If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
My thanks to Davoud!
On Jul 26, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ): On 7/26/2017 10:47 AM, David B. wrote: On 26-Jul-17 3:35 PM, PeterN wrote: On 7/26/2017 2:24 AM, RichA wrote: On Tuesday, 18 July 2017 04:45:54 UTC-4, David B. wrote: I've just viewed the most fantastic images of birds - I have never seen finer, EVER! Other folk may view them he- http://www.primordial-light.com/aves.html I've made a note to explore David's work further when I return home to my iMac! Thank you for providing the route to find you, Davoud! :-D -- Regards, David B. Difficult, getting that close to a bird like those in the wild and not spooking them. Unless they are acclimated to people, or you use a long lens.. https://www.dropbox.com/s/rqsbscqwac...%20birds%20oys ter%20cathcers%20terns_4192%20crop.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/9fjzuep8syetz60/my%20dinner.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/ycftpxc2x5...with%20fish.jp g?dl=0 The images at the links you posted, Peter, are not a patch on the quality of those photographs taken by Davoud (in MY opinion, anyway). OK. You certainly are entitled to your opinion. Reasons for your opinion would be appreciated. I can’t speak for David and his opinion, but I have my opinion, and observations regarding those three shots. Starting with the Oyster catcher. At first I thought this was your old Oyster catcher shot from a few years back, then I saw that this was recently captured with the D500. The image quality (IQ) is awful, and that seems to be a result of several things, including your usual crop, and poor focusing on this particular part of your frame. If this is a demonstration of the IQ capability of the D500, I am disappointed. The hawk shot is just a ridiculously severe crop resulting in an image not much better than a thumbnail. It hardly seemed worth posting. I certainly have managed to wring out better quality images with my D70. The Osprey is a great capture, but again suffers from your cropping, and sharpening techniques in post. The edge halo detracts from the image just as it did when you first shared it. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
My thanks to Davoud!
On 7/26/2017 1:36 PM, Davoud wrote:
Davoud: Other folk may view them he- http://www.primordial-light.com/aves.html RichA: Difficult, getting that close to a bird like those in the wild and not spooking them. Not at all difficult. I made it very clear on that page that these birds all wore jesses: "All of these birds were wearing leather restraining straps called jesses. In some instances the birdŒs stance hid the jess; in other instances it was necessary to remove the jess in Photoshop to give the bird a more natural appearance." While the birds aren't exactly tame (take your finger off and eat it, given half a chance) they are somewhat inured to humans. Every one of them has a physical or emotional handicap that would prevent it from surviving in the wild. The Golden Eagle, Aquila chrysaetos, for example, had to have its right wing amputated after a brave hunter shot it. -- PeterN |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
My thanks to Davoud!
On Jul 26, 2017, Savageduck wrote
(in iganews.com): On Jul 26, 2017, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 7/26/2017 10:47 AM, David B. wrote: On 26-Jul-17 3:35 PM, PeterN wrote: On 7/26/2017 2:24 AM, RichA wrote: On Tuesday, 18 July 2017 04:45:54 UTC-4, David B. wrote: I've just viewed the most fantastic images of birds - I have never seen finer, EVER! Other folk may view them he- http://www.primordial-light.com/aves.html I've made a note to explore David's work further when I return home to my iMac! Thank you for providing the route to find you, Davoud! :-D -- Regards, David B. Difficult, getting that close to a bird like those in the wild and not spooking them. Unless they are acclimated to people, or you use a long lens.. https://www.dropbox.com/s/rqsbscqwac...n%20birds%20oy s ter%20cathcers%20terns_4192%20crop.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/9fjzuep8syetz60/my%20dinner.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/ycftpxc2x5...0with%20fish.j p g?dl=0 The images at the links you posted, Peter, are not a patch on the quality of those photographs taken by Davoud (in MY opinion, anyway). OK. You certainly are entitled to your opinion. Reasons for your opinion would be appreciated. I can’t speak for David and his opinion, but I have my opinion, and observations regarding those three shots. Starting with the Oyster catcher. At first I thought this was your old Oyster catcher shot from a few years back, then I saw that this was recently captured with the D500. The image quality (IQ) is awful, and that seems to be a result of several things, including your usual crop, and poor focusing on this particular part of your frame. If this is a demonstration of the IQ capability of the D500, I am disappointed. The hawk shot is just a ridiculously severe crop resulting in an image not much better than a thumbnail. It hardly seemed worth posting. I certainly have managed to wring out better quality images with my D70. The Osprey is a great capture, but again suffers from your cropping, and sharpening techniques in post. The edge halo detracts from the image just as it did when you first shared it. BTW: here is a D70 shot of Osprey with snack from 2004. https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Shared/Demo/dsc0067C.jpg -- Regards, Savageduck |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
My thanks to Davoud!
