So we went for a walk this afternoon . . .

[Steve Foss]

. . . and of course my wife rolled her eyes when I tucked a backup D-Rebel XT (350D) and Canon 100-400L IS under my arm.

But it's the last gorgeous day of fall up here and the light was so sweet and honey, I said, what if we run into some birds to photograph?

And, uh, we did run into a couple birds to photograph.

Bohemian waxwing

Pileated woodpecker

[MN Shutterbug]

Dang Steve, you done it again. Did you actually come across these gorgeous birds while just going for a leisurely walk? I could spend a week in the woods and never get shots like these.

[DTro]

Simply breathtaking!

[Deitz Dittrich]

Dude, you must be a bird whisperer... That first pict is way cool!

[finnbay]

Hey, hey, hey! Awesome! Were you within six feet of that pileated? Sure looks like it!

[Paul]

Quote:

---

Dude, you must be a bird whisperer... That first pict is way cool!

---

That is Funny. I love the Pileated, way cool.

[Steve Foss]

Thanks, guys.

XT, yep, just a simple walk. We don't make much noise, don't bring the dogs and pay close attention to our surroundings, though. The waxwing was taken a couple doors down from our house on the way back, the pileated as it was working that dying aspen along a segment of the Taconite Snowmobile trail right on the edge of Ely (which is a popular walking spot in non-snow seasons.) The bird was several feet above me, which I don't like as far as photographic angles go, but he cocked his head a bit and looked down at me, so that helped.

Ken, it was more like 15 feet, but with a bird that big, that's plenty close enough.

[Jim Almquist]

Great shots Steve.I am beginning to think that you just have a bunch of critters all trained in your backyard

[Steve Foss]

Hah! I wish!

[buzzsaw]

I like the eye contact with the Pileated and your processing has definitely improved... I like the rich look of your shots.

[Dan Thiem]

So cool!

[Steve Foss]

Thanks, guys.

Buzz, I'm always trying to improve. No doubt I'll look back at this work a year from now and see ways I could have done it better, and same thing the year after that and the year after that and so on. The only post processing techniques I've added/changed in the last year have been the blending of images outlined in the how-to thread (didn't use that for these images) and the automatic photoshop framing actions.

So while I'm always happy to take a compliment, I'm not quite sure what I'm doing better now than what I did before. Can you be more specific? I'd be interested to see how our perspectives may be similar or different.

[jonny_redhorse]

I've noticed through the last few months Steve's images also have more "punch" colorwise...(as I'm a "color" person ...love a burst of color in my images also)...I boost most of my images up a notch or two... ....my style has even somewhat changed through the years (and I'm sure it's just an evolvement thing as we keep snapping and posting images)....cropping an image plays a big part in my images also...the whole image may not be intersting but a portion of it just may be...

[Steve Foss]

Hmmm, I'll have to go back and look through what I've posted over time. I strive for lifelike color, so either the ones I used to post are smack on and the later ones are oversaturated, or the older ones are drab and these are lifelike. Or it changed when I bought a new monitor about six months ago. Or it changed when I calibrated my monitor recently.

Thanks for the feedback you guys.

[finnbay]

I don't believe they're overdone. Your photos of late really seem to "pop" off the screen. I'm assuming the prints give the same effect. I think they're great.

[Steve Foss]

I wonder if it's the framing. Once I learned about the automated photoshop action for online posting, I compared unframed and framed prints toned exactly the same way. Those uncolored white mats and black frames really seem to help the color sparkle better than the unframed images, so that's why I've been using the frames.

[finnbay]

Ah, okay, any chance of smelling a tutorial on that when you have some time? And I emphasize, when you have some time! Or at least a direction where we might find that action?

[Steve Foss]

Ken, check your e-mail.

[jonny_redhorse]

I just purchased a new wide screen 22"(Acer) monitor about 3 months ago and always wondered how the pics look on "your" end...there certainly was some difference when I saw the same photos on my CRT compared to the LCD monitor I had...no doubt peoples monitors show an image somewhat different then the monitor I'm posting from...

[Guest]

Don;t forget to calibrate your monitor for proper color profiles also.. I use a Spyder Pro color calibrator and it makes a world of difference!

[Steve Foss]

Webby, this from a previous post of mine in this thread:

Quote:

---

I strive for lifelike color, so either the ones I used to post are smack on and the later ones are oversaturated, or the older ones are drab and these are lifelike. Or it changed when I bought a new monitor about six months ago. Or it changed when I calibrated my monitor recently.

---

[Dbl]

Quote:

---

Don;t forget to calibrate your monitor for proper color profiles also.. I use a Spyder Pro color calibrator and it makes a world of difference!

---

That is what I was trying to say in a thread a few weeks back. Calibrated monitors are the only sure way that what I see and you see are virtually the same. I have looked at others monitors and could not believe how far off they were in terms of color and contrast and hue.

All that being said, some really nice shots Steve. I do think your shots have definitely have had more "punch" in the last month or two. Calibrated monitor? Something else? I don't know, they are looking good whatever it is.

[Steve Foss]

Thanks, Dan. My prints haven't changed in vibrancy over the past few months, so it's got to be something specific to either small changes in my online color regimen that I'm not aware of or the monitor calibration or virtual framing. Could be a bit of all of them. Who knows?

As for monitor calibration, it doesn't really help things if the poster's monitor is calibrated and 95 percent of the rest of the monitors in America (owned by people more casual about such things) are not calibrated. As I understand it, only when the monitors of both viewers are calibrated will the image look just the same color-wise on each person's screen. Yes?

[JollyT]

I've noticed as people have shifted to LCD screens the look has changed. Different brightness and saturation levels on photos and videos they have posted. I'm still using an old CRT. When I go back and look at old videos and photos they look the same as they always did, so it must be the new stuff people are posting the last couple of years when LCDs have become popular. I may have to go get a new monitor one of these days.

[Guest]

Quote:

---

Webby, this from a previous post of mine in this thread:

Quote:

---

I strive for lifelike color, so either the ones I used to post are smack on and the later ones are oversaturated, or the older ones are drab and these are lifelike. Or it changed when I bought a new monitor about six months ago. Or it changed when I calibrated my monitor recently.

---

---

Oh, I was directing that comment to Johnny Redhorse as he got the new monitor