A few more fowl in fowl weather

[mmeyer]

these are a few more from Sunday. The lighting sure stunk. I thought I had a lot more decent shots but they were all dreary looking and there were so many birds that you couldn't get a decent shot of a small group or a single without a bunch in the background or foreground. Not the greatest photos but not as bad as they could've been I guess.

Don't get in my space!

What snow, I wasn't eating any snow!

I said get away from that corn, it's mine!!

[Steve Foss]

Mike, great captions help the image tell a story and these captions do the job well.

I like shooting in flat light like this better than direct sunlight in many cases. I'll take a cloudy day wedding over a sunny day one anytime, and that's also sometimes true in wildlife/avian situations (judiciously set flash can be your good friend in those instances).

In these days of excellent IQ at iso800, even a slow lens that doesn't open past f5.6 can do good work when steadied in a rock solid way. And a little exposure compensation or, in consistent light, manual settings, can go a long way.

One of the things I like best about flat light is not having to worry about sun position and shadows. Well, or course there are tradeoffs, but aren't there ALWAYS tradeoffs?

I like these images of yours. I like the mallard hen the best. She's just all of a piece there, precious as a pearl. Good work.

[mmeyer]

Steve,

Thanks for the advice. The problem I had on Sunday was this: I wanted to use my new 70-200 f2.8 lens but a lot of the birds were too far away so I would have to use my 170-500 f5.6-6.3 but sometimes I couldn't get a fast enough shutter speed even going up to ISO 800. My D50 doesn't do real well past that so I try not to go higher. Then when I was shooting closer shots I could use my 2.8 lens but I need to open it up so much that my DOF was diminished sometimes too much. I was using a good tripod and ballhead for almost all of the shots and I'm sure that did help. I wanted to be able to stop down my aperture so I could get depth of field but it wasn't working very well. That was probably my biggest problem that day. Any help on that would be appreciated.

Thanks Again

[Rozman]

Great pics!!!!!!!!

[Steve Foss]

Mike, you haven't posted exif, so I don't know all the info I could really use, but a couple general things occur to me.

If the light is so bad that you have to use the shorter faster lens, it's tough to do in some situations, but crawling along until you're close enough to where the birds WERE and having the warm clothing and patience to allow them to return within range is one option.

Don't worry overly much about f2.8 being shallow. When the light won't allow you to stop down, simply be alert for compositions that are flattered by shallow DOF.

I shoot the 30D and Canon 100-400L IS in most cases, and I have no hesitation about ramping iso to 800 and shooting at f7.1 or f8, but that lens has image stabilization, which helps, and when I have to hunker down and stalk I just leave my kit behind and am on my belly anyway, so bracing the lens across an arm on the ground (or my clenched fist) generally is enough to get sharp images. It's also a matter of timing, waiting until the subject's movement stills.

And, after the fact, a careful application in curves/levels can bring a slightly underexposed image back quite nicely. That's if you don't have the spare aperture/shutter speed to overexpose a darker subject slightly against a pale background.

[finnbay]

I like 'em, Mike. Especially the mallard hen. Tucked in and fluffed up, she looks cold but content.

[MN Shutterbug]

I don't see anything wrong with these at all. They're a nice series. However, the last hen looks like her eye is frozen shut.

[MN Shutterbug]

Quote:

---

Mike, you haven't posted exif, so I don't know all the info I could really use, but a couple general things occur to me.

---

Steve, I use Kuso Exif viewer for reading data from other's pics.

[jonny_redhorse]

All nice Mike...but the last image of the sleeping hen does it for me!.....sure have had a long stretch of gray days...geesh!...this is the last day of my eleven day vacation and we've had 1 full clear blue, sun shiny day in the 11 day stretch....gotta get used to shooting in gray ,snowy days up here I guess

[Dbl]

I noticed looking at your Exif data you shot these on manual, which is a good option with this lighting. You do need as Steve mentioned to compensate for the dark subject against the light background. What did you use to set your exposure, what did you meter off of? I put my hand out in front of me and take a shot of that to get me in the ball park of proper exposure. Brightly lit snow is 1.5 to 2 stops brighter than the 18% grey your camera sees and exposes for. Under cloudy conditions such as this about 1 to 1.5 stops over works well for the proper exposure of the subject. Constantly checking your histogram will get you the exposure you want. Everyone starting out with digital has a hard time remembering to looking at that histogram and using it to adjust your camera settings to nail your shots.

