2018 Project 52 - 4th Qtr - Sandy (Skitterbug)

[joebranko]

Sandy, as a result of your comment I realized I should update my LR6.10 to 6.14. .

Hi Bruce, I currently run LR CC and have dehaze. I am sure I also had dehaze in my last upgrade in Lightroom Classic. Not sure which version number I had though....

[skitterbug]

Sandy, as a result of your comment I realized I should update my LR6.10 to 6.14. I've done that but don't see a dehaze in the presets. The image/link you posted for the preset location doesn't work on either my iPad or Desktop computer. Are you able to repost the screen shot? Many thanks.

Hi Bruce - sorry it took me a bit to get back to CiC. I looked all over the web trying to find how I managed to get these in the stand-along LR v6.14. I can't seem to remember if they came with a download or what. But this is what my panels look like. (sorry the one didn't post and I'll edit it to show up.... I hope)

So I go into Preferences and click on show Lightroom preset folder. Then I choose Develop Presets - and it shows me that I have Dehaze- and Dehaze+. Maybe these images will show you what I mean. I'll keep trying to remember how I got them. Hope this helps a little bit?

[Cantab]

Sandy, thank you for the screen shot and information. I've done some digging around on the internet and came across what may be the plug-in you've installed: https://cutthruthefog.wordpress.com/...r-lightroom-6/ .

Does this sound like what you have?

As I read the info at this website, I began to have very vague recollections of having previously read that the software code for the dehaze function was contained in all except the earliest versions of LR6 but that there was no way of accessing the dehaze function without some sort of work around such as this plugin.

[skitterbug]

Hi Bruce - It occurred to me that if I checked when the install/modify date of the templates was done, maybe I could pinpoint the name or the original file that I wanted. Apparently, I did not keep the initial download. And yes, it does appear that I used a "third party" install app to acquire the Dehaze feature. And it seems odd to me that I can't locate the old files because I keep everything. I am a packrat plus when it comes to computer files.

Anyway, I finally found that this feature was added to my LR around August 2015. So I hunted the net and came up with this page that does sound more familiar to me than the information that you found. But I would bet that your info would also do the job.

For curiosity sake I did download the Prolost file just to see what it might do.And no, I didn't pay for it. He said to type in $0 so that is what I did. <smile> It looks like there is more added to it than when I initially installed my presets from him.
I also downloaded the file from your linked page and read the install info she offers on her webpage. I think installing either file would be done pretty much the same but he does have a "readme" document included in his zip file.

As a caution with all new installs, I'd suggest making a backup just to be on the safe side, if you decide to try either of these. I don't remember having any problems when I went forward with the install. I have a feeling that if something had gone wrong, I'd remember it very well! <chuckle>

I don't know if I've just complicated things for you but I did want to share what I'd found so you had options to consider. I'll definitely be curious about the end result if you decide to go forward with either of them.

[RandyRFJP]

Hi Sandy! That's a very nice photo of the hawk. I'm by no means an expert on identifying raptors, but like Rudi mentioned above, I'm also not sure it's a red-tailed hawk.

Based on the following website, I'd tentatively ID the hawk as an immature Cooper's Hawk.

See: https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Coopers_Hawk/id

The website I list above is maintained by Cornell University's Ornithology Laboratory which is, in my opinion, the premier higher educational institution in the US to study birds. When I want to ID a bird, that's the first site I go to.

[Cantab]

Randy and Sandy, one obvious ID issue is whether there are Cooper's hawks in Sandy's area this time of the year. I have no idea.

We get both Cooper's hawks and red tailed hawks here where I live on the southwest coast of Canada but the weather is considerably milder than Ohio where Sandy lives.

[RandyRFJP]

Bruce, you're absolutely correct. According to the website I referenced above, Cooper's Hawks are year-round residents of Ohio, which is two states "east" of Illinois, where I live. The range map of Cooper's Hawks can be found at:

https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/...awk/maps-range

According to the site I reference, Red-Tailed Hawks are also year-round residents of Ohio, so the bird Sandy photographed could be a Red-Tailed Hawk.

See: https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/...awk/maps-range

I don't have enough knowledge to say with any degree of certainty which species of hawk Sandy photographed.

[Cantab]

Randy, partly because of the shape of the bird, I never had misgivings about the red tailed hawk ID. Cooper's hawks always seem slimmer when I see them. One of them cruised past our bird feeders a few days ago. But I've now looked in a local bird book and its photo of an immature cooper's hawk looks a lot like Sandy's hawk.

Sandy, do you have any sense how the size and build of your hawk compares to any Cooper's hawks you've seen?

[skitterbug]

Hi Randy and Bruce - I'd say that this hawk is about the size of a half grown chicken. He seems to struggle with his hunting abilities so I don't think he's full grown. I have two rather lame pictures that I can post that will show the top side of his tail. And one from the side. These were also taken through a window but not what I would like to keep. In fact, I'm surprised I found them back. I worked on them a bit so they were more clear so maybe it will help?

