Wavy Trio

[Bob Smith]

159242<script type="text/javascript" src="safari-extension://com.ebay.safari.myebaymanager-QYHMMGCMJR/69faf8ae/background/helpers/prefilterHelper.js"></script>These birds were part of a large flock of 100's of birds that were dropping into an even larger flock of many 1000's in a harvested potato field. They were part of the largest migration ever of west coast snow geese from Wrangell Is. due to a huge survival on the nesting grounds last summer. Comments much appreciated and to start it off I'm thinking that I probably should have a bit more space up front, and maybe even beneath, the birds.7DII;Canon EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM; ISO 800;f/6.3;1/640;

[Jim Keener]

Hi, Bob. I'm glad to see others put up BIFs. Your geese look well fed! We have thousands in my area, both at the Bernardo Wildlife Area and the Bosque del Apache. I like the almost halo light that edges the tops of the heads and necks. It's probably just me, but I think the birds could use a big more exposure, a half to one stop, or lighten the shadows a bit. Also, it appears that you and I are sharing a problem with chromatic aberration. I see it most pronounced along the leading edges far wings and the leading edges of the heads. Not certain how to work with that. I haven't been that successful with it.

Funny about crops. My thought at first was less space on the bottom, but after looking some more and re-reading your comments, the birds are landing, and I think you're correct: a bit more space on the bottom would help show that.

Thanks for the image.

[Diane Miller]

A very pleasing group, and nice that you got matching wing positions. Is it much of a crop? If not, it's good that you were able to get close to these guys.

Your shooting specs look good for that equipment -- I don't care for the image quality above ISO 800 on that body. But at the same time it looks like it might benefit from a touch more exposure -- shouldn't be a problem to do it in post processing unless you have already boosted it a lot.
I could see a touch more space on the right, but not much and certainly not a major factor.

Hope to see more!

[Jack Dean III]

Nice shot Bob. I agree that a bit more room to the bottom and right would be nice.

[Bob Smith]

159283Thanks folks. The post is 6.4MP and the original 20MP so does that make it a 33% crop Dianne? I've come to about the same conclusion with regard to ISO on the 7DII. Arthur said somewhere that he chooses his for sunny days and I'm trying to stick with that and use my 5DIII when it's dull overcast. I think that line along the leading head edge of the juvenile is due to some over sharpening Jim so I've cut back in the repost as well as adding some exposure and doing some repositioning in the frame. I did experiment with the exposure on the 1st post Dianne-I think whatever level is chosen on any given day may depend on things like the mood of the day or the weather outside or ???, as I think, do many PP decisions.<script type="text/javascript" src="safari-extension://com.ebay.safari.myebaymanager-QYHMMGCMJR/a103ed21/background/helpers/prefilterHelper.js"></script><script type="text/javascript" src="safari-extension://com.ebay.safari.myebaymanager-QYHMMGCMJR/a103ed21/background/helpers/prefilterHelper.js"></script><script type="text/javascript" src="safari-extension://com.ebay.safari.myebaymanager-QYHMMGCMJR/a103ed21/background/helpers/prefilterHelper.js"></script>

[Diane Miller]

Saying it is a certain "% crop" is ambiguous. Does that mean that % cropped off or that % remaining? You need to say it is a certain % of the original full frame. In this case it would be 6.4/20 x 100, or 32% of the full frame.

That much crop will never have the image quality that can be captured with an excellent longer lens and the best technique on the best sensor. So all we can do is to do our best with the equipment and opportunity we have.

I could go with either crop, but like the color and contrast in the original post best. The darkest tones in the repost don't reach black, which would be expected with black on the birds, and especially in the shaded areas of the wings. Looks like the light was difficult, which makes a large crop even more limited.

What is you processing -- both software and settings?

[Bob Smith]

Dianne all my PP is done with Aperture. I tried DPP4 using the guide by Morris/Hazeghi but the sliders there, as in Lightroom, are smaller and I found less subtle in response per movement. I have the cloud version of Photoshop and Lightroom and know I need to buckle down and start using all the advantages of PS but before I can use the guides to doing so in, for instance , APTATS and various tutorials by Denise Ippolito and yourself I need to dig in and just learn the basics and I keep putting that off. I doubt you use Aperture so will the settings mean anything to you? If so I'll gladly send them.<script type="text/javascript" src="safari-extension://com.ebay.safari.myebaymanager-QYHMMGCMJR/a103ed21/background/helpers/prefilterHelper.js"></script>

[Diane Miller]

I can never remember what anyone uses -- apologies. I've never used Aperture and don't know anything about it, so they wouldn't mean much to me, especially in terms of what they can do.

In LR you can pull the left edge of the slider panel to the left somewhat, to make them a little bigger. You don't want or need to do huge moves in any case. But you're quite right that good response to your movements is important.

When Apple announced the end of support for Aperture, there was quite a bit of information on how to port things over to LR -- I assume you found them. I haven't needed to look into that so can't be of any help.

PS does have a bit of a learning curve, but it's really not that complicated. The most important things to master first are cloning and masked adjustments. Check the tutorials on my web site -- the one on Layers gives some important fundamentals.