Wayward Black Skimmer Chick

[Arthur Morris]

After struggling to photograph small skimmer chicks at Nickerson with the 800, the 2X, and Live View/Live Mode AF for several hours, I took a walk down by the ocean in front of the east colony; this little one appeared magically right in front of me. It was in great danger of becoming lunch to a gull or being whacked about by an adult skimmer. After photographing the bird for a while it headed back towards the colony. Reluctant to interfere with nature, I finally picked the tired chick up and placed him under some beach vegetation about 30 feet inside the ropes. I will never know if it makes it or not.

Canon 800mm f/5.6L IS lens, 1.4X III TC, EOS-1DX. ISO 800. Evaluative metering +1 stop: 1/400 sec. at f/10. Gitzo 3532 LS CF tripod (https://store.birdsasart.com/shop/item.aspx?itemid=20) with the legs splayed and the Mongoose M3.6. (https://store.birdsasart.com/shop/item.aspx?itemid=274)

Don't be shy; all honest comments and questions welcome.

[gail bisson]

Man, that is one ugly chick! Actually, he is so ugly he is cute!
I am amazed that you were actually able to pick the chick up-I have never heard of this. I just assumed they would scurry away or the parents would go ballistic.
Anyway, back to the image.
I like the light and the great HA and lovely eye. Also like that you have been able to maintain the fluffiness of the feathers.
I wish the leg wasn't blurred but like the little grains of sands being kicked up by the foot.
Gail

[David Salem]

Never seen a skimmer chick before. Sure is a gangly looking thing. They obviously dont get that unique lower mandible until later in there development.

Feather (down) detail is good and exposure is perfect. Blurred foot is a distraction. Nice capture.

David

[Andrew Merwin]

Except for the blurred foot which I like because it shows movement, I agree with the above comments.

[Arthur Morris]

Thanks Gail, David, and Andrew. As for the blurred foot and the flying sand, I like them both and think that they add to the image. That said, wide open with the 800 5.6 and the TC is f/8. I needed to stop down a bit with a small bird near minimum focusing distance. And I would much rather be working at ISO 800 than at ISO 1600. The latter would have given me 1/800 sec. and the blur would have still been evident. What should I have done differently???

[Jack Breakfast]

Love the blurred foot. Movement is important in photographs like these, or so I feel. The blurred foot compliments the flying sand grains, and vice versa. Motion! This photo is sweet in other ways also. But all of this pales in comparison to the fact that you picked up this chicklet and carried him (or her?) away...I would have done the same in your position, ambivalently. Lucky you, having a photo of the very chicklet whom you hopefully rescued...

[Oscar Dewhurst]

Love the light and colours, but agree about the blurred foot. I would have gone to ISO 1600 to get a faster shutter speed I think. Maybe a bit tight in the frame as well?

Oscar

[Alan Murphy]

Nice comp and low angle. DOF looks very narrow to me with the head sharp and the wings slightly OOF. (might just be the soft plumage) Why is there a halo of white soft feathers around the bird?

[Arthur Morris]

Nice comp and low angle. DOF looks very narrow to me with the head sharp and the wings slightly OOF. (might just be the soft plumage) Why is there a halo of white soft feathers around the bird?

Thanks Alan. DOF is of course very narrow with the bird just outside MFD. Agree on the oof wings. The white halo is not actually a halo--it is present in the original. Not sure why.

[Satish Ranadive]

Very sweet image.Love colorscheme, the fluffiness of the feathers,lights and composition.

Regards,
Satish.

[Tom Rambaut]

I think the 'Halo' is just the fine down feathers reflecting the light. Nice eye contact and raised foot. TFS

[dankearl]

Very nice story and I like the chick a lot. All beak and head!
I also would have gone 1600, but nice as is.

[Grace Scalzo]

Sweet. I love it as is. The "halo" looks like down to me. Glad you gave him a chance.

[Ken Watkins]

I like this as presented, the blurred foot and flying sand make it more natural for me.

Art well done on your "rescue" attempt, let's hope it worked!

[Robert Holguin]

Wonderful shot. I really like the pose and with Jack on this one concerning the foot it shows motion and I like it. Great shooting angle and excellent details.
Oh and way to go on rescueing the chick hopefully it makes it.
Well done.

[Frank Schauf]

Excellent pose and details, Arthur.

[arash_hazeghi]

sweet light and pose, the shallow DOF has created a 3D effect here which I like. I haven't seen any chicks so far

[Melissa Groo]

I've seen similar halo effects on images I've taken from the down on chicks' feathers, depending on how light hits it. Really like this image, Artie. Great detail, light, and sense of movement. Glad to hear you "interfered" and hope it was to good effect.