Avian Phototgraphy vs Landscape Photography

[Roman Kurywczak]

Has anyone who voted for Avain ever had to use a split ND filter?.......me either! In landscapes you often have to balance the light of the morning sky with a much darker FG. On average, the light difference is anywhere from 3 to 9 stops off! Ever have a bird that many stops off from head to foot? Didn't think so! Balancing the light and achieving that balance often requires a great deal of thinking and knowledge......that can't be done in a split second......so the 10 fps on the Mark lll can't save me as it almost always does in Avian!......one millisecond is just a push of the button away:D. Yes, I have to study behaviour......but Arash.....I would never take another Avian image again if the magical light of sunrise and sunset allowed me to photgraph 5 hours!;):D Take a look at the image below......how would you expose for this? In Avian, I never have such difficulties and I shoot manual mode for both 100% of the time. No cheating now and checking my specs from earlier!:eek:

[Alfred Forns]

Hi Roman ... does letting he water drain to the right side of the image has anything to do with it :D

... kidding aside you also have those night shots pitch dark which you showed me how to, at the time was thinking of all the tech/thinking that went into make a successful image !!

On the other hand with birds, it is often reacting making changes which I'm hardly aware of doing. Need constant practice to keep proficient.

I think it all boils down to the circumstance of the area.

[Roman Kurywczak]

I do think you and the others may be correct.....but waiting for James to chime in!!!:D See what happens when he says Landscapes are easy:eek:!

[Sid Garige]

See what happens when he says Landscapes are easy:eek:!

http://www.youtube.com/user/joemcnal.../2/lkiuQs6gqBQ

some thing like this .... hehe :D

[Roman Kurywczak]

hehe he he!

[Christopher Miller]

Very interesting discussion. In my own personal experience, I find avian photography more difficult because there are so many things that can totally ruin a good bird photo, many of which are out of your control and can change in a split second. Landscapes, on the other hand, don't run away(or fly away as the case may be! :D) giving you much more time to plan your shot and get it right. Then again, I use a bridge camera, which isn't as fast as a DSLR and thus isn't as effective for avian photography; maybe if I had a DSLR, I would feel differently.

I do feel that no area of photography is easy to do successfully, and how difficult a particular area is is entirely dependent on circumstances and personal opinion.

[Marina Scarr]

After reading this thread, I am beginning to think that Roman has made some valid points which I had not conidered.

[Kaustubh Deshpande]

Happy to see lot of people chiming in with 'getting exemplary work done in either is quite hard' opinion. I find taking "extra special" photos of my son as hard as birds and mountains :)

[Jim Neiger]

Landscapes don't move very fast. :) Anything that allows you to take your time, think it over, retry repeatedly and go back and do it again on a different day is got to be easier than something that requires instantaneous decision making and split second response.

[Roger Clark]

A few years ago I was driving in Arches N.P. working with another researcher. I was mapping minerals of the rocks and soils. A made a comment to the other researcher: "I study the geology because it doesn't change very fast. I can work this week and next month and it'll be pretty much the same. But you have it much more difficult studying plants as they constantly change with time." The researcher fired back: "Nah, I have it easy. I can come out next week to the same plant. Those who study animals really have it tough. Not only do the animals change with time, they are constantly moving and you don't always know where they are.";)

Roger

[Dan Woodward]

IMHO I have no problem getting tack sharp focus on a tree and my exposure dosn't rapidly change as a stream dances across the horizon. Ican't say the same about focus on a birds eye or a change of light as a bird hops into and out of the shade. Just a beginers point of view. Intresting topic :)

[Roman Kurywczak]

IMHO I have no problem getting tack sharp focus on a tree and my exposure dosn't rapidly change as a stream dances across the horizon. Ican't say the same about focus on a birds eye or a change of light as a bird hops into and out of the shade. Just a beginers point of view. Intresting topic :)

Shoot a tree at sunrise or sunset with a FG.....then talk to me!.....after that you will know the true meaning of a tough exposure!;)

[Dan Woodward]

Roman your light house photo is truely stunning and surley technicaly difficult, well above my skill level. However the subject will be there next year, by then my skills may have improved enough (I should live so long) to attempt such a shoot. If I get it wrong, I can try again. With avian my subject may be rare for me, never to be seen again. For me, time with the subject determines the degree of difficulty in getting shot. Both disciplines require excellent tech's. :)

