Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Wildlife Photos

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 21, 2006, 3:30 PM   #11
DBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,483
Default

Our Killdeer is nicer then YOUR Killdeer. And no other bird can immitate the sound of a Killdeer. Which sounds very much like, "theresahumanandawolf, theresahumanandawolf."

When the Willets arrive, they take over providing the noise, but it sounds a bit different... :blah:

Dave
DBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2006, 7:44 AM   #12
KEM
Senior Member
 
KEM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,458
Default

These are really nice shots Jake. You post some of the clearest and sharpest photos on this board. That African Crake is my favorite with the great lighting, color contrast of legs, bill and background. You also did a good job on exposure of the dark bird and the sense of motion you set with the offset crop and stepping bird..
-Kent


KEM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2006, 8:19 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
bmullen@comcast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 4,435
Default

Fantastic shots (as usual), Jake.
bmullen@comcast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2006, 9:02 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
101Linda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 305
Default

Jake - wonderful as always and very educational. Thanks!
101Linda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2006, 9:22 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 301
Default

Yes, great shots as usual!! I love seeing the variety of birds & wildlife you are able to capture. Esp. love the lapwing & the crake-really neat looking birds!
Murmurmel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2006, 11:23 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
JakeTPegg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,767
Default

Quote:
You also did a good job on exposure of the dark bird
Thanks all for the favourable comments, I really do appreciate your time and effort to look in and reply :-)

Kent, the Crake shot is a good example of the benefits of shooting in RAW.The exposure was horribly wrong [way over exposed], if I had shot inJpg mode, it would have been a definite throw-away,however, usingtheRAW converterin PSgave me something reasonable out of a disaster situation.For those out there who have RAW capabilities [Camera and Software], if you're not using it, give it a bash - I thinkBob [bmullen@comcast] can vouch for that as well
JakeTPegg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2006, 12:03 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
bmullen@comcast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 4,435
Default

I agree with Jake, RAW has some very nice benefits. It is all I shoot in now.
bmullen@comcast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2006, 7:58 PM   #18
KEM
Senior Member
 
KEM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,458
Default

Jake,
Would you mind posting the original of the African Crake so that I can see the differences? I'd love to see the pre/post results. I usually just shoot in JPG and use the generic knobs in the supplied Nikon software as I'm not that versed in PS. I'm very interested in learning how to salvage my overexposed pictures!
Thanks,
-Kent


KEM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2006, 12:56 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
JakeTPegg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,767
Default

Sure, Kent, here it is. There is no sharpening as well. It must be noted that in .jpg mode, the camera's built insoftware [all digital cameras, point and shoot included] will shoot in raw, then convert to jpg with whatever settings are built into the cameras own software. Sharpening, saturation, white balance and exposure [to a degree] are then handled by the camera, rather than by the post processing software/user. That is why it is better to do the PP youself, it gives you better flexibility and choice.
Attached Images
 
JakeTPegg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2006, 11:20 AM   #20
DBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,483
Default

JakeTPegg wrote:
Quote:
Sure, Kent, here it is. There is no sharpening as well. It must be noted that in .jpg mode, the camera's built in software [all digital cameras, point and shoot included] will shoot in raw, then convert to jpg with whatever settings are built into the cameras own software. Sharpening, saturation, white balance and exposure [to a degree] are then handled by the camera, rather than by the post processing software/user. That is why it is better to do the PP youself, it gives you better flexibility and choice.
The combination of RAW and the new noise elimination programs (noise ninja, noiseware professional) have turned me back to religion. ()

BTW, Noiseware professional 4 is out, and it's a big improvment over 3 (which was pretty good). So whereas I used to use Noise Ninja and occasionally Noiseware, it's now reversed.

Dave

Dave
DBB is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:42 PM.