A Play of Light on an Overcast Day / Sandhill Cranes at Bernardo / grus canadensis

[Jim Keener]

• Canon EOS-1D X
• EF500mm f/4L IS USM
• ƒ/4
• 500mm
• 1/1250s
• ISO 100
• James Keener rs
• Flash not fired
• Sat, 02 January 2016 1:46 AM
• Copyright 2015. All rights reserved.
• Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.3 (Macintosh)

I didn't get many keepers when I went to the Bernardo Wildlife Area yesterday. It was overcast and there were a lot of cars in a small area. And they weren't photographers, so they got out of their cars and frightened the birds away.

I made this shot from the south road of the Area, as hundreds of birds flew over in small herds.

• Canon EOS-1D X
• EF500mm f/4L IS USM
• ƒ/4
• 500mm
• 1/1250s
• ISO 100
• James Keener rs
• Flash not fired
• Sat, 02 January 2016 1:46 AM
• Copyright 2015. All rights reserved.
• Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.3 (Macintosh)

Hand held in a car. 1DX, 500/4

1/1250, f/4, ISO 100. The relatively low shutter speed was a mistake.

LR: clarity, highlights, lights, darks, shadows, red saturation and luminance adjusted
PS: smart sharpen, Nik Color Efex for vignette

I think this place is going to be increasingly important to me. So. Just one more reason I'm eager for your help.

 

[Jim Keener]

How do I get rid of the attached image?

 

[Diane Miller]

No clue about the two images. I'm new here, too.

You got a nice formation with different but good wing positions. Not easy. There is always more impact, to me, if the formation is tighter so you can crop to make the birds larger in the frame. But these look sharp with good exposure.

I got some passable shots at Bernardo the one time I was there, several years ago, at sunrise, but I nearly froze to death doing it. My husband, who doesn't know hot from cold, wouldn't get out of the car.

 

[Glennie Passier]

No idea about the "other" image, but I like the more vignetted look. I agree with Diane about the tightness of the group, maybe you could clone one in closer. As posted I see a nice sort of a loose sideways triangle shape made by the birds.

Very nice image Jim.

Keep them coming!

 

[Jim Keener]

Thanks. You know? You're right. Tighter is better. I like the idea of cloning. I just don't know where to start with a BG that varied. I'm sure you noticed the variation in the leading bird.

 

[Frank McKernan]

What has cloning in a bird got to do with photography? To go out with thousands of dollars worth of photographic equipment and then come home and clone a bird just not make sense to me.

 

[Diane Miller]

Photojournalism and pure nature photography is admirable, but some of us like to explore art as well. For me, there is no need to have to choose one to the exclusion of the other. Of course, disclosure is important.

Arthur Morris has no hesitation about moving birds around, at least within the same frame or from a close sequence. I don't remember if he has stated limits about where the material comes from. And, of course, he does call it Birds as Art. And to do good art you need to start with good photography.

 

[Jim Keener]

Hi, Frank. To answer your question, I don't know what cloning has to do with photography. And I awoke today thinking about this image and wondering about the nature of beauty. Is tighter better than loose? I don't know. I like loose. But is liking enough. Certainly not in all cases. My decision on what to do in response to critiques here is mostly to go with it. The people I've asked to help me know more than I do. And they respond in good will. What is not to trust? And while I don't know that tighter is better than loose, there is no harm caused by tightening.

To the general question of modifying photographs. It has a long history, almost from the beginning of photography. Ansel Adams took the best equipment available to him, walked and climbed long distances, spent a very long time capturing each frame. And then hours in the darkroom modifying what he had captured in the field.

I'm enjoying the process of learning. And part of that, it seems to me, is to suspend preferences as a precursor to expanding ability and outlook. But that's just one man's thought.

 

[Diane Miller]

Well stated, Jim. I think the general idea behind a tighter composition is that too much empty space between objects of interest tends to isolate them, when it is preferable to have a stronger visual flow between them. That would also argue for having some unevenness in the spacing, to increase interest. That applies to landscapes and any genre, both in photography and other art forms.

 

[Frank McKernan]

Hi Diane and Jim,
Thanks to both of you for responding to my post. I was simply asking a question and expressing my thoughts as a total novice and you have given me plenty of food for thought.
Thanks Frank.

 

[annmpacheco]

It is very admirable to read this thread and have various opinions and to discuss them respectfully. Now thats a "pretty picture!"

 

[Glennie Passier]

Wow! Frank has really made me think. And to Jim, Diane and Ann, mighty fine words.

I have yet to encounter serendipity when I'm out in the field, so I guess, when I get home I will be trying to achieve this by enhancing (or manipulating, if you wish). Distortion of reality?...I'll stick with artistic interpretation.

 

[Jim Keener]

I am enjoying this space. And find considerable pleasure in the title of the group: Eager to Learn. Especially pleasing to me is that one teacher and one student are 72 years old. And eager to learn. Now I know why tighter is better. It makes sense. And it's something I had to learn by instruction, rather than through repeated experiments.

 

[Frank McKernan]

Hi Jim,
One teacher and one studeny are 72 years old. I was 73 on New Years day.
Cheers Frank.

 

[Jim Keener]

Wow, Frank. Are you old!

 

[Frank McKernan]

No Jim, age is just a state of mind. I know many people who were born a lot later than me but are much older.
Cheers Frank.