anymore ;-) LOL!
No wonder: I wouldn't want a lot of customers like me either....
Thanks again, CJ!
--
Focus
|
