Antievolution.org :: Antievolution.org Discussion Board The Critic's Resource on Antievolution

Antievolution.org Discussion Board > From the Panda's Thumb > After the Bar Closes... > Wildlife

Pages: (74) < ... 39 40 41 42 43 [44] 45 46 47 48 49 ... >

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,07:27    Quote (Lou FCD @ April 23 2011,15:02) Quote Now see? That right there is how it's done. Sweet shot, the light is perfect, the focus is dead on, and the bokeh is beautiful. What he said! Wow! I'm with FNXTR, but in a nice way too. -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,07:32    Quote (Lou FCD @ April 24 2011,18:48) Quote Cedar Waxwing (Bombycilla cedrorum), new for my life lists. Oh...lovely Lou! My favorite bird! I love how their song is really something only dogs can hear - it's so high-pitched! -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,07:56    Well, nothing quite like Lou's or Alby's shots, but I'm working on it: Chipping Sparrow - Spizella passerina "I'm watching you!" Osprey - Pandion haliaetus Eastern Black Swallowtail - Papilio polyxenes Easter Tiger Swallowtail - Papilio glaucus American Painted Lady - Vanessa virginiensis Silver-sided Skipper (Epargyre clarus) sportin' some tude -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

carlsonjok Posts: 3326 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,09:17    Quote (Robin @ April 25 2011,07:56) Well, nothing quite like Lou's or Alby's shots, but I'm working on it: Chipping Sparrow - Spizella passerina Just a few minutes ago, I had about a half-dozen of these outside my home office window.  I took a few pictures hoping someone could identify them, since I have never seen them out there before.   Now I don't need to ask.  Which is probably good, since the combination of an overcast day and taking the picture through a screen would mean they are probably pretty crappy shots. Thanks. -------------- It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,09:51    Quote (Albatrossity2 @ April 23 2011,15:17) Coincidentally, I heard my first Prothonotary Warbler of the season this morning, while we were out seeking morels. Here's a pic from a few years back; probably not the same one I heard this morning  :) that thing eating a mayfly? did you find any morels is the more immediate question.  we are done here -------------- You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

Albatrossity2 Posts: 2780 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,11:06    Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,April 25 2011,09:51) that thing eating a mayfly? Yeah, it's not a "bug".   Quote did you find any morels is the more immediate question.  we are done here Yeah, we got about 3-4 lbs Saturday and probably another pound yesterday. We found several nice explosions like this one. Ate a bunch of them, gave some away, and dried the rest for the famine times. We're probably done here too, although the morels are not finished. Too cold and rainy today, and when it warms up again the understory growth will be too heavy to allow easy sighting of the morels. We had a good year here, though, so I won't worry if i don't get any more. -------------- Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind Has been obligated from the beginning To create an ordered universe As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.                         - Pattiann Rogers

dhogaza Posts: 525 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,15:16    Robin: the osprey shot rocks ...

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,15:28    Quote (dhogaza @ April 25 2011,15:16) Quote Robin: the osprey shot rocks ... Thanks! She was reeeeeeaally cooperative. I think I rattled off about 3 dozen pics of her coming and going above me. There were 4 out total along this coastline at this park, just lazily floating back and forth and calling to one another. Both groups - two groups of mated pairs it turns out - had nests nearby that we could check out, and the parents didn't stray that far from them. Couldn't get a good shot of the chicks, unfortunately, but otoh, mom kept a good close eye on me, and kept floating down this one path I was on, providing a very good photo subject. -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,15:32    You know, since some of you are quite a bit more experienced at this than I, I have a question. On the butterfly pics I shot above, would it have been better to try to shoot them with a flash? Are there any pointers you can give me on how to get the colors to 'pop' for such subjects? Any suggestions and feedback would be most appreciated. -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

