Bird Shots

[Uroplatus]

I just wanted to show these off... Please feel free to critique. The goal was to provide a good identification of the species.








I know that there isn't much Art in these, but none the less, they are photos that are sometimes hard to catch.  I would like a more Text Book critique from please...


Thanks

[habakuk]

Well, I am not a profound bird savant. (As we found out earlier, I am just an idiot savant )... but from what I used to do with bird identification books, it is often not enough to just have one view of the bird. The back and belly as well as the side of the head are often showing characteristic details. I feel the white balance is a bit off, making it harder to decide on the true color of the feathers, but knowing how difficult it can get to catch a bird without a heavy technical setup... I think the shots are ok and should work for identification.

cheers
®

[Uroplatus]

first to are too yellow, the second one is not so bad, just not bright enough.

The birds are getting really use to me being out there, i had one almost eating from my hand.  I will try to take just one bird, and get multiple shots for identification. Back, Breast, Head and Sides. 

[eob]

I am not good at text-book critique, but I'll try my own way.

The thing with this kind of wildlife photography is that it should be as close to technical perfection as possible.

I see pretty good separation of foreground and background, but these shots lack the general sharpness and true colors. As Roland mentioned, the WB is off in all 3 shots. What is your routine way of achieving the right WB? Do you use 'auto' setting, or do you adjust it manually?

[Uroplatus]

I am not good at text-book critique, but I'll try my own way.

The thing with this kind of wildlife photography is that it should be as close to technical perfection as possible.

I see pretty good separation of foreground and background, but these shots lack the general sharpness and true colors. As Roland mentioned, the WB is off in all 3 shots. What is your routine way of achieving the right WB? Do you use 'auto' setting, or do you adjust it manually?

I am taking presets with these shots. I hardly ever take Auto, If i am shooting weddings or portraits i use a preset for the location, normally shooting a white card or using coffee filters to shoot through to a light source.

WB is one thing that i do need to work a little more with. On these they where taken with a cloudy or sunny preset.

[eob]

There's a wonderful small accessory called ExpoDisc that you can put on your lens like a filter to take a reading of the light-temperature and adjust the WB accordingly. I have seen many very positive opinions among serious photographers about that thingie. Price: around $80.

If you're interested, check out this link:
http://www.expodisc.com/products/product_detail.php?prodid=2&productname=ExpoDisc_Digital_White_Balance_Filter_-_Neutral

[VisualThoughts]

I,too, am not good at text-book critique, but I very much like the third photo from the aspect of creativity. There is something about the sweep of the feathers that pull my eyes into movement around the shape, to the feet clutching the tree, then back along the body to the head, the pose, the body line, the slightly askew upward tilt of the head, the seed in the beek, the tiny glint of light in the eye, the prideful moment in the small but majestic body. I like the color, perhaps a tad dark, but still appealing. I like the disoriented bark on the tree and the swirls of texture that seem to amplify and compliment the full body of the bird. The picture holds my attention long enough for me to look at the details and enjoy the emotional impact. There just seems to be so many nice things working together in this shot.

I,too, am attracted to taking pictures of birds and appreciate your comment about how hard they are to effectively capture. It seems to take such an amazingly instant assessment of so many things to consider composition-wise, plus knowing the camera so well as to intuitively react, and then trying to be in sync with the unpredictable nature of the bird. Perhaps accomplishing all the above, which I find very difficult to do, is what makes the photo so appealing to me.

[Uroplatus]

There's a wonderful small accessory called ExpoDisc that you can put on your lens like a filter to take a reading of the light-temperature and adjust the WB accordingly. I have seen many very positive opinions among serious photographers about that thingie. Price: around $80.

If you're interested, check out this link:
http://www.expodisc.com/products/product_detail.php?prodid=2&productname=ExpoDisc_Digital_White_Balance_Filter_-_Neutral

Exactly what i do when using coffee filters     Its just a lot cheaper.  works exactly the same.

I,too, am not good at text-book critique, but I very much like the third photo from the aspect of creativity. There is something about the sweep of the feathers that pull my eyes into movement around the shape, to the feet clutching the tree, then back along the body to the head, the pose, the body line, the slightly askew upward tilt of the head, the seed in the beek, the tiny glint of light in the eye, the prideful moment in the small but majestic body. I like the color, perhaps a tad dark, but still appealing. I like the disoriented bark on the tree and the swirls of texture that seem to amplify and compliment the full body of the bird. The picture holds my attention long enough for me to look at the details and enjoy the emotional impact. There just seems to be so many nice things working together in this shot.

I,too, am attracted to taking pictures of birds and appreciate your comment about how hard they are to effectively capture. It seems to take such an amazingly instant assessment of so many things to consider composition-wise, plus knowing the camera so well as to intuitively react, and then trying to be in sync with the unpredictable nature of the bird. Perhaps accomplishing all the above, which I find very difficult to do, is what makes the photo so appealing to me.

Thanks for the comments,  I am drawn to birds, always have been all my life... they represent something in life that we have to face we would never have the ability to do... Fly!!!

Thanks agian, much needed work on my end for sure... but its postitive growth.

[JaketheSnake]

I agree with the white balance being off.  But the photos do show the birds well enough for identifying.  I really like the angle and position of the bird in the third photo.  It may not work as well for identification purposes because you can pretty much only see the underside of the bird and not much of the head.  But I still really like it for another type of photo.  To me it has a feel of motion and it is a unique perspective.