A Morning Coop

[Doug Brown]

I was standing in my family room this morning photographing some quail on our yard wall when a Cooper's Hawk streaked by. I saw it go to the ground about 75 feet behind our house, so I ran outside in my pajamas to try to locate the bird. I found it, but it flew before I could take a photo. I watched it fly into an arroyo and set off to find it in my pajamas and slippers. Again I was able to locate it; this time it was perched low in a tree and was eating a bird. Having photographed quite a few Cooper's Hawks in the past I knew that my best chance of getting close to one was when it was eating, so I cautiously approached. The Coop didn't budge as I worked my way in, hoping for a clean angle. Unfortunately the perch was too busy for a good shot. Luckily the photographic gods were smiling on me, because after it finished breakfast, the hawk flew a short distance to the clean perch you see in this image. I got a number of frames before it left for good, and this was my favorite.


Canon 5D Mark IV, 600mm + 1.4x, f/5.6, 1/400, ISO 800, manual exposure, hand held

[John Whaley]

Great shot. It is all working together here. The perch looks like it came from a studio and the relaxed fluffed feather detail is great.

[Randy Stout]

Doug:

A very fine photo, but, the one I really want to see is you sneaking up on him earlier with your big gear, in you pajamas!

Great eye contact, interesting circular perch, soft background.

The cluster of branches in the lower right corner, set against the neutral background, is enough to draw my attention somewhat away from the bird. I might try simplifying that a bit, either by cropping or some very selective pruning.

Cheers, and congrats on your PJ adventure.

Randy

[Mike Poole]

Great sighting Doug, and well done with your endeavours to get the shot. I like the bird itself, nice direct stare into the camera, and the BG suits the shot well.

I'm undecided on the perch, not sure yet if I like it as something different or find it a bit messy, but (I don't know this species) if they're difficult to get near then you take whats on offer.

Is there any reason you risked the slow shutter speed at ISO 800?

Mike

[Doug Brown]

Is there any reason you risked the slow shutter speed at ISO 800?

Good question Mike! Although 1/400 hand held is plenty of shutter speed for me. I was experimenting with ISO invariance yesterday morning; keeping the ISO low and underexposing in camera, and then pushing the exposure in post. Normally I'd be an ISO 1600 guy with the amount of light I had for this shot. While photographing quail on the yard wall before the Coop appeared I was shooting ISO 200 and f/8, and then pushing over 2 stops in Lightroom; I got some very interesting (and thought-provoking) results.

[Doug Brown]

Here's a teaching point using this bird as a demonstration. Don't be afraid to work your subject to find the best possible shooting angle. I'll post a series of the views I had leading up to the final frame. These are unedited shots. You can see the deliberate underexposure.

[Doug Brown]

Here's the next angle.

[Doug Brown]

Next angle.

[Doug Brown]

Next angle (and the last one before I got the image I posted).

[Mike Poole]

Cheers for that Doug - always good to see the thought process as well as the final shot.

Mike

[Daniel Cadieux]

Oh my, this is good! Great story too, I can just picture you in action! I love the puffed up head feathers, and I love the perch...all of it - very gnarly and interesting.

[Bill Dix]

Nice one, Doug. Great stare, good detail, background. I personally like the perch as presented. Is there some advantage to underexposing, or was it just to experiment to see what you could get away with in post? It seems to go against the current school of exposing to the right.

[Doug Brown]

Nice one, Doug. Great stare, good detail, background. I personally like the perch as presented. Is there some advantage to underexposing, or was it just to experiment to see what you could get away with in post? It seems to go against the current school of exposing to the right.

Thanks Bill. There actually are some potential benefits to underexposing in camera and correcting exposure in post. It has to do with a concept called ISO invariance. There's a great article on it at DP Review. Nikon shooters have been doing it for years, but it's only with Canon's latest sensors (chief among them the 1Dx2 and 5D4) that Canon shooters have gotten a chance to try it out (and not hate the results). Imagine shooting with impossible camera settings for a given amount of light (lots of DOF, low ISO, and sufficient SS), rescuing the shot in post, and being happy with the result. Low ISOs improve dynamic range, so if you can capture at a low ISO and brighten in post (with an ISO invariant camera) and get all of the advantages of shooting at a low ISO penalty-free. You can also stop down to the point of underexposure for the added DOF; the same can also be done with SS. I'm definitely intrigued by the possibilities but I'm new to ISO invariance, so I've been experimenting.

[Doug Brown]

Here's a side-by-side of a Gambel's Quail that I underexposed in camera and then salvaged in LR. The exposure has been pushed 2 1/3 stops, plus I applied an adjustment brush to the blacks that added 0.22 stops of exposure and 13 points of shadow recovery. No noise reduction was applied. This was shot with the 5D4.

[Doug Brown]

Here's a 100% crop of the original.

[Doug Brown]

And here's a 100% crop of the corrected version.

[Doug Brown]

To my eye I get all the benefits of f/8 and ISO 200 with none of the drawbacks.

[Satish Ranadive]

Excellent image. Lovely colors and superb composition.

Regards,
Satish.

[David Salem]

Great shot of this adult female Doug. Amazing how much detail is able to be recovered without the appearance of much, if any noise!!

[arash_hazeghi]

very nice Doug, saw one of these on a poll the other way, was gone before I could even get close.

I would still stick to correct exposure in camera though (w/o overexposing any high lights). Consumer camera's aren't really ISO-invarient because the manufacture never give us the direct sensor read out. The dpreview article is full of errors and misunderstandings (most of the stuff on that site is junk including their reviews and opnions, I discourage folks from looking at their forums ). At best there is no downside of shooting low ISO and pulling up in post, but it has no advantage either unless you are shooting a night scene/long exposure where the signal might get clipped at high ISO.

best

[Doug Brown]

Thanks for the comments everyone!

[Bill Dix]

Interesting stuff, Doug. I read the DP Review article. Certainly food for thought, which is a good thing, although I'm afraid I got a bit lost in the technical forest. I find that for BIF I often need to push the ISO up to get the needed SS, but I'm sure this wasn't intended to apply to all situations and all gear.