Lou FCD Posts: 5455 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,16:45    Nice shots, Robin! You'll have to wait for Albatrossity or someone to answer about the flash, I don't use one (I don't even own one, yet). ETA: Lightroom is a good bit of software for fixing pictures that come off the camera odd, or flat, or a little over or under-exposed. That's what I use. Are you shooting in RAW or jpg? Edited by Lou FCD on April 25 2011,17:50 -------------- “Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas? Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

dhogaza Posts: 525 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,17:12    Yeah, I'm with Lou, you can pump up the saturation in whatever program you use for post processing. Note that a lot of pre-digital nature photography you see online or in print was shot in Velvia, which gives unnaturally saturated colors which photo editors loved.  It's a major reason why Fuji overcame Kodak in the professional film market.  Kodak fought back by introducing moderately pumped-up film like E100SW (my personal favorite for colorful birds species, and well accepted by photo editors, though I would shoot Velvia for brownish sparrows and the like, because the extra saturation makes them unrealistically attractive, and what the photo editors want, the photo editors get). The point of this ramble is that a whole generation of people grew up looking at ultra-saturated nature photography and when presented with an image more true to the actual colors in the scene (digital is capable of much more accurate rendition) think "oh, it's washed out, it's pale, it's not real!". So tweak it until you like it but afterwards you might find the real-life butterflies unnaturally drab :) As to flash ... flash in nature photography requires a delicate touch, IMO, and should be balanced with ambient light in such a way as to highlight your subject without overwhelming it. I suggest buying a good nature photography guide written fairly recently (written with modern bodies and flashes with reasonably smart exposure balancing capabilities). Far too much to even begin to discuss in a discussion thread if you want to use flash to improve your photography (as opposed to blinding your subject).

dhogaza Posts: 525 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,17:19    So here's an example of a photo of mine that could've been improved with a bit of fill flash (underexposing for ambient conditions).  The result would've been a lot less contrast and more even lighting on the pelican, without the harshness that frequently comes when flash is the main source of light. BTW if you start exploring use of flash you'll start wanting at minimum a bracket to move the flash off-axis from the lens, and quite quickly will begin thinking of getting a bracket with two flashes off-axis from the lens and each other. If you look at a lot of published bird photos, in particular, you'll see the tale-tells of the use of two flashes for fill - two highlights in the eye and (unless the photographer's ham-fisted with flash, which unfortunately many are) nice even light on the subject which is high-key enough to separate it a bit from the background.

Albatrossity2 Posts: 2780 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,17:30    Robin I agree; that osprey picture is great. They can be difficult birds to approach, but I've also found that nesting pairs give you some pretty close approaches. Flash for butterflies is good for some situations, but not all. It will allow you to get better depth of field, which can be critical for some of the larger butterflies, where it is hard to keep all of the critter in focus. And for butterflies that constantly flutter and never alight on a blossom, it allows you to stop that motion. But natural light, like that on your Tiger Swallowtail above, is really more pleasing. In most situations, butterflies pose on colorful backgrounds, so you don't want really want that full-black background that you get with a flash. And I definitely agree with dhogaza about fill flash for birds. It's an art form in itself, and some folks are very good at it. Many are not... -------------- Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind Has been obligated from the beginning To create an ordered universe As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.                         - Pattiann Rogers

dhogaza Posts: 525 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,17:30    A bit more on flash ... one problem with using flash for subjects outdoors is that a naked flash is very much like a point source, like the sun, so like direct sunlight, tends to create harsh shadows.  Cloudy/raining days are the opposite, no harsh point of light in the sky, just a nice even source overhead, leading to a soft, saturated look. Studio shooters will put diffusers in front of their studio lights to soften the light, but this is often a bit impractical outdoors (you can buy small fabric lightboxes but they're not really large enough to make much difference if you're at much of a distance from your subject). However, when you're doing macro shots with the flash mounted on a bracket towards the lens' snout, the flash lens itself is often nearly as large or even larger than the subject. So it doesn't light like a point source, but floods the scene evenly. Here's a shot that shows this - the flash pops the iridescence but the light's nice and even ... the subject area here is probably about 2-3x the size of a 35 millimeter film frame (1" x 1.5" or 24mm x 36 mm) while the flash lens was about 1" x 2.5" or 3".

Albatrossity2 Posts: 2780 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,17:43    If you really get into macro insect photography, you might look into a ring-flash, which mounts on the front of the macro lens, and usually has diffusers to even out the light. As for fill flash on birds, it really helps in some situations. Here's a juvenile Ruby-throated Hummingbird, sitting in the shade. Without the fill flash this would have not been a very good image, but the flash allows you to illuminate the entire bird evenly, and (serendipitously) adds some iridescent green highlights to some of those body feathers on the flank. -------------- Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind Has been obligated from the beginning To create an ordered universe As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.                         - Pattiann Rogers

Wesley R. Elsberry Posts: 4991 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,19:46    My alternative to ringflash. -------------- "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

