Cattle Egret

[Stu Bowie]

A cloudy sky would have been good to add to this image, but as always, we cant choose our BG. My own critique - the shadow on the underwing is distracting to me. I have brought out the shadows as far as not over doing it. If anyone can suggest or help to improve that area, I would love to hear the process.

Canon 50D
100-400 L IS USM @ 300mm
1/3200
F/7.1
ISO 500

Hand Held

[Randy Stout]

Stuart:

Nice handling of whites in the harsh light. Excellent wing position, angle in frame.

I took a quick look at your shadow area in NX2, and I wasn't able to extract any useful detail in the shadow.
Brighter, yes, but not an improvement really. I think you have gotten most of what it has to give. It might be possible to reconvert the raw image, one for highlights and one for shadows, and get a bit more.


Randy

[Stu Bowie]

Thanks Randy. With regards to the light, I had a look at my Exif. This was taken at 6.39am.

[Steve Canuel]

Hi Stuart,
Nice job on the whites, plenty of detail. Nice eye contact and detail in the face too. I personally don't find the shadow too distracting. I like his little colored crest, gives him a nice aerodynamic look.

[Randy Stout]

Stuart:

I stand corrected on the light. :)

Randy

[Juan Aragonés]

Stuart I think that you did a pretty decent job with the exposure and I think that you can not extract more details from the shadows without getting a very unnatural look. Too bad that the birds has such a dirty plumage because the eye looks really nice and I like the wing´s position. The shooting angle is a bit step to my taste.

[WIlliam Maroldo]

Hi Stuart. I've been known to be opinionated, and sometimes I will accidentally pass on erroneos information, but I find it most usefull when other members point out such errors. Here is my take on this image:
Harsh light is sunlight un-filtered by clouds. Period. The time of day has nothing to do with it. 6:30 AM will just make the harsh light come in at a more horizontal angle.
I have a problem with shadows, not soft low contrast shadows, but those created by high contrast situations. I would surmise that all of us have the same problem. I am not saying all shadows are bad and have no place in avian images. Just one type of shadow. Thought I'm make this clear. I am not referring to Stuart's image either, other than as an example. It does have many good qualities:sharpness, bird positioning, and composition.
As far as members saying they don't mind this type of shadows is something I do as well when assesing my own images, well at least until I think about it! No. You should mind, with the exeption that the shadow is an integral part of the image. (an unusual shadow that you would like to make the major point of the image). Not even "it makes the image seem more 3D", (sorry Ed, couldn't resist). Sticking ones head in the sand and ignoring a major flaw isn't going to make any of us better photographers.
Randy is so diplomatic about the subject (I've read his comments before), and unfortunately I don't have the skill.
"I wasn't able to extract any useful detail in the shadow" for example. High contrast is damaging to practically all avian images: we have drastics shifts from light to dark, characteristically darks with no detail, and blown out whites on the other, all in the same image. Post-processing is very likely unsuccesful in resurrecting such images, IMO, and loss of detail in dark shadows is a lost cause.
I think that this is undoubtedly the major source of poor images, and should be a number 1 consideration when photographing birds, especially white birds such as snowy, great, and cattle egrets.
Fill-flash is the obvious solution, yet it has problems as well with flight captures, such as the subject being at too great a distance, and the flash creating shadows of its own, just in different areas. (a wing shadow on body, for example).
I'm afraid the only satifactory solution is to wait for more favorable light conditions, and as Randy has so diplomatically suggested; use the time practicing so you can get it right when the light is more favorable(paraphrasing).
Stuart: The cloudy sky adding to the image as far as the background is concerned? For one, the solid blue background here would make exceedingly easy to select the bird, and put another background of your choosing. But a cloudy background would have profound effects on the image itself, and not the background. As long as the clouds are at least partially obscuring the sun, all the high contrast/ harsh light problems would magically disappear.
Whether in flight or not, under harsh light, the key is to have the shadows hidden; in flight the wings in a down position, or having the sun at such a position that the subject blocks the view of the shadows. Fill-flash is undoubtedly very useful, and although there are shortcomings, it is the best solution to giving detail to dark shadows, especially when positioning of camera to subject is not possible.
One more thing, about the cattle egret. In the first place, there is no other bird that that I know of that is has explanded its range to be present in all continents (except Antartica), and in a way it brings all of us bird photographers together. We all have a bird in common! Usually a rather drab bird, yet the males breeding plumage and colors are exceptional!
regards~Bill

[Tony Whitehead]

I agree with Bill's comments on the harsh light issue - it is a quality unrelated to time of day - diffusion is the solution. A massive scrim would do the job but not practical for BIF :D. I have found in Africa at times the window of softness extremely short (5-10 mins after sunrise, before sunset) unless there is a lot of moisture/dust in the air.

[Axel Hildebrandt]

I like the details, eye contact and wing position and wish the angle were less steep. This would have helped with the shadow issue, too.

[James Shadle]

The light looks great to me!
Randy-it's time to calibrate your monitor again:D!
James

[Stu Bowie]

Thank you all for the great feedback, and the kind words.