another hawk shot

[jamn4ex]

Who's looking at who? I took this with cannonxs 55/250 mm IS 1/500 5.6 av

[tameigh]

When you are shooting something against a much brighter background you need to shoot with exposure compensation increased to get a good exposure on the subject. I have the same camera, and I press the Av button on the back, and turn the knob behind the shutter and watch the display, you can increase it by a couple of stops. I would also brighten the whole thing up a little. The whole thing is a tiny bit soft.

It is an interesting subject though.

[jamn4ex]

Thanks Tim , I am constantly dealing with bright backgrounds so Ill try that next time out .I appreciate all input.

[Geoff F]

But be careful not to overdo the exposure compensation, James, if in doubt, I would always err on the underexposed side and increase brightness during editing.

If possible take a few shots with different amounts of compensation.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi James,

Nice shot, although it is soft as Tim says, I have countless shots of birds of my own with exactly the same problem, sharp perch, soft bird

Geoff is wise to advise caution with the +EC - you really don't want to blow the sky, in my experience 1 - 1.5 stops will do the trick, keep an eye on the histogram and blinkies - but do beware in case the bird takes flight while you're chimping

Cheers,

[ScoutR]

Hi James,

Geoff is wise to advise caution with the +EC - you really don't want to blow the sky, in my experience 1 - 1.5 stops will do the trick, keep an eye on the histogram and blinkies - but do beware in case the bird takes flight while you're chimping

Cheers,

This seems like a perfect opportunity to ask a question that has been building up for awhile. In a case like this with a plain dull grey sky, does it really matter if the sky gets blown? Same thing with a dark subject on snow, does it really matter if the snow gets blown. I'm thinking cases where there is no detail in the background anyway, does it really matter if the background is blown, if the subject is properly exposed? Will the blown background introduce other artifacts like Chromatic aberration or halos or something?

The reason I ask is because I like this type of shot, and although I do try to expose as advised above I think I would rather (and have) err on the side of blowing the background in a shot like this, because I find if I underexpose the subject I end up with a lot of noise when trying to bring it back. I'm normally shooting birds at ISO 400 or 800.

Sorry James I don't mean to hijack your thread. I love the Hawk shot, but agree the focus seems to be on the perch. This is still a great shot though, the eye contact is amazing, he sure is giving you the look. I don't know if this can be PP'd for more sharpness, but it would certainly be worth a try - great shot

Wendy

[Dave Humphries]

This seems like a perfect opportunity to ask a question that has been building up for awhile. In a case like this with a plain dull grey sky, does it really matter if the sky gets blown? Same thing with a dark subject on snow, does it really matter if the snow gets blown. I'm thinking cases where there is no detail in the background anyway, does it really matter if the background is blown, if the subject is properly exposed? Will the blown background introduce other artifacts like Chromatic aberration or halos or something?

The reason I ask is because I like this type of shot, and although I do try to expose as advised above I think I would rather (and have) err on the side of blowing the background in a shot like this, because I find if I underexpose the subject I end up with a lot of noise when trying to bring it back. I'm normally shooting birds at ISO 400 or 800.

Hi Wendy, James,

Yes, it does;

I let it blow on this shot because I had the subject against the tree trunk, not the sky;


Nikon D5000 + Nikon 70-300mm VR: 1/350s, f/8, iso800 (34412)

So, when the sky behind the twigs on the left blew, it didn't matter so much, here's a screen grab at 400% to show the problem it introduced.



All that nasty smeary stuff below the twig had to be cloned out in PP* - it wasn't an issue because it is just a twig, but that's not an option when it is the edge of the main subject.

* If you don't get rid of it before sharpening, it gets even worse!

I don't always clone away, often, if a coloured edge, vigorous desaturation is acceptable.

Cheers,

[Radu Dinu Cordeanu]

Who's looking at who? I took this with cannonxs 55/250 mm IS 1/500 5.6 av

Hi,
Such "static" portrait calls a good long focal lens(500mm or more) to avoid so much negative space because You must show to the onlooker what is importan at this bird - eyes and claws.