Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: No-flight Zone

  1. #1
    BPN Member Bill Dix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    12,487
    Threads
    1,892
    Thank You Posts

    Default No-flight Zone

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    This Flightless Cormorant was photographed from a moving panga off Isabela Island in the Galapagos in May. Almost full-frame. I sort of like the symbolism of the large rock blocking his 'flight path', but I suspect some would prefer it not be there. (Could be evicted easily by going with a square crop.) The wings of these guys must really take a beating from 'flying' underwater. Even though they can't fly, we often saw them from our boat at a considerable distance off-shore.

    D90 | 80-400 VR @ 185mm | ISO 1000 | 1/2000s @ f/7.1 | -0.3 EV | HH

  2. #2
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Boynton Beach, Florida
    Posts
    7,726
    Threads
    640
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    great compostion, bill. i really like it! but it looks like you were a little underexposed and tried to bring up the light? muddied out the darks a little. with that -0.3 compensation, i think it hurt you. probably should have been a little in the positive with that dark bird. i think it's totally salvageable with a little more work. i think a little bit of blocked up blacks would be better than the muddy colors.

  3. #3
    BPN Member Bill Dix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    12,487
    Threads
    1,892
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    Thanks for looking, Harold. I don't think the problem was exposure. Here is a jpeg copied straight from the RAW Capture file, showing the histogram which looks OK to me with the -0.3 (ignoring the quality of my jpeg copy). Perhaps I could have boosted the contrast?

  4. #4
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Boynton Beach, Florida
    Posts
    7,726
    Threads
    640
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    yes. this is the perfect case of less is more!!:) nice job with the original capture!

  5. #5
    Lance Peters
    Guest

    Default

    Hi Bill - could just be my eyes - but looks like a halo around the upper part of the bird.
    Exposure looks good to my eyes. Blacks look a little noisy perhaps - dont mind the rock on the LHS too much!
    Like the pose and some tattered feathers there.

  6. #6
    BPN Member Bill Dix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    12,487
    Threads
    1,892
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Thanks Lance. Now that you point it out, I see a bit of halo too, and perhaps some noise. I wonder if I oversharpened a bit.

  7. #7
    William Malacarne
    Guest

    Default

    Nice and timely photo for me.....just watched a 3 hour show this afternoon on National Geographic called "Galapagos". It showed among other things some footage of these guys underwater...they are pretty fast.

    Bill

  8. #8
    Alfred Forns
    Guest

    Default

    Hi Bill Exposure in camera not bad but you could have pushed the histogram more to the right? Looks like you got a third over there? With dark subjects as main try going all the way to the right and even blowing a couple would not be a problem I got my lesson big time doing the rodeo images, any image that was not as just described I just trashed ..too hard to work on !!!

    Like the pose very much and don't mind the rock that much, illustrates your point !!! ... would also have tried one without it !!!!

  9. #9
    BPN Member Bill Dix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    12,487
    Threads
    1,892
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    I'm a little slow getting back to this, but in case anyone is still tuned in, I've tried another version, going back to the original RAW file. I got rid of the big rock, and also some oof rocks; cropped to square; ran the new Topaz DeNoise 5 selectively in places; boosted the contrast; and a little cleanup. Looking closely at the bird, his body is almost more like fur than feathers, and does look a little 'muddied' in reality. Curious to know if anyone thinks this is an improvement.

  10. #10
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Boynton Beach, Florida
    Posts
    7,726
    Threads
    640
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    i think the bird looks great here. going back and looking at the OP, i like the original comp with the rock better.

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