What's wrong here?
Whats wrong with this shot??? - how could it be improved??
(Could not quite get what I wanted - inconsiderate birds :cool: )
D3
Sigmonster @800mm
F5.6
1/160TH
800 ISO
0EV
SB900 with Better Beamer
Manual Flash @ -2
Tripod
Dont be shy - comments welcome!!!
beautiful image......would you go this far?
(a bit hastily done)
Hey Mr. Peters,
I am going to respectfully reserve my comments; and wait to see what the rest of our brothers and sisters have to say about it...should be interesting...:D:):cool:
Way to go Dave :) ... but thats not it :) Will wait also !! ... neat image Lance !!!!
Hi Dave - I have that image :) straight from the camera. So that's not it.
The juxtaposition of the two is not optimal, but is there some other elementOriginally Posted by Alfred Forns
we are looking for?
It's not a NIkon double exposure, as these birds are different
Just saw it.....quite obvious now!!
Last edited by Dave Phillips; 05-29-2009 at 09:09 PM.
Hi Dave Want to give a chance for others to give opinion :)
btw on the D200 you could select two images in the card and blend together ... even change the opacity difference for each Really neat feature No clue why it was not carried over to the current models ...maybe they felt bad for us Canon users !!!!
I think it is a beautiful image, but if I were to suggest an improvement it would be to have both bird's HA exactly on the same plane.
I'm new to this but I may as well take a shot...800mm lens, a flash, and SS of 1/160?? Long lens at f/5.6 = shallow depth of field and puts the second bird out of focus. Plus if the second bird moved a bit with the slower SS there may have been some motion blur. High Speed Sync the flash, crank up the SS and maybe you get two sharp birds. Also would like to know the distance between the two birds?? Just a guess at this point......In my opinion sweet image anyway.
Lance,
I like these type of puzzles. However, not sure of the direction to take. When I get a green-field, I tend to wander around a bit. For example, could it be DoF, Hyper Focal distance, or like Dave said, the birds are different and one OOF.
I have to choose so,..maybe the lack of shadow or catch-light in both eyes.
Its not DOF - even at F22 both birds would not be in focus. Distance between the birds would have been 10ft or more.
OK, some photographer is just too difficult to satisfy :D
You've captured a two-headed bird. Something that many don't see every day. I'd like to take a shot at it, too, so, where did you find it?
Hey Desmond - this is from the Gannet Colony - Portland Australia, Australia's only mainland breeding colony. Hats off to the guys at the DSE here for sensible attitudes towards photographers and these birds.
Thanks for the info, Lance ! Glad to know Australia has some interesting species of birds :)
What's wrong with this photo? Nothing. OK, actually, whether it's nothing or something depends on what the photographer wants to show and if the viewers can see what the photographer wants them to see. That aside, if we look at the exposure, sharpness, details and color rendition of this photo, it's typical of Mr. Peters, which we all know are of top-notch quality.
Anyhow, Mr. Peters have been showing us photo of this particular species of bird for a while. But, he has not been simply showing photos of that particular species of bird; he has been presenting to us photos that are shot in some specific way. Photos that show the neck and above of the bird in sharp focus, great blue sky in the background plus some blurring things :) in the foreground. Except this time, although he seemingly shot it again in that specific way, this photo is showing two heads, with no if not minimum separation even, as he said, the birds were ten feet away. Why? Mr Peters said he shot it with a 800mm lens. Long telephoto lenses have an inclination to compress things, making objects that are separated far away look close to each other in the final image. Therefore, even with ten feet between them, the neck and above of these two birds look very close to each other. If we look at the composition of this photo and compare it to some similar ones posted in the past, I have to say Mr. Peters deliberately included that blurry bird in the background. You don't believe Mr. Peters did not see that big white ghost in his viewfinder, do you? If his intention was to photo just one bird, why would the sharp one so close to the frame? :D
Nevertheless, I still don't think I know what's wrong with this photo except it's a shot of some rarely seen two-headed bird (but what's wrong with that?) that probably could only be found in Australia. If luck is with me, I might have guessed what had gone "wrong" though.
Just my crack of this puzzle :o
How to improve this image? May be some clean-up job on the beak? :D
Last edited by Desmond Chan; 05-30-2009 at 01:45 AM.
lance, there is two things that stick out to me. the biggest being the EYE angle of the foreground bird. it's actually looking away. and personally, i think the two birds are merged a little too much.
did i win?:)
If they were ten or more feet apart, why does the rear bird look bigger than the front one? Must have been a giant! :)
Good guesses at what to suggest !!!
All it needs is a different position for the oof bird As presented the beak of one is in the other's eyeball and a slight rotation to make them as similar as possible. Would just move the bird and is mostly taste !!
For getting the second in focus is impossible in camera counting on the dof !! Even at f 64 you wouldn't be even close !!!
Thanks AL - often you do not have to move the camera by much to get the angle and separation that you want.
Unfortunately here I was at my limits couldn't move any further to the right.
Can get some great shots with a second OOF mirror of your main subject, pose needs to be exactly the same and the separation/angles spot on.
Posting Permissions
