Grey heron - my favourite bird!

[Pink Dragonfly]

I might as well come clean, grey herons are favourite birds I have more photos in my grey heron folder than all the other birds put together!!! Maybe, it's because my first decent bird photo (the one in my gallery) was a grey heron. Maybe, it's because it always comes to find me - well, we find each other :blush2: when I'm out and just says "Oy, I'm over here - please take my photo" . And then I just can't help myself, like a kid in a sweet shop....Here's two "portraits" from the day before yesterday, when it was standing in the reeds near the shore of the lake. It was just before sunset, so not much light. Both of them taken handheld (all my photos are) at focal length 300mm, f5.6 and 1/100s, ISO 800.

Mette

[A.M.D.A.]

Very nice closeups of the bird's head - but it's too bad the bottom of the neck was "chopped off"!

How near were you to the heron and is 300mm the 35mm equivalent or is it the actual lens's focal length?

[Dylan8i]

nice shots of a great looking bird, pretty sure we don't have those this side of the pond. it does look alittle soft though, are these full frame? could be the lens and at f5.6? maybe try sharpening it in photoshop a bit?

[Pink Dragonfly]

Thanks for looking, Alex

It was actually quite purposely chopped off in my framing, I've got so many "full figure" shots, also some "full neck", that I thought I'd try something different, now that I was relatively close to the bird, a few meters I guess. It may not be "traditional" or "by the rules" but I must say I quite like it. If I include the whole, rather long, neck, it takes the attention away from the face which I think is rather lovely

The focal length is the actual lens' focal length, full length of my 100-300mm zoom. In the beginning when I first got my camera 2 months ago, I used to calibrate to 35mm equivalent all the time, but as it was 6 years since I'd last used a camera, it quickly wore off

Mette

[Pink Dragonfly]

Dylan, I agree, they do look a little soft - it got a lot worse after resizing. I don't think the lens is the best in the world, my old Minolta standard 100-300mm, but it'll have to do for now.....hoping to a marry a rich man LOL

They are not quite full frame, couldn't get close enough without getting my feet wet!

I would have preferred a smaller aperture, but in the freezing cold weather with icy hands, I don't dare take a slower shutter speed than 1/100s.

I don't have Photoshop yet, I just use Microsoft Office Picture Manager LOL but I should be getting a copy soon....

Mette

[Loupey]

Nice shooting.

... but in the freezing cold weather with icy hands, I don't dare take a slower shutter speed than 1/100s.

1/100s at 300mm and hand-held is really tough to do. Well done at these conditions.

[alexkhoo82]

Those 2 shots seemed OOF~

[A.M.D.A.]

Those 2 shots seemed OOF~

I have to disagree with alexkhoo82: Out-Of-Focus does not nearly come close in accurately describing these heron images.

I'd say they are indeed a bit "soft" - but nothing that isn't fixable in an image-editing program.
------------------------------------
Incidentally, there is a free, downloadable program which I would recommend: GIMP. I have 2.4.5, but not completely sure if the newer versions are stable - since they have just been released. The latest version can be downloaded at http://www.gimp.org/

[scott-devon]

Nice shots, handheld at 300 with a relatively slow shutter speed they are far better than my shaky hands could ever accomplish. They are a fascinating bird, large and interesting to watch.

[Pink Dragonfly]

Alex, thank you for your last posting I must say I was a little gobsmacked when I read
alexkhoo82's comment - not really the tone of voice usually used in this forum. Anyway, I posted the photos in this forum to share my love for this bird, though I obviously greatly appreciate any constructive criticism (such as yours, thanks ) I have now posted the photos in full size in my gallery, and they do seem sharper though not perfect. I will most definitely check out GIMP, thanks for the suggestion :thumbsup: I have also been using Picasa that has a wonderful "sharpen" button, except that after a while I discovered that the sharpening effect wasn't saved!!! I checked it out using google and it seems to have been a well known bug for years....

As for alexkhoo82, a socalled beginner with a point&shoot (rather a modest term for the equipment he lists on his profile: EOS 40D, TAMRON 17-50 f2.8, CANON 70-200L f2.8 IS USM, 580 EX II, BG E2N), he joined PR today and made 20 posts in about as many minutes, suggesting maybe he has not really read the threads he comments on. And "funnily" enough, I received the following mail from him justed after he posted the above comment:

"Hey i really love your shots!! Nice works u have there!! I would very much like to cordially invite u to post your shots in CLIKCLUB http://clikclub.forumotion.com where we all share our shots and comments in this photography forum.. Register today!! Please feel free to give us your comments on our photos there! We are eager to hear from you! ClikClub originates from Singapore so come on in and share your shots and views! Cheers!"

Somehow, I don't think I was the only one to receive such a mail....but I shall contact Loupey, as this is spam by my books....

