Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Fallow a small group

  1. #1
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,179
    Threads
    103
    Thank You Posts

    Icon1 Fallow a small group

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    These guys have rumbled me trying to get through a hedge in a run too small for my shoulders,so what you are looking at are various behaviours scent sight and sound being explored, even the footstamp of the lass of at the back is part of their communication. I'v tried to take every thing on board from the last two images regarding trying to get better IQ,shot is Full frame with 1.4ext,sitting this time foliage meant being lower was impossible. I'm bracing arms on knees ,so as locked down as possible while HH . Shot is down a hill,if it is deaeed back lit could it please be included in the theme mods. Sun is behind,but off to the left and with the hedge I'm unsure if it qualifies,your wisdom please.

    Ok processed in DPP4 HH fullframe focus point pricket (oh yearling male deer fella on the left),teribly hard getting a clean group !! I dropped lower on shutter here than I normally do and lowered iso,I have been thinking alot of late about the recent posts and figured I'd try this at some point in the day if the chance allowed. Really I have shot with my mark iv at low iso so little,I wanted to try it and see "that" image for. I felt confident that my technique at shutter press was as good as I can be and waited basically for most of them to freeze,as if that really happens,but yes in some ways a considered exploration,really id like more shutter here and would probably normally be at iso 1600 or maybe a bit more,tricky shooting in the shade. on a sunny day.

    Canon 1Div 300f/2.8 ext 1.4iii
    1/320
    AV 5.6
    iso 800


    Thanks for the huge help too many to name of late,sorry all the deer I'll show you something closer to home soon bless him.

    take care

    stu

  2. #2
    Lifetime Member Rachel Hollander's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    14,320
    Threads
    929
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Stu - I think these are more in the shade than backlit. The IQ and sharpness look much better here than on the previous posts. It's nice to see you taking on board the suggestions and improving. The only thing that bothers me about the image is the comp with the big bush on the left and then cut bodies on the right. What was to the right? If possible I would have wanted to point the camera (or move) more to the right to include the herd and less of the bush.

    TFS,
    Rachel

  3. #3
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    20,551
    Threads
    1,285
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Stu, signs of improvement indeed.

    I like the light, it's always helps I feel with a bit of nice warm light. Without seeing the FF, I might have gone for a centre point (this being your sharpest area) and positioned it on the hind to the left. Gone for either 1600 or 2500 ISO to gain more SS & a DoF say f/8. Slow SS is not your friend IMHO, but a faster SS is, especially HH and you can easily deal with the noise Stu, you know how.

    Herds are difficult for composition as you often find yourself cropping into one or two, but would like a bit more to the right and certainly say less FG, to me it's a tad too much. say perhaps the bottom trim to start at the foot of the dark blob, LHS?

    TFS
    Steve

  4. #4
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Nagpur, India
    Posts
    3,837
    Threads
    245
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Stu -- I agree with the above comments , certainly an improved showing this time. Yes, the comp is a bit odd and i too would have cropped out from the LHS and opted more of the RHS .

    I have noticed that every time you have opted for a T.C. , precisely because the subject must be at a distance and shy enough to approach ? But still i would advice that go without a T.C. when light is a dilemma as it is affecting your ss and also if you can get close enough where you wont be needing a T.C. that also might help in the IQ. Will be tough though but certainly you can get closer.

    TFS !

  5. #5
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    20,551
    Threads
    1,285
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    But still i would advice that go without a T.C. when light is a dilemma as it is affecting your ss and also if you can get close enough where you wont be needing a T.C. that also might help in the IQ. Will be tough though but certainly you can get closer.
    In some part I agree Haseeb, without the TC you would gain mores Stops, SS and to a degree the IQ would be better with the awesome 300f/2.8. However, as you know, Wildlife can be easily spooked and so having the TC on could mean the Deer are not stressed, Stu hasn't encroached on their comfort zone and all is good, but as we both have said Techs will drop a bit and so more ISO is required, a balancing cat for sure.

  6. #6
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,179
    Threads
    103
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rachel Hollander View Post
    Hi Stu - I think these are more in the shade than backlit. The IQ and sharpness look much better here than on the previous posts. It's nice to see you taking on board the suggestions and improving. The only thing that bothers me about the image is the comp with the big bush on the left and then cut bodies on the right. What was to the right? If possible I would have wanted to point the camera (or move) more to the right to include the herd and less of the bush.