Lou FCD Posts: 5455 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,20:18    'nuther Prothonotary, this one having a bad feather day. And to resurrect the Pissed-off Birds theme, What The Fuck Are You Laughing At, Douchenozzle??? -------------- “Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas? Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

fnxtr Posts: 3504 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2011,21:48    Bloody hell you lads/lasses are good. I'll just go eat some worms now.... -------------- "[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory "Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: April 26 2011,07:41    Quote (Lou FCD @ April 25 2011,16:45) Quote Nice shots, Robin! You'll have to wait for Albatrossity or someone to answer about the flash, I don't use one (I don't even own one, yet). ETA: Lightroom is a good bit of software for fixing pictures that come off the camera odd, or flat, or a little over or under-exposed. That's what I use. Are you shooting in RAW or jpg? Thanks Lou. I'm shooting jpg right now. I figured as I got started with this and used to the camera, jpg was a bit quicker and easier to upload and play with. I'm currently using the photo enhancement software that came with my Nikon. It's pretty basic, but is enough for me to learn on right now. I'm trying not to touch up my photos too much though as I'd like to get to the point where the photo comes from the shot, not the software darkroom. Maybe that's unrealistic though. -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: April 26 2011,07:57    Quote (dhogaza @ April 25 2011,17:19) Quote So here's an example of a photo of mine that could've been improved with a bit of fill flash (underexposing for ambient conditions). Wow! Still such a crisp photo without the flash though. I like it, but I see what you mean about what the flash would have done for it. I'm betting the same would apply to the Tiger Swallowtail I shot; a little flash would have given it a more uniform brightness and allowed the yellow to pop a bit. And I know what you mean by the ham-fisted flash photographers - I see that in particular on birds. Trying to avoid that. -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: April 26 2011,08:01    Quote (Albatrossity2 @ April 25 2011,17:30) Quote Robin I agree; that osprey picture is great. They can be difficult birds to approach, but I've also found that nesting pairs give you some pretty close approaches. Flash for butterflies is good for some situations, but not all. It will allow you to get better depth of field, which can be critical for some of the larger butterflies, where it is hard to keep all of the critter in focus. And for butterflies that constantly flutter and never alight on a blossom, it allows you to stop that motion. But natural light, like that on your Tiger Swallowtail above, is really more pleasing. In most situations, butterflies pose on colorful backgrounds, so you don't want really want that full-black background that you get with a flash. And I definitely agree with dhogaza about fill flash for birds. It's an art form in itself, and some folks are very good at it. Many are not... Thanks Alby. I'll avoid flash for now then. I'll try switching to RAW next and see how the increased detail affects the pics instead. Might need to start looking at faster lenses too and see if that doesn't help give things a crisper look. -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: April 26 2011,08:05    Quote (Albatrossity2 @ April 25 2011,17:43) Quote As for fill flash on birds, it really helps in some situations. Here's a juvenile Ruby-throated Hummingbird, sitting in the shade. Without the fill flash this would have not been a very good image, but the flash allows you to illuminate the entire bird evenly, and (serendipitously) adds some iridescent green highlights to some of those body feathers on the flank. This just stuns me, Alby. How in the world do you get this close and crisp with a hummer? I see what you mean about the flash - it really does fill it out nicely and does pop just a little iridescence. Lovely. -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

Albatrossity2 Posts: 2780 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 26 2011,10:35    Quote (Robin @ April 26 2011,08:05) This just stuns me, Alby. How in the world do you get this close and crisp with a hummer? Thanks, Robin. One of the first things I learned about bird photography was that some birds allowed you to approach closely, and some don't. And the second thing I learned was that young birds are often dumb enough to be in the first category. I have lots of pics of first-year hummers, first-year hawks, etc. Not so many pictures of older, wiser birds, however! -------------- Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind Has been obligated from the beginning To create an ordered universe As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.                         - Pattiann Rogers

clamboy Posts: 299 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 26 2011,10:52    Wow, I am bowled over by the photographic excellence on display. I might, if I tried really hard, be able to sneak up on a daffodil to get its picture.

