Black Crowned Night Heron

[Troy Lim]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3322/4603107764_62b3a89881_o.jpg

Manual
Time: 6.27am
Exposure: 0.001 sec (1/1600)
Aperture: f/5.6
Focal Length: 350 mm
ISO Speed: 1600
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Flash: No Flash

[Jamie Douglas]

Great exposure control Troy in the early morning light. Really like the head angle and eye detail but a shame the left wing isnt a little higher to put the head against the sky but becasue of the good head angle I am not sure how big a deal this is but lets wait and see what others say.

I would prefer to see your signature at the bottom as I find it distracting at the top and pushes the bird to the bottom of the image. Maybe add a tad more sky below the bird and then add your signature.

Thanks for sharing

[Tom Graham]

Good for sun lit shot, nice balance of light.
Agree with Jamie that head merges with the wing and thus not best view.

Also copyright symbol is not required for the image to be copyrighted. This from the US gov copyright office - http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/

"When is my work protected?
Your work is under copyright protection the moment it is created and fixed in a tangible form that it is perceptible either directly or with the aid of a machine or device"

Also same web site has information about copyright registration. To take an infringement into court your work has to be "registered".

Tom

[arash_hazeghi]

Very nice flight shot, like the HA and wing positions. might sharpen just a tad more

[Alfred Forns]

Like it as presented Troy .... really good stuff !!!

Wing position wise it is always "ideal" to have the entire head with wing behind or not, this is so close I'm fine with it and a keeper in my files. Not an easy bird to get, your doing well !!!!

btw copyright wise I move mine around, when saving images have an action that will resize and include the copyright but stops before flattening so the move tool can be used to move around to best location and reduce opacity if needed.

Thanks for the feedback Tom !! ... also images can be registered at the Library of Congress .... easy and can include as many as you can fit in on CD !!! Not a bad idea !

[Troy Lim]

Good for sun lit shot, nice balance of light.
Agree with Jamie that head merges with the wing and thus not best view.

Also copyright symbol is not required for the image to be copyrighted. This from the US gov copyright office - http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/

"When is my work protected?
Your work is under copyright protection the moment it is created and fixed in a tangible form that it is perceptible either directly or with the aid of a machine or device"

Also same web site has information about copyright registration. To take an infringement into court your work has to be "registered".

Tom

Tom,
Thank you. I read about copyright protection a while ago, just never got around to register just yet.
I wonder how many people are actually doing that. I guess I have not sold that many of my work to motivate me to do that. I guess I have to do that soon. I believe it is a fix fee for as many images as you could do at one time.

[Troy Lim]

Like it as presented Troy .... really good stuff !!!

Wing position wise it is always "ideal" to have the entire head with wing behind or not, this is so close I'm fine with it and a keeper in my files. Not an easy bird to get, your doing well !!!!

btw copyright wise I move mine around, when saving images have an action that will resize and include the copyright but stops before flattening so the move tool can be used to move around to best location and reduce opacity if needed.

Thanks for the feedback Tom !! ... also images can be registered at the Library of Congress .... easy and can include as many as you can fit in on CD !!! Not a bad idea !

Al,
When you said fit as many as you can fit in on CD, is there a requirement on the file size?
So we can put an 80KB file per image, and a lot could fit into a CD.
I should do some that with some of my images.

[Tom Graham]

But, I ask, if the/your/everyone's image is copyright as soon as it goes onto the camera card, why bother putting symbol and such on the image? Will it prevent some kid from printing it out for their school report? Sure :) Will it discourage National Geographic from using it? Yeah, like they don't know everything about copyright law.

Tom

[Troy Lim]

But, I ask, if the/your/everyone's image is copyright as soon as it goes onto the camera card, why bother putting symbol and such on the image? Will it prevent some kid from printing it out for their school report? Sure :) Will it discourage National Geographic from using it? Yeah, like they don't know everything about copyright law.

Tom

I would be glad to give them my shot if NG wants to publish mine.
One of my shots have been chosen by NG photo editor, which I could only hope they will choose to publish it. It would be awesome.

[WIlliam Maroldo]

I think it is a pretty good image and the head/wing merge not too much a problem. I shoot the black-crowns in flight quite often, and I would hope for more detail. Perhaps the bird was a bit too far, a significant crop, or something else. It looks like noise reduction had something to do with it, either you shoot JPEGs and the camera is applying NR, or you applied it in PP. I could be wrong, but to me the feathers appear a bit too smooth.
As far as copyright-no legal stuff will help much IMO. You can tell whoever to stop using your image on their website. They will probably. You can bring a law suit(which seems crazy since the law says it is yours since you created it). Sounds like they are saying it is yours but you can't do anything about it unless you register it. Stupid!
In the first place a small image presented on the web can only create a 2x3 inch print. Not much money in very small images, I would guess. OK, you registered it, and someone is using such a small image. How likely is that? They sure need to make a lot of money off it or a lawyer will not take the case! Either are not very likely.
Troy, I don't like the prominent top placement of copyright info. Copyright(symbol) your name, and year IMO is all you need, bottom left or right, and small enough not to compete with the image at all. You could also reduce opacity. regards~Bill

[Troy Lim]

I think it is a pretty good image and the head/wing merge not too much a problem. I shoot the black-crowns in flight quite often, and I would hope for more detail. Perhaps the bird was a bit too far, a significant crop, or something else. It looks like noise reduction had something to do with it, either you shoot JPEGs and the camera is applying NR, or you applied it in PP. I could be wrong, but to me the feathers appear a bit too smooth.
As far as copyright-no legal stuff will help much IMO. You can tell whoever to stop using your image on their website. They will probably. You can bring a law suit(which seems crazy since the law says it is yours since you created it). Sounds like they are saying it is yours but you can't do anything about it unless you register it. Stupid!
In the first place a small image presented on the web can only create a 2x3 inch print. Not much money in very small images, I would guess. OK, you registered it, and someone is using such a small image. How likely is that? They sure need to make a lot of money off it or a lawyer will not take the case! Either are not very likely.
Troy, I don't like the prominent top placement of copyright info. Copyright(symbol) your name, and year IMO is all you need, bottom left or right, and small enough not to compete with the image at all. You could also reduce opacity. regards~Bill

Bill,
You were correct. Shot in Raw, distance away, heavy crop, NR in PP which smoothed some feather details.