At least I think it's a salmon of some sort. Once in a while they come almost into range with a whole fish. Canon 7D2, 100-400 II at 400, ISO 400, 1/2000 at f/6.3. This is 25% of the original frame. I need to try adding the 1.4X next time.
Super capture Diane. The light looks tricky, testing the dynamic range of your camera. Unavoidably 'hot' on the head and there is fine-grain noise under the wings that I think could be removed with a little noise reduction but no big deal. Regards, Ian
The huge crop handled relatively well, though the noise is most likely due to that rather than underexposure.
You managed a decent enough image out of the file. Try to reduce the heat on the crown - perhaps also try to darken under the wings a touch - and you're in business.
Well done!
I have to agree with the above comments.
Looks to me like you had to really open up the underwing resulting in some noise.
Nice to see an osprey with a whole fish. I usually only see them flying by with a headless fish!
Gail
Great that you were able to capture an osprey with the entire fish, and those talons grasping it. The first thing that struck me here was that the whites on the top of the head look pretty hot on my monitor.
Very nice capture and pose with the fish. I would suggest reducing the crop a bit and i think the IQ would improve. I agree about the whites on the head, I suspect a linear conversion combined with conventional in DPP would fix that.
Here’s an improved version. Looking at the image again, I see I did way too much exposure compensation in an attempt to bring out more detail in the wings. (Was I working too late at night?) But even before increasing exposure, the highlights are really pushed, in harsh light 3 hours before sunset. (These guys lower their activity level before the evening light starts to get good.)
I tried a linear conversion in DPP, which did pull out some highlight detail, but I got the same result by lowering the Exposure slider and balancing whites in LR/ACR, which has highlight recovery features that are not in DPP. I hadn’t thought to do that, as the blending can be tricky, but it worked well enough here. Thanks for the nudge!
The repost for me looks much better though there is a sort of broad darkening halo in the sky around the bird. The angle of the bird is much better than the last image posted.
I have to say Diane that many images of birds are ruined because photographers are over cooking shadow areas (and often being encouraged to do so) to a point that the images have an unnatural contrast with the lit part of the bird which is a separate issue to noise or artefacts, in my humble opinion.
Adrian, I neglected to fix that halo, and will go back and do it. Do you think I went too far in bringing up the shadows? I'm inclined to do that. It's easy to back off a bit more.
Yes I think you went just a tad too far but you had an exceedingly tricky exposure situation and not helped by a severe crop. Given the amount of crop you still did pretty well.
Exposure on these birds is frustrating. The nests are quite high and our California sun is usually very bright. When the light is decent early and late, they aren't as active, and flights are sporadic at any time.
Still working this nest, which has at least two chicks. Now using the 100-400 with the 1.4X on the 7D2. May try the 5D3 as well, with the 300 f/2.8 + 1.4X or 2X -- the noise is a stop better but the AF not as good. It's almost a toss up. And the zoom is hard to give up.
And it may not be a salmon -- my fisherman friend ID'd a couple of other shots as squaw fish, commonly called suckers. Somehow, a salmon seems more noble. There are several varieties in the Russian River, 1/4 mile away. At least it's a whole fish...
Last edited by Diane Miller; 06-08-2015 at 03:26 PM.
Osprey with salmon
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
