Eagle - Reel Foot lake

[Jeff Cashdollar]

Canon 7D & Canon 500 MM f 4/L
BLUBB
ISO 400
f/4.0
1/3200
Manual - set with light meter

LRII--->CS4

Eagles start to nest around Jan/Feb, they fly south from Canada and N. Michigan via Mississippi migratory fly-way and nest in Reel Foot State Park, North TN. The Eagles perch in trees along the Mississippi rive and fish. Those trees are very tall and create challenging angles. Only a few here so far (we saw there) still early. Will return next month hope to see more. Great local food and had much fun.

[Bob Decker]

Gorgeous bird, Jeff. I'm jealous. I've seen a few in flight and in the distance around here lately, but no joy on getting a shot. Nice feather detail, the eye looks nice and sharp, there are details in the white. Looks pretty good to me. If it were my shot I'd crop a little tighter on the bottom and on the left. I think I see a little hint of cloning on the bottom right side of the perch (a little bleed).

I'm curious about some of your exposure solution decisions... if I might ask. Why f/4.0? There's nothing in the background but sky... e.g. nothing to blur. The "sweet spot" on most lenses is going to be something stopped down a bit, yes? I'm also curious about the use of a light meter vs. the camera's metering system. In setting up complicated portraits / fashion-model shoots with multiple lights (Key, hair, kicker, background) I'm used to using light meters due to the complexities involved. I'm not sure I understand the advantage for a ambient light shot.

[Jeff Cashdollar]

Bob,

Great questions, thanks for asking!

You are correct about the branch clone job, should have know I would get nailed (smile). I was working and watching a movie (yikes).

My f/4 decision: the 500MM lens is expensive and of high-quality and has an extended sweet spot. the 500MM is know to be tight at f/4. Another reason is revealed in my narrative, I shot the guy at 60 - 80 feet in a tree. That's a stretch for a 500MM. hence I knew the crop would be larger than I wanted and I needed to get my shutter up to keep detail tight. I like to follow Artie's advise and shoot wide open most of the time too. However, it is a good ideal to try different settings, a 5.6/8.0 might have been nice to see as well.

I have noticed your work as of late continues to improved - congrads.

I took some classes that taught using light meters for manual settings, I love the technique (many do not). It and the sunny 16 and AV give a nice well rounded set of options.

Chas is well know for his light meter work and I have attended his workshops. See him at shootthelight.com or PM me and I can provide additional info if you have questions in this regard.

[Alfred Forns]

Hi Jeff Good looking bird !! Sure hope you get some more in your area and get one flying !!!

Bob made some good points with the metering ... but you know how I feel about separate meters :) Would tone down the sky, reduce saturation !! Aperture wise would also be a good idea to stop down in this case, nothing in the way for this one !!! btw for the steep angle you can try backing up and using a 2X converter .. will flatten angle !! Sometimes its an option !!!

[Jeff Cashdollar]

Al,

Great ideal about a 2X to flatten out angle (neat concept) when I use it with the BLUBB the images look soft, must be my technique. I'm decent with tripod but not there with the bean bag yet on the 2X?

[Bob Decker]

I took some classes that taught using light meters for manual settings, I love the technique (many do not). It and the sunny 16 and AV give a nice well rounded set of options.

Chas is well know for his light meter work and I have attended his workshops. See him at shootthelight.com or PM me and I can provide additional info.
I'll take a look at the website. "Knowledge is power." I'm a bit biased against light meters/flash meters because of past training. I learned off-camera lighting from Zack Arias, (onelightworkshop.com, usedfilm.com, zackarias.com). He's a big proponet of using the histogram and blinking highlights to set exposure... even for shots using flash. I also took a workshop with David Beckstead (Bechstead.com, shootwithbeckstead.com) where I learned to incorporate harsh ambient light into wedding, engagement and portrait images... again using the camera's metering system.

I do own a meter that will do reflected, flash and spot metering and I'm sure I have an incident meter or two around from when I played around with TLR film cameras. Maybe I'll have to play. Thanks for your answers.

[WIlliam Maroldo]

All this metering stuff makes my head hurt. I usually shoot manually, though occasionally aperture priority if the lighting conditions are changing rapidly. If the lighting is steady I guess you could say I cheat. The big advantage in digital IMO is you can delete images immediately. I generally know what shutter speed I'll need, what aperture would be appropriate. A stationary subject is perfect. Take a guess, take a test shot, look at the histogram making sure it is on the overexposure side with not too many blinkies, look at the LCD screen to get a general idea about the exposure, adjust, take another test shot, repeat as necessary. Takes a few seconds, no more than a minute, and I'm good to go. Delete the test shots.
Bob, you mentioned ambient light. This is also called diffuse light, and is used by portrait photographers, as you know, to soften shadows and reduce contrast. In avian photographers the clouds act as very efficient diffusers, and this counteracts the negative aspects of direct sunlight, which is high contrast and has the effect of creating shadows with very little detail, among other undesirable effects. To me at least, one of the most important things about avian photography is knowing when light conditions will be most advantageous in creating excellent images.
About Jeff's image. I think although F4 seemed to work, I'd probably use a greater DOF. There was shutter speed to burn, so to speak, in that he could have lowered it and increased the F stop. There is a point that increasing the shutter speed will not increase detail. For a stationary subject, I can't imagine that there is much advantage shooting over 1/2000 sec, and probably slower. I almost always hand hold the camera, by the way. A greater DOF is more of an insurance policy in the event that the focus was a bit off, which does happen! Also you might have gotten the head in focus, but the shoulder may be out of the focal plane , and it is very hard to tell though the viewfinder that this is the case.
regards~Bill

[Lance Peters]

Hi jeff - interesting - I struggle to see the point in using a separate meter - find that the inbuilt meter does a fine job - but always open to a different view especially if it provides a advantage - what do you perceive the advantage to be? (Genuine question)

I too find the blue sky to be a bit unreal - would desat a bit - cool bird.
With a static subject and nothing in the BG I would have swapped some of that SS for some more DOF - more DOF would have given better quality with the crop? wellnot better quality but added insurance for errors with were your focus was.

[Richard Waas]

Jeff, Great capture. I'll leave the tech stuff to the guys who know, but the sky could be desaturated a bit. Love it.....

[Gus Cobos]

Hi Mr. Cashdollar, I like your composition, image and capture, I like the head turn pose. You have good feather details and a sharp eye. The blue hue in the sky would look its best by desaturing it a little bit...I don't have a problem with the additional light meter as long as it works for you. I use a hand held spot meter in addition to the in camera one in my studio shots...looking forward to your next one Sir...good show...:cool:

[Jeff Cashdollar]

Great feed back - hope you like my Eagle.

I like to shoot wide open and have a bias towards that end of the scale - its just my style.

The metering thing I learned/studied/practiced this year and use it from time to time when appropiate, thought I might mention the theory (e.g., ETL right). I love it and it works for me.

Gus, thanks for thread, I was providing options and sharing information learned in workshops from pro's like you.

Cheers,

J$

[Harold Davis]

just the sky for me, jeff. does look a little unnatural! everything else is well done!!

[Oscar Zangroniz]

Great image Jeff. Tack Sharp. Agree with the sky and also as Al mentioned the angle.
Congrats