Gentoo & Chicks

[Jay Gould]

Hi, I have been posting so much about my trip to Antarctica that it was time to post a penguin! This is from Paulett Island, a circular island about 1 mile (1.6 km) in diameter, lying 3 miles (4.8 km) southeast of Dundee Island, off the northeastern end of the Antarctic Peninsula. (Wikipedia). I have posted this in the ETL section as I am not sure that a penguin and chicks fits cleanly in the Avian Forum; tomorrow I will post why the chicks are fixated on the parent's beak!

The nest that they are standing on was created by the parents one stone at a time, and most likely the stones were stolen from a nearby nest. We spent a lot of time watching the Gentoos run around stealing each others rocks - hysterical!

What appears to be a slight halo around the parent is in the original and the light/sun was coming from my left.

Camera: 7D
Capture date/time: 16 Jan 10; 6:30PM
Light condition: mixed clouds and sun
Lens: 300 f/2.8
Focal length: 420mm
Distance: 14 m
Extender: 1.4
Tube: none
Flash/Comp: no;
ISO: 400
Exp Prog: Tv
Speed: 1/100 sec
Aperture: f/8
Exp Comp: +2/3
Metering: Partial
WB: Auto
AF Drive: AI Servo
Tripod: yes + Sidekick
Filter: None
Crop: Minimal

Processed in LR 3 (beta) and then CS4 - plus Topaz Suite and Pixel Genius Sharpening.
All C&Cs gratefully appreciated!

[Lance Peters]

Hi Jay - Looks like you are enjoying your trip of a lifetime ;)
Love the interaction - id be tempted to add a catchlight to the adults eye if it fits with your ethics.
Might have bumped the ISO up a little to increase the shutter speed.
Looking forward to seeing more :)

[Jay Gould]

Hi Lance, thanks for peeking! I have no problem adding a catchlight or even doing major changes. I believe that except for the purest - whom I completely support - we are producing digital art photography in the 21st century. Simply need to make disclosure.

The right chick has the barest hint of a catchlight; where would you add a catchlight to the parent? For them to appear "real" doesn't the bird need to be at least somewhat in the sunlight for the catchlight to has appeared in the first instance? In this image you can see where the light ends at the parent's shoulder; wouldn't a catchlight appear out of place since the light has ended at the shoulder?

[Lance Peters]

Hi Lance, thanks for peeking! I have no problem adding a catchlight or even doing major changes. I believe that except for the purest - whom I completely support - we are producing digital art photography in the 21st century. Simply need to make disclosure.

The right chick has the barest hint of a catchlight; where would you add a catchlight to the parent? For them to appear "real" doesn't the bird need to be at least somewhat in the sunlight for the catchlight to has appeared in the first instance? In this image you can see where the light ends at the parent's shoulder; wouldn't a catchlight appear out of place since the light has ended at the shoulder?

Hi Jay - I agree on your comments on the light - I would just put something similar to the chick - just a faint hint of a catchlight.

[Axel Hildebrandt]

I like the interaction and hope to be able to visit this area sometime. The soft light looks good, too. Personally, I wouldn't add a catchlight since there is no direct sunlight but I would lighten the iris(es). If you have, I would give it more room at the top. Some of the whites are overexposed, should be easy to fix using recovery and/or highlights in your RAW converter.

[Alfred Forns]

Sweet interaction Jay Really like this image !!!

From the tech side agree on using a higher ISO, your camera performs well, also would shoot wide open, no need to stop down for quality/dof when camera motion would be the greatest threat to the image ... you did great on this one !!

Exposure wise you did perfect, whites are pushed to the max without being over. Not much you could do with the shadow, maybe trying a slight curve in PS but always be careful since reducing contrast on shadows can lead to muddled blacks ... rather have blocked shadows than a muddle look !

... btw this can go in birds !!!

[Jay Gould]

Thanks Axel; no room at the top!

Al, almost all of the time I am using the 300 with either the 1.4 or 2.0 converters. I was pushed during the trip by several of the pros to stop down a bit when using the converters; shoot wide open when using the bare lens if DOF isn't needed.

I must admit as a newbie the hardest this is to remember to keep checking you setting from image to image :cool:.

Thanks Guys for the comments.

[Tim Townsend]

I like the image's composition. I would have a sore butt with a nest of rocks! I don't understand the rationale of shooting wide open when using the bare lens, unless the motivation is to reduce DOF. Optimal performance will typically 2-3 stops above wide open. Did you focus on the eyes or elsewhere? What's the fuzz around the parent's beak?

[Jay Gould]

Hi Tim, focused on the parent's eye; don't know about the fuzzy/halo around the beak - it is also present in the original image. I think the lighting was playing tricks. Cheers, Jay