    TFS,
    Rachel
    Hi Rachel hope you are well. Rach thanks for clearing up the back lit dilemma for me,many thanks I'm cool with your assesment. You were with me here mate,I did all I could to try and take on board your thoughts and the other guys. I think you especially made me a little more disciplined,I'm hugely grateful , Mate you always seem very considered about what you do and I tried to be inspired by that. I learnt some lessons here thankyou so much,I'm not there yet at all but it's lovely for me to have your honesty tell me it's a little bit better,special thanks.

    There was basically more deer Rachel,simply put, this is framed like it is on the left to right side of things as this was as close as I could get to a clean frame.,if there weren't more I'm pretty sure I'd have composed differently,I don't like the doe to the right being so close to edge of frame personally ,but felt little choice. there is no option for me to move right or left here Rachel they would be gone !! Up and down is a different matter which I'll cover in my reply in a mo.

    Steve, Haseeb,yes I concur this is a real balancing act, I would really like to use this incredible tool without TC's at all. I really appreciate the comments here but do feel I have to make compromises. Haseeb, these few weeks are when our fallow deer breed. The bucks don't feed are hyped up on testosterone. So, there is a slight chance that the buck,you can't see down the bank would attack me if he feels I maybe am a threat to his ladies. Secondly and this effects all other times of year,they can hear the camera and that spooks them. I have tried silent one shot,but honestly the lack of having my fast shot rate does not out way the benefit of a slightly quieter shutter,they hear that too !! Haseeb I can get closer,but the result has always been the same one shot and they are gone. with time I might get past this with them,but that chance is remote,honestly ,but one never knows.

    Steve I know, on the shutter as I mentioned,I wanted to see a lower iso. I so rarely shoot at below 1600 Steve,with our light,I just wanted to go there and see it with real deer not targets etc. Don't worry buddy I have heard you and do believe you are right. Steve I didn't feel I was going to get a killer frame here,as you say the herd is a massive challenge composition wise , there were no breaks for a clean frame without cutting someone !!

    Steve selection of the focus point one in from the left top line is two fold: primarily it was to try and get the cleanest frame possible,secondary there are two things that might happen next at speed. Either they will back away,or on occassion curiostiy will bring them closer if that happens my best bet before going to portrait is to have the top line active,or I cut feet off!! There is a degree of pre-emting here Steve driven by experience with these particular deer, learnt the hard way.Those very close chances are incredibly rare,those images may well be the most detailed and I don't want to mess them up as I have done before.
    I concur on the crop guys but better IQ even with a slow shutter is a step forwards I guess.

    Finally Steve my turn to share something it's not oft I get to educate you, extremely rare ,but we are all here to help each other. Fallow are not stags and hinds they are bucks and does not being pedantic buddy,you guys are incredibly discilplined and passionate so I feel it's cool to get this one right.

    Thankyou guys, truly so, your generosity makes a humble guy try harder you inspire me so much !!

    take care

    stu

  7. Thanks Rachel Hollander thanked for this post
  8. #7
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cody, WY
    Posts
    2,491
    Threads
    428
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Nice group of Fallow Deer... Some tough light to work with but you handled it very well. 2 issues form me.. A bit to much OOF FG that really doesn't add anything to the image and the amputations of the animals on the right side of the frame. Looks like it was a tough situation compositionally and you had few choices!

  9. Thanks Stuart Philpott thanked for this post
  10. #8
    Macro and Flora Moderator Jonathan Ashton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    17,017
    Threads
    2,604
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    I haven't read the previous comments so if this is repetitious then maybe I'm in good company.
    First reaction I would have raised the camera - too much grass.
    Second not too happy about the RHS but of course I wasn't there - would it have been better to point more to the right, alternatively would it have been better to crop the width both directions?
    Processing and focus looks good to me, perhaps the image is a little busy with some deer being OOF.
    Maybe just maybe consider increasing exposure a tiny bit or perhaps reducing contrast a tiny bit.

  11. Thanks Stuart Philpott thanked for this post
  12. #9
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,179
    Threads
    103
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    John,Dale many many thanks for your wisdom both . Much is covered already but still great to have these additions to linger on

    take care both

    Stu

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Web Analytics