[Roman Kurywczak]

.......However the subject will be there next year, by then my skills may have improved enough (I should live so long) to attempt such a shoot. If I get it wrong, I can try again. With avian my subject may be rare for me, never to be seen again. For me, time with the subject determines the degree of difficulty in getting shot. Both disciplines require excellent tech's. :)

The statement is partially correct Dan.....while the lighthouse may indeed still be there.....the same exact conditions won't! Ever see 2 sunrises/sunsets exactly the same? I have been to this lighthouse (Nubble) many, many times......only 1 frame like this......and it didn't have to do with skill level....but conditions coming together. This was a full moon night.....which I normally don't attempt night images.....but there was a very thick for.....just behind me diffusing the moon just the right amount. While I will definitely see fog there again at some point.......most likely not where I need it! Even if conditions do come together for a similar image (because the lighthouse didn't go anywhere)....still won't be the same because too many factors come into play! I have egret, GBH images...etc., etc, etc....from every trip the last 14 years down to Florida.....same with Cranes and Snow geese from Bosque.....if I didn't have a date on them....wouldn't know when I took them.....can repeat them fairly regularly.
I do agree that it depends on many factors as Roger and others have stated....such as where you live and access to either birds, landscapes, or animals......this plays a large role......only difference in all is......that macro is easy:D......as it is readily available to all......you don't even have to leave the house!.....but I'll save that argument for another time!

[Dan Woodward]

Thanks Roman. You bring up great points that are quiet valid. If I ever get to the point were I'm happy with my avian shooting (seems impossible at this stage) I will take on landscape. After all it's all nature wich I love. After seeing some of your images it gives me a level to shoot for. So much to learn... So little time

[Charissa]

For a total noob, i just had to budge in. Have to go with Morkel on the Landscapes being more difficult. We come from the same country, and as he said, birds are everywhere, and in masses sometime. Maybe it should be narrowed to avian, and Bird in flight shots, as everyone can get a sharp, perching shot of a bird, but not everyone get the BIF shots perfect.
I don,t use fancy equipment for avian photography, and i do get more keepers of BIFs on a average day out, than i do with landscapes. With avian, u have to worry about the bird being correctly exposed, but with landscape, u have a lot of things to consider, and expose correctly. Birds move, but remember, clouds, water, grass, sun, waves, all of them move constantly, so there is my 2 sents worth, landscape it is. ;-)
Roman.****, i see u took on macro.... did u ever shoot a wasp, or bee for that matter with a Canon MPE 4mm from its face, manual focus, and still get the wing blur fancy, the pin point small eyes sharply in focus, whiles rocking back and forth?....;-))

[Kobus Tollig]

Nice to read all this. And some very good points made here.
I think for myself landscapes are harder.
The reason is that you need to find a landscape by yourself to get a really good one. Something that no one else has shot. With Avian the basic composition stays the same and most people has done the shot before.
We do sit in a catch 22 on this subject cause avian can go hand in hand with landscapes. Arty has done this and some other togs. To get out of the box avian stuff is also hard......
Im talking myself into a corner here:D
So i guess you cant really compare a green apple with a red one... One is sweeter but they both apples......

[Harshad Barve]

Hi Roman ,
It took me 10 years to get tiger cub climbing on tree , this is FYI and I am posting this LIVE from Bandhavgarh NP

Wildlife photography ( Avian & W/L ) needs lots of time , money and patience , it is all about freezing the moment when it comes and that too perfectly , so for me this is more difficult :)

[RakeshDhareshwar]

For me , the level of quality you want to achieve in any branch of photography makes is more and more difficult . The small increase in the quality is achieved with a dispropionate effort .and that is true for each genre of photography . So both the genres are very difficult at the highest level .

[James Shadle]

IMO it is as tough to do one "great" as it is the other.

[Roman Kurywczak]

Hi All,
Charissa....I've been doing macro for a long time.....more than I care to admit:D....while I don't have the MPE.....I have plenty of images full frame in macro.....most hand held! Not easy either....just having fun!

Harshad......I also do wildlife photography.....and I hope to do it in Bandhavgarh NP with you one day......and hope to prove you wrong:D!

James.....see what you started:eek:???......but which way did you vote:D?