Foggy woodstorks

[Joan Chasan]

Took this at ding darlng in a light rain/fog early in AM (time must be off a little as doesn't open till 7:30AM and it says 7.28. (maybe still on daylight savings). I like how they are all standing & waiting like soldiers. background is noisy however, since taken at 1600 iso. Any suggestions? comments?

2008:01:17 07:28:00
500mm
750mm (in 35mm film)
1/40 sec, f/6.3
Mode: Program
Metering: Multi-segment
ISO: 1600
White balance: Auto
Flash: Off

[Mike Tracy]

Good idea just not implemented to the end. The noise / grain in this case puts you behind the eight ball from the git. I would crop from the left to eliminate the the birds just kind of left out own their own. It would be hard for the best in the world to fire off a frame at this focal length and the shutter speed you chose and I am taking a educated guess this has been cropped heavily.

[Joan Chasan]

Not cropped much actually. but it was raining so hand held out the window I think. probably had to go up to 1600 and slow speed to get anything. now see that is the problem. thanks.

[Katie Rupp]

Joan, the light wasn't with you on this one but I think it is an interesting pose(s) and I wonder how it would look in black and white?

[Gus Cobos]

Hi Joan,
I like the concept, and what you were trying to accomplish. The birds in the foreground are out of focus. and you do have a problem with the noise. I worked on your image and came up with the following: I cloned out the upper left bird on the left side of your frame and cloned out the brown spots or blemishes in the water. I also boosted the contrast just a tad and lightened the image just a tad...hope you like...:D

[Lance Peters]

also looks like it needs some CW rotation.

:)

[Julie Kenward]

Joan, I noticed you shot this at f6.3 which is way too shallow of an aperture for an image with this amount of DOF (depth of field.) Next time you're looking at birds in several different focal planes, go with a much deeper aperture - probably f16 at a minimum. You can always add blur to the BG (background) in post-processing but you can't add back focus!

Another thing when making an image like this one where there are several rows of birds in different focal planes is to decide which row you want to be in focus more than the others and nail that row of birds with tack sharp focusing (usually this will be either the front row or one row in the front third of the image.) There needs to be at least one bird where a viewer's eyes can lock on to it. When all the birds are fuzzy the eye roams around the image with no place to rest.

You had a good composition here and an interesting subject but the lack of focus and DOF did it in.

[Joan Chasan]

Thanks so much for your comments. Very helpful. Lots to learn!!!!!

"You had a good composition here and an interesting subject but the lack of focus and DOF did it in.[/quote]"

[Joan Chasan]

Joan, I noticed you shot this at f6.3 which is way too shallow of an aperture for an image with this amount of DOF (depth of field.) Next time you're looking at birds in several different focal planes, go with a much deeper aperture - probably f16 at a minimum. You can always add blur to the BG (background) in post-processing but you can't add back focus!

Another thing when making an image like this one where there are several rows of birds in different focal planes is to decide which row you want to be in focus more than the others and nail that row of birds with tack sharp focusing (usually this will be either the front row or one row in the front third of the image.) There needs to be at least one bird where a viewer's eyes can lock on to it. When all the birds are fuzzy the eye roams around the image with no place to rest.

You had a good composition here and an interesting subject but the lack of focus and DOF did it in.

Been thinking about your comments and you are right. But there is one problem with my situation. the light. The sigma 170-500 lens is an f6.5 at the 500 end. i was already at 1600 iso and the shutter speed was only 40. If I went higher than f/6 (or lower- whatever you call it ) to f/16 or f 22. the iso would have to go up to 3200? even then wouldn't work or shutter speed would have to be musch slower and would have to be on a tripod. (or I would need a better 500 lens).

Am I missing something here?

[Julie Kenward]

Joan, the thing to remember is that you have to be able to work within the limits of the lighting and the equipment - this is why a lens with that goes down to f2.8 costs more than the one that starts at f6.5 - it will allow you to use it in more situations. If you use a lens that starts at an aperture of 6.5 then you need to make sure you work within the limits of that lens by seeking out better lighting situations so you can make the most of the equipment you have.

Now, had it not been a moving target, you could have dropped that shutter speed way down and that would have allowed more light to enter the camera but, when the target is moving and you're at an ISO of 1600 and the best reading you can get is 1/40th...you will more than likely never make a good clear image. It doesn't mean you shouldn't try...it just means don't expect a miracle!

My long lens is only a 70-200mm but starts with f4. I don't have the length you have (unless I use a teleconverter) but I do have a few more lighting situations where my lens will work and yours probably won't. Would I rather have a lens with an f2.8 or 500mm length? You bet...even more opportunities to make a great shot in low light or further away - but, again, the cost would be significantly higher and a slow lens is better than no lens at all.

In short, if you can't get at least part of the image in clear focus using the parameters of lighting you have to work with, you are taking a crap shoot at best. At that point, I usually either decide to "play" and just knock off a few images to practice and see what does happen or I fold up the tripod and call it a day.

Again, your eye was good - you sure saw a nice photo opportunity and you did the best with what you had to work with but, in this case, it wasn't enough to get you where you needed to go. It's all a learning opportunity!

[Anita Rakestraw]

I really like the idea here - those guys are a great looking subject with their soldier-like poses!! But the sharpness/focus just isn't there and the noise definitely is. I hope you get a better opportunity for this same image!