dhogaza Posts: 525 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 26 2011,17:15    wesley's double-bracket set up is similar to one I used for years, but wider because I used it most often as fill for birds. Canon used to have these great little $50 flashes that were guide number 100 (that's not bad), basically batteries and lights and no smarts - my EOS 1 and EOS 1n featured in-camera flash exposure and flash compensation.  About 1/3 the size and 1/2 the weight of my old vivitar 285 flash. With a smart enough camera body you don't need smarts in the flash for most stuff, and if you remember your inverse square law and realize how the camera meters, to get (say) a key light + 1 stop less fill just put the fill flash 1.4x as far away from the subject as the key (obviously easier to do in a static situation than shooting out in the field). Albatrossity's example of fill flash is excellent - for it lights up the iridescent feathers, it's even, and it provides separation of the subject from the background.  Yet it's not ham-handed as you see so often.

dhogaza Posts: 525 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 26 2011,17:22    I'm not actually a big fan of ring lights ... but some people are. In this one the flash is really the main light, mostly because I was shooting velvia (look at that saturation!) and it was dark in the cottonwood stand where I knew a pair of well-known tolerant great horned owls live.  Across the street from a cafe, so I had my camera on my tripod, flash and remote flash in one hand and, of course, milkshake in the other. If any of you have been to SE Oregon yes, it's the Fields Oasis.

dhogaza Posts: 525 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 26 2011,17:24    Quote And the second thing I learned was that young birds are often dumb enough to be in the first category. So what's the excuse for dumb adult florida birds :)

Albatrossity2 Posts: 2780 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 26 2011,18:06    Quote (dhogaza @ April 26 2011,17:24) Quote And the second thing I learned was that young birds are often dumb enough to be in the first category. So what's the excuse for dumb adult florida birds :) Maybe they moved down there to retire??? -------------- Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind Has been obligated from the beginning To create an ordered universe As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.                         - Pattiann Rogers

Albatrossity2 Posts: 2780 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 26 2011,19:12    Quote (dhogaza @ April 26 2011,17:22) In this one the flash is really the main light, mostly because I was shooting velvia (look at that saturation!) and it was dark in the cottonwood stand where I knew a pair of well-known tolerant great horned owls live.  Across the street from a cafe, so I had my camera on my tripod, flash and remote flash in one hand and, of course, milkshake in the other. Great shot! I shot quite a few rolls of Velvia (ISO 50 version) myself, but always found myself going back to Kodachrome 64. Velvia was a great slide film, for sure. But I don't have a film camera now, so I can't even be tempted to try it again... -------------- Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind Has been obligated from the beginning To create an ordered universe As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.                         - Pattiann Rogers

Wesley R. Elsberry Posts: 4991 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: April 26 2011,20:24    Quote (Albatrossity2 @ April 26 2011,19:12) Quote (dhogaza @ April 26 2011,17:22) In this one the flash is really the main light, mostly because I was shooting velvia (look at that saturation!) and it was dark in the cottonwood stand where I knew a pair of well-known tolerant great horned owls live.  Across the street from a cafe, so I had my camera on my tripod, flash and remote flash in one hand and, of course, milkshake in the other. Great shot! I shot quite a few rolls of Velvia (ISO 50 version) myself, but always found myself going back to Kodachrome 64. Velvia was a great slide film, for sure. But I don't have a film camera now, so I can't even be tempted to try it again... I got myself a Nikon N80 for $48 off eBay just so that I could use the full 12mm on my Sigma 12-24mm zoom in something other than aperture-priority mode. Mostly, though, I settle for the 18mm-equivalent view on my 1.5x crop factor digital SLRs. I did get some awesome group photos at a family gathering with the Sigma on film one time, though. That gives me a Nikon F2, N90s, and the N80 for film bodies. The N90s is a sweet camera. Its flaw is the lack of a second command wheel, which the N80 has. And the F2 is deservedly a classic. It just is no good for mounting "G" type lenses that lack an aperture-selection ring, unless you happen to want to shoot at f/32 or whatever the smallest aperture on the lens happens to be. Going the other way, though, is not a problem: my Nikkor AIS 24mm f/2.8 lens from around 1977 works perfectly with my D2Xs DSLR in A or M modes without adapters or repair-shop mods. I do miss Kodachrome. I mostly shot ISO 25 in that. With the macro rig, I could convert a 36 exposure roll of Kodachrome into between 30 and 36 well-exposed shots consistently. My E6 slide film habit was  bulk-loading the Fuji ISO 400 stuff. -------------- "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

Pages: (74) < ... 39 40 41 42 43 [44] 45 46 47 48 49 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

© 2002-2009 Antievolution.org Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a © 2001 Ikonboard