Printable View
I captured this image of a American White Ibis at Ft. Desoto north lagoon. The green background is a reflection from Mangroves in a shadowed area of the lagoon. Comments and critique welcomed and appreciated. Thank you for viewing.
Nikon D7000
Nikon 80-400mm F/4.5-5.6 VRII AF-S ED image captured at 400mm
1/1600 F/5.6 Matrix Metering EV 0 ISO 500 AWB, camera supported by a monopod
Post processed in Lightroom Classic CC and Photoshop CC 2018
Cropped for composition and presentation
Nice detail in the whites, and the red legs pop nicely against that ripply green water. Soft light really aided your cause here......
Hi Joe, I applaud you for posting daily but this white ibis is rather "ho-hum" to me! I'm not a fan of green water and I'm not seeing enough details throughout the whites. Maybe a blue cast in the shadowed whites, but you know I'm on thin ice there! I look forward to your next white bird! TFS
Hi Ann, thank you for viewing and commenting. The shadows on this bird do have a blue cast, but only the shadows. Normal light in shadows on a sunny day is blue. This is because the yellow light of the sun does not reach that area. The blue light in the shadows is from the blue sky and other indirect light. It will especially show on a white bird. A image color cast affects the whole image, the whole image appearing too blue, too green, too yellow etc..Quote:
Originally Posted by annmpacheco
Thank you Joe, do you leave the shadowed "blue" in an image or? Hoping others add to this question!Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Przybyla
Hi Joe. I like the pose, and the way the bird stands out against the green water. I agree with you on the shaded white areas, although I know there are some at BPN that would have removed the blue. It looks natural to me. My only nit is a personal preference to see the bird moved a bit to the left.
Hi Ann, I would say it depends, regarding leaving the shadowed blue in the image. In this case the light is from the left side as viewed, one experienced in looking at photos would expect a shadow in that area. I think it would appear strange for that to be as white as the rest of the bird. As long at the parts that should be white are white I would leave it. When post processing a white bird I am constantly checking to see what the RGB values are to see how close to pure white and what value of white. I try to keep the bright whites no higher than about 240. Thank for viewing and commenting.Quote:
Originally Posted by annmpacheco
Hi Bill, I kept the bird pretty close to the center of the frame because everything with the bird was up and down. It just seemed to balance the image. Thank you for viewing and commenting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Dix
P.S. How's your shoulder?
White bird with the darker green water pops nicely. Like the relaxed preening pose.
Thanks for asking, Joe. My range of motion is getting vastly better. Now I just need to begin working on some resistance training to regain enough strength to lift a camera. It's coming, slowly.
Thanks everyone for viewing and commenting, very much appreciated.
First off, as detailed elsewhere here fairly recently -- see my last gannet post with the black BKGR -- I do not usually find it necessary to take the BLUE out of shadowed WHITEs,
Secondly, while Joe's image here is likely not a contest winner, I think that it is a very fine image. The exposure is perfect, there is amazing detail in the fluffy feathers on the neck. And the preening head angle is right out of the book. And heck, I wrote that book. From where I sit, white feathers in soft light never show much fine detail at all. I will however, take Joe to task on the image design/crop ... The bird is close to dead-centered. That would be fine if this were a vertical and I believe that it would have been a very fine vertical. As a horizontal, the bird needed to be moved either far left or far right. Far left would be my first choice. But anything would have been better than centered ... Just my two cents.
with much love to all, artie
ps: the more I look at this one the more I realize that with those reflections -- all thing being equal, this should have been a vertical original.
a
Thanks Artie, I originally had this as a vertical. Depending on the image I work up a couple variations, so this image was in the stack with the horizontal. WDYT?Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Morris
Hi Joe,
wow for me, and an apology to you, sorry about the "ho-hum" comment a few days earlier along with "lack of details,,," I really like the vertical, makes the preening pose for me come to life. Whites, shadows, and details all there, and a preference for the vertical repost! Thanks
Thanks Ann for coming back and commenting. Very much appreciated.Quote:
Originally Posted by annmpacheco
Way, way better. I would not mind a vertical with maybe 10% more room all around ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Przybyla
with love, arite
