Pushing the Subject?

[Larry Heath]

I had an opportunity to grab some quick pictures of some Sandhill cranes. Well I tried to push the envelope a bit. Because there was a pair I wanted to have a substantial depth of field, as a result I pushed the ISO really hard 3200, which got me up in the 1000th and f16 range, shooting hand held. Plus the birds were a bit touchy and wouldn’t let me get very close at least in the time I had available, so there is some significant crop factor going on as well. The question becomes, are these shots too soft?

They look, ok, but I’d like other people’s opinion on it.
 


Then of course the silly birds wouldn’t stay together so I got mostly singles.




So Opinions?

Later Larry

[sdwilsonsct]

The birds are great -- good work on the technical stuff. Now you just need to get them on a good, quiet background. Not easy!!

[andrewsk]

Technicaly well done on the shot in a tough lighting situation.

Is the bottom picture at 100%? If so, it does not seem that soft.

Agree with the other poster that the main issue is with the background. The animals never seem to go where we really want them.

Keith

[Larry Heath]

The first shots are at a guess about 90% to 95%.   I am not too happy with the background on most of the shots I got. I had about 20 minutes and really wasn’t expecting to be shooting these birds, so I really wasn’t prepared technically or mentally. If I had a couple of hours (or more?) I am pretty sure the birds would have allowed me to get a lot closer and work my way into a position where the background would have been much nicer.

My son does therapeutic riding once a week at this place and I usually drag the camera along, I just had it in my head to do some candids of the other riders and there the birds were out in one of the pastures with the horses. I didn’t want to jump the fence without asking. I will ask if they mind if I photograph the birds form inside the pasture next time.  I am pretty sure these birds are more or less resident in this area, I have seen them there once before, it’s pretty secluded. I put together a quick and dirty print package, which I am sure the owner will be happy to put up on a wall in the office and may ease the way for getting some more shots without the fences in the background.

[DwayneOakes]

Great bird and work Larry. If it were me I would throw the background say @ f/2.8 or f/4 if your lens has it to hide the fence.

[gerafotografija]

I've had some luck extending DOF with muti bird shots by focus stacking. However, I did it in water where it is relatively easy to photomerge without the seam being obvious. Maybe it would work if you managed to position a distant organic background in this setting?

[Larry Heath]

Great bird and work Larry. If it were me I would throw the background say @ f/2.8 or f/4 if your lens has it to hide the fence.

Oh, how I wish, I had or could afford a prime 400mm f4 or longer. I have the new Nikon 80-400 VR variable aperture, which believe me, is worth every dime I spent and is just about at the limit of what I can bring myself to plunk down on a single lens. If you put it on a tripod and use best practices it produces as sharp an image as I have ever been able to produce, well outside of my view camera stuff. Best practices were not part of the program the day I shot these two birds. I just need to be prepared with all the gear every time I go up there and make some time to go up there just to photograph this pair, particularly as they seem to be year round residents.

[Larry Heath]

I've had some luck extending DOF with muti bird shots by focus stacking. However, I did it in water where it is relatively easy to photomerge without the seam being obvious. Maybe it would work if you managed to position a distant organic background in this setting?

You know focus stacking didn't even dawn on me!  Focus stacking is not something normally part of my go to repertoire; I have been meaning to take some time to figure that process out. But I can sure see where it could make life easer in this situation, thanks for pointing it out.

Later Larry