If you shoot RAW you will have a bit more latitude than you do with jpeg for correcting exposure, but you will bring out noise in the shadow areas if you underexpose too much in either format. As Steve said you will be better off with the faster lens in lower light such as this, get closer to the subject or wait until they get closer to you.

You have some great compositions with these shots but they are a bit underexposed except the last shot. Making a few adjustments should give you photos that really stand out!

[mmeyer]

Thanks Everyone,

Dan, I remembered your hand trick so the first thing I did when I got there was meter my hand but it the entire shot after that was white so I must have done something wrong with that. I haven't been using the histogram although I keep meaning to. I always use the blinkies but I can see the problem with that. I know they aren't overexposed but with the blinkies I can't see the dark areas. I'll have to start to get used to using the histogram.

With this situation I couldn't get closer because they were very strict about staying within the park boundaries and the water was a ways from the boundaries.

Thanks again Steve and Dan for all the help. I'm pretty new to this stuff but sometimes I get a little impatient like I should know all of the things you guys do so I get a little frustrated. I just have to remember that it's going to take me a long time to get all of the ins and outs down.

Happy New Year

[Dbl]

Mike,

Don't get impatient you are doing a fantastic job just starting out. Your results are very good, but doing the little things will make them even better! The histogram is so important it can't be stressed enough. It allows you to learn on the spot and make adjustments to nail your exposure.

I am not sure what happend with metering off your hand, did you fill the entire frame with just your hand? You don't want to fool the camera meter by including much of the background in the shot. Again this will get you in the ballpark, small adjustments will need to be made.....by using the histogram to get it perfect.

That is tough when you restricted by boundaries, not much you can do about that. The really cool thing about digital is that you have instant feedback on your results, learn to interpret them and your learning curve is shortened by a considerable amount. You are doing great but will be doing much better one month from now because you are willing to go out and experiment and take pictures.

Enjoy the new year, I know it will bring you many great pictures!

[MN Shutterbug]

Quote:

---

Dan, I remembered your hand trick so the first thing I did when I got there was meter my hand but it the entire shot after that was white so I must have done something wrong with that.

---

Did you remember to take your glove off? Seriously, the books say to meter off your hand and open up 1 stop. Just make sure the light hitting your hand is exactly the same as the light hitting the subject. You may have to change the exposure mode to spot or center weighted, because if you meter off your hand is in evaluative mode, you may be including area around your hand if your hand doesn't completely cover the lens.

Many years ago, I had an 18% gray card that went wherever I did. After awhile, I no longer used it but still looked back at it for reference so I'd remember what 18% density looked like. I can see I'm going to have to order another one. You can buy them 8" X 10" or 4" x 5". I had the 8 X 10 and cut it in half so it would fit in my camera bag better. It can come in might handy, and they only cost about $5.

[Dbl]

Quote:

---

the books say to meter off your hand and open up 1 stop. Just make sure the light hitting your hand is exactly the same as the light hitting the subject. You may have to change the exposure mode to spot or center weighted, because if you meter off your hand is in evaluative mode, you may be including area around your hand if your hand doesn't completely cover the lens.

---

I find in winter time that just the meter reading from my hand with NO additional adjustments works well for me. If you add one stop you will most likely be overexposing your subject and making the snow completely white with no texture to it. This again is just a method I use, others may find better results with just metering the scene and using EC to adjust for proper exposure in the snow. It is just another method to add to the many that are available to help you shooting in snow.

With evaluative metering the camera gives equal importance to the entire scene to make sure that over all best exposure is achieved in the entire scene. That is why it is best to try and fill the lens with your hand.

[MN Shutterbug]

Yep, that snow is definitely a factor. I was just thinking. If a person was to take 10 parts white paint and add 1.8 parts black paint, would he end up with 18% gray? Logically speaking, he should. If I have some white and some black paint around, I may give this a shot. A person could then paint a small piece of masonite, to use for a gray card. Any thoughts on this?

[Dbl]

X I think some of the automobile type paints might make a good grey card. I am not sure about the Masonite, you would have to prime it white to get a good neutral base for the final coat. Automotive paint is spectrally uniform and will withstand UV fading as well as being moisture resistant. Might work, I would be interested in seeing the results if you make one.