Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Coppery-headed emerald, shallow DOF

  1. #1
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    966
    Threads
    41
    Thank You Posts

    Default Coppery-headed emerald, shallow DOF

    We're all pretty used to multiple-flash hummingbird images by now, so I wanted to experiment with something a little different. So, I chose an open aperture and set up my branch to run all the way through the frame. The trick was getting the birds to go to the right clump of flowers! Lighting was set up to simulate the muted, filtered sunlight in the cloud forest.

    This is a coppery-headed emerald visiting native epiphyte flowers in the Ericaceae (blueberry/cranberry) family.

    Name:  BPNemerald.jpg
Views: 115
Size:  195.4 KB

    Tech: Was shooting with a friend so we used his Nikon equipment. Nikon D700, Nikon 70-200 f2.8, f4, 1/200, ISO 250, four SB-600s, tripod, artificial background

    Field: Setup near feeder, flower baited with sugar water, highlands of Costa Rica

    Post: Full-frame, a bit of saturation in Lightroom, and that's it

  2. #2
    Lifetime Member Doug Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    11,879
    Threads
    917
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    I really like the position of the bird, with a great view of the wings, tail feathers, and eye. I admire the way you are always pushing the envelope Greg! I think you're onto something here, but this particular image has a couple of issues IMO. The OOF flower in the foreground looms a little too large in the frame. And I would have liked the entire bird to be in focus; this could probably be dealt with using some selective sharpening of the back feathers in CS. I do like the OOF flowers in the BG though.
    Upcoming Workshops: Bosque del Apache 2019, Ecuador 2020 (details coming soon)
    Website -
    Facebook - 500px

  3. #3
    Lifetime Member Stu Bowie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Centurion, South Africa
    Posts
    21,360
    Threads
    1,435
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Greg, excellent hovering posture, and I really like the DOF effect here. Can I ask, the light in this, is from actual lights, ( and not flash ) Either way, the colours have turned out exceptionally well. Great work.

  4. #4
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    966
    Threads
    41
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi, Stuart. Thanks very much for your comments. This is all flash; no ambient light influenced the exposure at all. It was a dreary day, so even opening things up to f4 didn't let in any light. Thus the effective shutter speed was not 1/200 but rather the duration of the flashes (can't remember what power the flashes were set at, but the flash duration was probably between 1/10,000 and 1/20,000).

    Cheers,
    Greg Basco

  5. #5
    Lifetime Member Stu Bowie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Centurion, South Africa
    Posts
    21,360
    Threads
    1,435
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Thanks Greg. I realise no natural light was involved, but only wondered if 'coloured lights' were used instead of flash, but you have explained everything. Cheers.

  6. #6
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    966
    Threads
    41
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi, Stuart. Sorry for the redundant explanation. I didn't know if you were familiar with the whole multi-flash hummingbird thing. In any case, yes, just the straight Nikon Speedlights.

    Cheers,
    Greg

  7. #7
    Forum Participant Joe Senzatimore's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    new york
    Posts
    3,509
    Threads
    524
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    I agree on the flower in the FG being a distraction. Otherwise love the image.

  8. #8
    John Wright
    Guest

    Default

    I think it's a great effect! I'm sorry, but I have to disagree about the FG flower distraction - I feel it helps with the perspective of the shot and am fine with it - guess it's just a case of personal choice.

  9. #9
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    966
    Threads
    41
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi, and thanks very much for your comments. Doug, I was intrigued by your comment about that out of focus flower. To me, that's what makes the composition. My eye hits that flower first and then progresses to the in-focus flowers and the bird and then continues back to the next clump and then the final clump. But, just for kicks, I cloned out the flower and cloned in the branch in Photoshop. Here's what they look like side by side.

    Name:  BPNemeraldcomparison.jpg
Views: 74
Size:  106.1 KB

    I realize the pics are small and the Photoshop work is awful but when I look at composition I'm looking simply at shapes and colors so I don't think details matter here. Upon comparing the two, I stick with my original composition as I just don't think the image flows as well in terms of utilizing the entire canvas without that first clump of flowers.

    I'd be interested to read what others think.

    Cheers,
    Greg

  10. #10
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    438
    Threads
    55
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Greg: I saw this post and have followed the thread and conversation. Looking at the two images you posted in this latest reply, the one on the right feels odd and unbalanced. That said, the flower on the left bothers me as well. While it does balance the composition, for me it is the intensity of the colors in that large OOF area that tend to draw me a away from the main subject. I'm wondering if selectively desaturating and bringing the luminosity of that foreground group of flowers down would help. It is an intriguing image. Not one that most of us would think to set up and shoot.

  11. #11
    Lifetime Member Doug Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    11,879
    Threads
    917
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Basco View Post
    Doug, I was intrigued by your comment about that out of focus flower. To me, that's what makes the composition. My eye hits that flower first and then progresses to the in-focus flowers and the bird and then continues back to the next clump and then the final clump.
    I like the concept Greg. It's just that for me, the foreground OOF flower tends to hold my attention due to its size and brightness/saturation. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be a flower in the foreground. For this particular image to work for me it just needs to be less prominent.
    Upcoming Workshops: Bosque del Apache 2019, Ecuador 2020 (details coming soon)
    Website -
    Facebook - 500px

  12. #12
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    966
    Threads
    41
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi, Doug. As Ron Burgundy said in the classic cinematic masterpiece Anchorman -- agree to disagree :)

    I do appreciate your comment though, because it was good to really go back and look at that with a critical eye to consider this for future images.

    Keith, your suggestion to tone down that first clump may be a good compromise.

    Cheers,
    Greg

Tags for this Thread

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