Mette

[A.M.D.A.]

Good decision of yours to contact Loupey. That is most definetely spam!

If it was sent via PM, then you can forward the message to Loupey/paulnj - or better yet - to Photo-John. I'm sure it will be taken care of.

[Pink Dragonfly]

Thanks for your support

By the way, would you mind taking a look at versions in my gallery and tell me if you think they are better, or if it is just wishful thinking on my part??? Pretty please, with sugar on top...

[A.M.D.A.]

Took a quick look at your gallery shots.

They are slightly sharper. I think the reason why the resized ones aren’t as sharp is the way in which they were resized and also if they were saved as maximum-quality JPGs.

Try resizing in increments of no more than 40% (I personally prefer no more than 60%) instead of in one fell swoop. The more percentage that is resized at once, the more chance of data not being saved properly – which can result in “soft” images. After resizing in increments, I always apply some Unsharp Mask, which helps restore any lost detail and add “punch”.

When re-saving, select 100 (or the highest option available) to ensure best possible image quality. I don’t think Picture Manager has this option – or sharpening either. GIMP does, plus a lot more, including “noise reduction” tools to reduce graininess.

[Pink Dragonfly]

Thanks

I'm right now downloading GIMP, getting quite excited, Picture Manager is really VERY limited....

I have actually been re-saving in one go....I somehow thought that would be better ??? Guess, I thought the more actions the more it was likely to get distorted.... And there aren't any different "quality" options...

And GIMP is just about installed now.... Oh no, it's somehow detected I'm in Denmark and it's all in Danish - think I need to figure out how to tell it that I prefer English.....

Thanks, Alex, you're a sweetie
Mette

[Dylan8i]

yeah i think they are alittle sharper, although its hard to tell when they are THAT big.

id guess its a combo of resizing, and camera shake (since it was 1/100 @ 300 mm)

[Pink Dragonfly]

Scott, thank you! I only just saw your post :blush2: And thank you Dylan for taking the time to check out the gallery versions and your comments

Considering the comments from you and Dylan, I think it I need to reconsider my minimum "cold weather" speed. Any suggestions as to what is reasonable? I wonder if there is a "temperature coefficient"??? It looks like we're finally going to get a few days without rain.....BUT with temperatures dropping to well below zero, minus8 deg C and maybe even our first snow!!! (The first snow also for me and my camera )

Alex, you are my hero After a while, I finally found the Danish unmask button! I had some trouble figuring out the resizing, so for the moment I just took the image that I posted here and unmasked. That sent it over the size limit to 313kb so being rather lazy I just trimmed a bit off the edges. Anyway, here's the result! A true "before and after" image, I can certainly see the difference...

Mette

[A.M.D.A.]

Alex, you are my hero

Aww... ..I'm just glad I could help.

[scott-devon]

Wow, that is a remarkable difference! ... now I'm going to have to look into Gimp..
;)

[Pink Dragonfly]

Well, it's totally free

It seems quite like Photoshop (from the little I know...), I certainly can't just sit down and use without looking in the online manual which is in English. They downloaded me the Danish version of GIMP (presumably because I unfortunately have Windows in Danish...), so it takes some time to figure what the corresponding terms are...And I don't like reading manuals at the best of times But I think I had better in this case, as there seems to be a lot of advanced and useful features.

The photo seems to have lost a bit of colour in the sharpening process, but I only saw this once I'd uploaded.

Mette

[sillypore]

nice bird!...a pity about the sharpness though, or the lack of it....

singapore corporate and industrial photographers photography

[Pink Dragonfly]

Hi Silly, Welcome to this forum and thank you so much for your constructive and polite critique.

Mette

[Eric D]

Interesting thread!! Personally I love this bird. I noticed you call it a Grey Heron...looks like a Great Blue Heron to me or is this a different name for the same bird?

We have so many of these flying in our Florida air space.

Same bird??

[Pink Dragonfly]

Hi Eric,

Yes, I was rather surprised that Silly revived it Anyway, both my camera skills and post-processing skills have improved a lot since the start of this thread when I was a total beginner regarding both digital photography and bird photography. I've had lot better and sharper heron shots since then - though I still like cropping the bird for portrait shots

Nice shot of your Great Blue Heron It is not the same bird though, mine is indeed a grey heron, Ardea cinerea, not found in the US - this is what they write on Wikipedia:

"It is closely related and similar to the American Great Blue Heron, which differs in slightly larger size, and chestnut-brown flanks and thighs. The Australian White-faced Heron is often incorrectly called Grey Heron."

Mette

[Eric D]

Very cool, I learn something every day...thanks for the info, I had no clue!

[Pink Dragonfly]

You're welcome To tell you the truth, I wasn't entirely sure until you made me check it out So thank you too!

Mette