While on our way home, hubby and I did spot a full grown red-tail hawk and I think(?) we can eliminate mine from that species but I haven't seen the underside of his tail feather other than when he is perched. I believe they are white/brown and barred (does that description make sense?).

Anyway, see if these two images help? And thanks for the interest because identifying him would be a treat! He's a nuisance to the other birds but he's fun to watch!

[Shadowman]

Sandy,

This website might help with identification.

https://identify.whatbird.com/obj/41...iled_Hawk.aspx

[skitterbug]

Hi John - I've appreciated the various links to pages about identifying birds (you and Randy). From what I can tell based on the chest and tail markings, I'd have to agree with my Sis, I think this one is a Broad-Wing hawk. He is a beautiful bird!

Thanks for the info!

[skitterbug]

Week 50 (already)

We returned home from church and was just entering our home when this fellow swooped through our yard. He startled the hawk out of the brush pile and sent the rest of the birds flying as well.He landed across the road in the tree line well above the field. This is a first time event for us. I never in my wildest dreams ever thought we'd see an eagle in our neighborhood.

I was attempting to get a photo from our front porch but wasn't having much luck. He was just too far away. So hubby suggested we climb into the vehicle and cruise over the road and through the cornfield which had recently been harvested. We approached as close as we could and the result is a heavily cropped photo that I have posted here. No clouds at all in the sky. Too many little branches but I imagine that is why the eagle picked the place he landed.

My First Eagle
ISO100 - f/11 - 1/320

[Shadowman]

Nice effort.

[skitterbug]

Nice effort.

Hi John - There is always the desire to do better. A longer focusing lens would be nice but it is entirely out of my budget!

Thanks for commenting!

[billtils]

Well spotted and nice capture. Sure, like (just about) every shot it could have been better if only ... but you did a great job with what was available, and to borrow the somewhat hackneyed phrase, you captured the moment.

[Cantab]

Well spotted and nice capture. Sure, like (just about) every shot it could have been better if only ... but you did a great job with what was available, and to borrow the somewhat hackneyed phrase, you captured the moment.

I agree with Bill.

As for a longer lens, I assume you were using your 100-400 zoom? A few years ago, I checked prices on Canon's longer prime telephoto lens. I'd need to win the lottery first -- but I never buy tickets!

[billtils]

... A few years ago, I checked prices on Canon's longer prime telephoto lens. I'd need to win the lottery first -- but I never buy tickets!

.

All the main manufacturers are the same. It could be worse - a photo buddy recently ditched his 5D3 and lenses (including some L series ones) for an Olympus OM-D E-M1 (I think that's the correct designation, in every day language, their top of the range body) and was staggered by the prices of their Pro series lenses.

[skitterbug]

Well spotted and nice capture. Sure, like (just about) every shot it could have been better if only ... but you did a great job with what was available, and to borrow the somewhat hackneyed phrase, you captured the moment.

Hi Bill - It was an exciting moment for me since there are very few of these birds in our area. When we took our walk a few weeks ago by the lake where there is a pair nesting, I'd hope to spot one. No luck that day. So boy was I surprised when he/she came to us!

I appreciate your comments. Feedback is what makes this forum fun to be involved in. Thank you!

[skitterbug]

I agree with Bill.

As for a longer lens, I assume you were using your 100-400 zoom? A few years ago, I checked prices on Canon's longer prime telephoto lens. I'd need to win the lottery first -- but I never buy tickets!

Hi Bruce - My lottery purchases are few and far between. I buy scratch off tickets for the kids for Christmas stocking stuffers. Sometimes we actually win a $1 or $2. <LOL> Not nearly enough to purchase the lens that would be handy for long range image captures. I did use the 100-400 zoom for this adventure. I don't regret adding it to my kit!

I have considered a Canon Extender EF 1.4x III but the reviews don't inspire me. It sounds like some don't get very sharp focus with it - not good in low light conditions, etc. I'll keep reading what I can find about it and maybe sometime, I still may try it.

Thanks for commenting. As I mentioned to Bill, feedback definitely makes this forum fun.

[Geoff F]

I use the Canon 1.4x Mk II on a lot of my insect shots, Sandy; but yes there are potential problems with using it on many lenses. It won't physically fit on so many lenses and you can lose auto focus on some others. Best on a 2.8 lens (approx) up to F4 (possibly F6.3). There is also a Sigma version (and other makes) which are more compatible but they still don't fit all lenses.

Maybe I notice a slight lack of contrast as times but this is easily overcome during editing.

I have used it on my Sigma 150-600 Sport lens but found auto focus was poor although manual focus did work. Not an ideal addition though. That is a good lens for bird photography although, unless I am specifically looking for wildlife or similar scenes, it does spend a lot of time sitting unused in a cupboard, which makes it a rather expensive ornament.