Tigress on the waterfront
This tigress was taking rest and then something caught her attention in the hill or in the tree. No idea what it was, as I couldn't see a thing.
Canon EOS 1D Mark II, Canon EF 300mm F4 L IS USM, EF 1.4xII ie. at 420mm, ISO 320, f5.6, 1/80 sec, bean bag.
Cheers,
Sabyasachi
Thanks for showing a wider view. Gives a nice feel of the surrounding area. Good comp Sabyasachi.
I wish you had used a polarizing filter to get rid of the bright reflections in the water. Otherwise, a good composition
TFS
Although, I like it as it is, a tighter crop might be better (depends on how much resolution you have).
Harshad, A CP would not work in this case since it will cut the light down by 2-3 stops. His speed is already 1/80 on a bean bag and so with the CP it would've been quite challenging to put it mildly.
--- Vivek
Agree with both, Harshad and Vivek.
Instead of a polarizer in this case, a multiply/Darken blend mode in PP can reduce some of the intense glare/reflection from the water which is taking my attention away from the lovely composition.
I gave it a try, with slight bg blur and +5 color temp warming. What say ?
I like this composition. The two little splashes of greenery at the top and bottom of the right side balance nicely with the tree on the left. I also like Kiran's repost.
Harshad,
I had a 77mm polariser in my bag to fit this lens. However, as Vivek has already pointed out the light was too low for that.
Kiran: Thanks for the repost. The toned down water looks better.
In Lightroom, there is a facility for creating a ND filter effect. However, I have never tried that. I tried warming a bit but saw that the white colour of water changes. So had left the image as it is.
I am wondering whether including less of water would have been better. I guess I should have tried the mirror lock up. No idea why I didn't use it.
Cheers,
Sabyasachi
Kiran, good toning down the water, I like this better.
Sabyasachi
I believe ONLY the LR 2.0 has this feature and it is NOT as good as Kiran was able to do. The reason is that the grade line in LR is straight line. The options in PS are vast in comparison. The only reason to use LR is if you have to process a bazillion photos (like at an event or something). LR also does not have layer masks which are critical for good pp.
I tend to strictly stay with PS for pp (thanks to Kiran for getting me up to speed on basic stuff; now am in explore mode).
-- V
Kiran's repost definitely looks better as the bright reflections tended to 'hit' the eye.
Dear All,
Thanks for your comments.
Vivek,
The gradient line in PS is straight, and can be rotated in any direction. In this image, the straight gradient will work.
The options in Photoshop is more as it is was created for digital artists. LR is designed more for photographers. Since I don't want to manipulate my images much, so I prefer Lightroom. For me images like this one will never go for print. More to refresh my memories.
Cheers,
Sabyasachi
Funny..... I *only* present images to the public that I can (and do) print :-). Horrifying images stay hidden in my stash never to see the light of day. Well, unless it's that noisy image of the Sunderbans tiger staring at me from the swampy mangroves.... :-).
Everyone has different standards, I guess. To each his own :-)
Last edited by Kiran Khanzode; 08-19-2009 at 12:06 PM.
Sabyasachi
"I am wondering whether including less of water would have been better. I guess I should have tried the mirror lock up. No idea why I didn't use it."
James
Not IMO. Less water would not feel as well balanced.
Harshad
"I wish you had used a polarizing filter to get rid of the bright reflections in the water."
James
A polarizing filter wouldn't put a dent in that glare. A split neutral density would be the ticket. Do they make them that big?;)
Harshad
Otherwise, a good composition
James
Otherwise outstanding composition. Well balanced and framed.
Kiran
"intense glare/reflection from the water which is taking my attention away from the lovely composition"
I did not find the glare at all distracting. My eye went straight to the Tiger.
Sabyasachi
"Since I don't want to manipulate my images much"
I'm with you brother, I'm an old film man.
I do shoot digital differently than I did film. With film I would use color temp filters and choose a film for the contrast I wanted. Digitally, I can correct color temp and contrast after the fact.
On this repost I warmed it up just a drop and made a minor curves adjustment.
Sabyasachi, is your monitor calibrated?
On this one I warmed it up a tad and did a curve adjustment.
Then I made a background copy, set it to liner burn, painted out everything but the water and adjusted the opacity slider to taste.
I prefer the first one.
Kiran
"I *only* present images to the public that I can (and do) print :-). Horrifying images stay hidden in my stash never to see the light of day"
James
I hope you are not implying this is a horrifying image? FWIW, my "horrifying" images get deleted. That way, it is impossible for me to present them in public!:).
Sabyasachi,Originally Posted by Sabyasachi Patra
Like the compositon and pose. Water is not a issue for me
Your techs say you shot this image at ISO 320, F5.6 and 1/80. Why not at ISO 600 and gain some good shutter speed?
-Sid
Thanks James! Thanks for reminding me. I will calibrate my monitor again in a day or two when I get a bit more time. There is an alert showing that my calibration period is over.
Sid,
I agree with you regarding the high ISO. I always hesitate about using higher ISOs in my Mark II. However, I agree that it is better to use a high ISO when you are struggling for shutter speed. Noise can be dealt with later.
By the way, my print comment was regarding limited edition fine art prints.
Cheers,
Sabyasachi
Good point added by Sid here
I was too hesiatant to use ISO beyond 400 on D 300 , But I realized these new tech cameras are quite capable of handling higer ISO's . I have spoiled my trip to Bandhavgarh in April by using ISO 200/400
But after boosting ISO I am happy with results , some of those are here http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...ead.phpt=43572
http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...ad.php?t=42880
http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...ad.php?t=42222
we may have to run NR couple of times & I will strongly recommend to boost ISO
James repost is simply great IMHO
Last edited by Harshad Barve; 08-21-2009 at 09:16 AM. Reason: Spell check
Harshad,
I shoot D300 too and I dont have any issues with ISO 400 to ISO 800. I mostly hand hold and I use them pretty much all the time.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote