Project 52 by Rebecca Humphries

[woty87]

Rebecca, I agree with you. I think it may be a bit too grey overall and could use an adjustment to either the squirrel or background. I love taking wildlife photos, but I'm horrible at pp them because PS selections on furry little creatures drive me mad. Nice capture though!

[ScoutR]

Hi Rebecca, you seem to be a squirrel magnet and you manage to get very sharp shots. I don't mind the monotone look with this one. I think the squirrel stands out nicely against the plain background. Sometimes too much colour distracts from the subject. It's one of those things that come down to personal taste I guess. I have a tendency to like simple muted and monochromatic colour schemes so I like this one.

Wendy

[beckyhumphries]

Hi John and Wendy, thanks for your comments.

I'm hoping to continue with the wildlife theme this weekend by trying some birds or deer (to give the poor squirrels a break!).

Hopefully I will be able to get some nice shots

[Dave Humphries]

Continuing the squirrel theme... this greedy chap seemed to have no fear as he came within a couple of meters of the camera. He definitely had his hands full and in the end only managed to carry two of the three bits of bread away with him! My worry is that the picture overall seems a bit one-tone with all the grey.

I wouldn't worry about the grey-ness, the subject is well separated from the background by shape and focus.

To really make it pop, you could try duplicating the background on a new layer, perform a local contrast enhancement on that, then show only the squirrel from that layer. That will also improve the colours a bit.

It was unfortunate the light was so poor where we shot him/her, I suspect there is some subject movement, but I cannot see the EXIF data - does the new Panasonic software provide access to that, so you can tell us what the shutter speed, aperture, iso and focal length was?

My tarmac path shots were 1/125s f/8, iso800 at 300mm and s/he looks softer than yours!
I do have one sharper one; from under the bushes, but that was 1/45s f/8, iso800 at 145mm - when it came up to our feet almost.

Good crop/framing btw.

Cheers,

[beckyhumphries]

It was shot at f/5.8, 1/320s, iso1600 at 280mm (35mm equivalent).

I am even more happy now I see what iso it was shot at; I would never get anything decent over iso400 on my old camera

[Dave Humphries]

It was shot at f/5.8, 1/320s, iso1600 at 280mm (35mm equivalent).

I am even more happy now I see what iso it was shot at; I would never get anything decent over iso400 on my old camera

Ooops, my 35mm equivalents are 450mm (for 300mm actual) and 200mm for the 135mm shot.

Your shutter speed is a better choice, gaining a stop each on aperture and iso over me

[beckyhumphries]

Ooops, my 35mm equivalents are 450mm (for 300mm actual) and 200mm for the 135mm shot.

Your shutter speed is a better choice, gaining a stop each on aperture and iso over me

If I try to get some birds in flight shots tomorrow, I will shot at f/5.8 again probably, but what iso would you recommend to get the shutter speed up? I don't want to go too high in case I risk getting noise. Normally I would shoot around iso200 but might this be too slow?

[Steve S]

If I try to get some birds in flight shots tomorrow, I will shot at f/5.8 again probably, but what iso would you recommend to get the shutter speed up? I don't want to go too high in case I risk getting noise. Normally I would shoot around iso200 but might this be too slow?

Hi rebecca,

You will need shutter speeds of 1/1000s or more(depending on how fast the bird is) for birds in flight. Use whatever iso you need, to get the shutter speed you need, and then apply some noise reduction in post processing if necessary. f/5.8 should be more than enough depth of field, unless you are extremely close.

[beckyhumphries]

Hi rebecca,

You will need shutter speeds of 1/1000s or more(depending on how fast the bird is) for birds in flight. Use whatever iso you need, to get the shutter speed you need, and then apply some noise reduction in post processing if necessary. f/5.8 should be more than enough depth of field, unless you are extremely close.

Thanks Steve, this was very useful. I tried to get 1/1000s wherever possible, the only thing that let me down was my panning skills and keeping the focus on the birds. Oh well they say practise makes perfect

[beckyhumphries]

Theme of the week is birds of prey. For my next Project 52 I want to get more practice (and get better at!) getting animals/people in motion as I am not good at panning and keeping focus on moving objects. These photos were from a day out at a local birds of prey centre.


f/5, 1/4000s, iso500, 342mm (35mm equivalent)


f/5.1, 1/640s, iso320, 436mm (35mm equivalent)


f/5.4, 1/400s, iso320, 516mm (35mm equivalent)


f/5, 1/640s, iso500, 200mm (35mm equivalent)

This one is not in focus but it was the best of a limited selection of in flight shots!

f/5.6, 1/4000s, iso1000, 200mm (35mm equivalent)

All comments much appreciated.

[sstracke]

#3 is a great shot. Detail and exposure are very nice.

#5 is a very complicated shot - movement that necessitates the fast shutter speed; tone of the subject, that needs a bit more light; light background that appears to work against you in getting enough detail in your subject. Perhaps, take a single point exposure reading from the similarly-toned gloved hand (with the necessary shutter speed for capturing the bird's movement), manually set the necessary aperture and speed, then fire away. The background will still be blown out, but your subject will be exposed more. Not sure what lens was used, which could have been an additional limiting factor, based on available aperture.

I would not have wanted to have that beast land (or gnaw) on my hand!

[Goldcoastgolfer]

Great captures! #1 and #3 are my favourites. I think #4 could use a bit of exposure in the front areas of the owl. Perhaps try using an adjustment brush of some sort. With #5, given the background is already light you could try lifting the exposure of the entire photo to see if the darkened areas can be lightened and provide more detail. I think this should work.

[Geoff F]

They all work well.

[beckyhumphries]

Hi Steve, thanks for your comments. I was shooting with a Panasonic Lumix GH2 with 100-300mm lens.

I had the image of number 3 in my head before I shot it, I went back 2 or 3 times to get the right set up without background clutter so am very pleased with how it turned out.

I will definitely be practising some moving shots for my next Project 52 as this is my major weakness in photography. I missed my opportunity in the second flying display of the day as my battery ran out just before it started and when I went to put in my new spare battery I realised I'd been sent the wrong type of battery! Maybe I will have better luck next weekend

[Wendy Stanford]

All the images are great, especially like #3, good lighting with focus on the eye, very clear with good detail, #5 great action shot, the bird is really focused on the the food ,birds in flight are one area that I really have to practice on also,

[Steve S]

Nice job rebecca. The only thing i can add to help, would be pay attention to the light direction. Several of the shots were backlit. Try and keep the light behind you and to one side or the other.

[Donald]

I had the image of number 3 in my head before I shot it, I went back 2 or 3 times to get the right set up ....

I know I sound like a broken record and keep saying it, but I think that visioning of what image you want to create is just so important. I think the evidence of that is shown here. It is a cracker.

[Nat]

I like all of these but #3 is really a "cracker"! Lucky you to have these birds available to you. Question for the experts, ....would it have helped to have used the flash on the bird in flight, but with a diffuser? For fill light. Sometimes, because of the circumstances, we can't always ask the bird or handler to turn into the right direction for the light. Keep shooting, Rebecca!

[beckyhumphries]

Thanks for all your comments.

Hi Steve, yes I must try to think more about the light in future. It is something I noticed a lot when browsing through my pictures from the day, but failed to think about when I was there. I will make that my next thing to master

Hi Donald. I found great inspiration in browsing through some birds of prey shots online and in the forum before turning up, to see how the pros managed to set up great shots. It helped me think better about framing the shot and how close-ups could help me capture some of the great detail in the birds feathers etc so I had this in my head before I even arrived.

Birds of prey are fast becoming my favourite thing to shot (or get practice shooting), as they are much larger than the birds in the wild I seem to come across, stay put longer and I have more than one shot at getting them in motion. For the sake of the £5 entrance fee I may return to the centre to have another go at some flying shots in the upcoming weeks

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Rebecca,

Looking at these; they are all good for composition and mostly also for exposure, if you were shooting RAW, you might get another 1/3 stop exposure on many, but with jpg, I'd err on side of caution and stay as you are.

#1 and #3 are fine, no suggestions for improvement needed.

#2 would stand a little brightening up and some local contrast enhancement.

#4 similar, although I'd be tempted to try some increase in the mid-grey point of levels dialog to lighten the shadow side only without further brightening the sunlit side.

#5 could, especially if it had been shot RAW, allow significant recovery of the in shadow detail.
FWIW, I don't think the focus is off, possibly sharpening could be improved but the beak edge is sharp and I don't think your shutter speed (or mine) goes any higher than that!

You should be proud of these, as I am of you for taking them.

Keep it up,