Davoud:
Other folk may view them he- http://www.primordial-light.com/aves.html .... Not at all difficult. I made it very clear on that page that these birds all wore jesses: "All of these birds were wearing leather restraining straps called jesses. In some instances the birds stance hid the jess; in other instances it was necessary to remove the jess in Photoshop to give the bird a more natural appearance." While the birds aren't exactly tame (take your finger off and eat it, given half a chance) they are somewhat inured to humans. Every one of them has a physical or emotional handicap that would prevent it from surviving in the wild. The Golden Eagle, Aquila chrysaetos, for example, had to have its right wing amputated after a brave hunter shot it. Tony Cooper: The Audubon Center for Birds of Prey in Maitland FL (a city that is adjacent to Orlando) is a rescue center for raptors. Raptors that have been injured are brought there for rehabilitation and released back to the wild when they are capable of hunting on their own. My photos were made at the Soldier's Delight Natural Environment Area near Baltimore, Maryland. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soldiers_Delight_Natural_Environment_Area The raptors that are kept there are deemed incapable of surviving in the wild. In addition to the eagle mentioned above, there is a Barred Owl, Strix varia, that has been blinded by cataracts. -- I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that you will say in your entire life. usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
My thanks to Davoud!
On 7/26/2017 2:15 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 26, 2017, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 7/26/2017 10:47 AM, David B. wrote: On 26-Jul-17 3:35 PM, PeterN wrote: On 7/26/2017 2:24 AM, RichA wrote: On Tuesday, 18 July 2017 04:45:54 UTC-4, David B. wrote: I've just viewed the most fantastic images of birds - I have never seen finer, EVER! Other folk may view them he- http://www.primordial-light.com/aves.html I've made a note to explore David's work further when I return home to my iMac! Thank you for providing the route to find you, Davoud! :-D -- Regards, David B. Difficult, getting that close to a bird like those in the wild and not spooking them. Unless they are acclimated to people, or you use a long lens.. https://www.dropbox.com/s/rqsbscqwac...%20birds%20oys ter%20cathcers%20terns_4192%20crop.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/9fjzuep8syetz60/my%20dinner.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/ycftpxc2x5...with%20fish.jp g?dl=0 The images at the links you posted, Peter, are not a patch on the quality of those photographs taken by Davoud (in MY opinion, anyway). OK. You certainly are entitled to your opinion. Reasons for your opinion would be appreciated. I can’t speak for David and his opinion, but I have my opinion, and observations regarding those three shots. Starting with the Oyster catcher. At first I thought this was your old Oyster catcher shot from a few years back, then I saw that this was recently captured with the D500. The image quality (IQ) is awful, and that seems to be a result of several things, including your usual crop, and poor focusing on this particular part of your frame. If this is a demonstration of the IQ capability of the D500, I am disappointed. The hawk shot is just a ridiculously severe crop resulting in an image not much better than a thumbnail. It hardly seemed worth posting. I certainly have managed to wring out better quality images with my D70. The Osprey is a great capture, but again suffers from your cropping, and sharpening techniques in post. The edge halo detracts from the image just as it did when you first shared it. Not wild birds are a lot easier. https://www.dropbox.com/s/mjgquqx9c2h988o/Bailey_Owl_7821.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/r3b1oguvhqc007b/20150614_9309%20owl.jpg?dl=0 -- PeterN |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
My thanks to Davoud!
On Jul 26, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ): On 7/26/2017 2:15 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Jul 26, 2017, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 7/26/2017 10:47 AM, David B. wrote: On 26-Jul-17 3:35 PM, PeterN wrote: On 7/26/2017 2:24 AM, RichA wrote: On Tuesday, 18 July 2017 04:45:54 UTC-4, David B. wrote: I've just viewed the most fantastic images of birds - I have never seen finer, EVER! Other folk may view them he- http://www.primordial-light.com/aves.html I've made a note to explore David's work further when I return home to my iMac! Thank you for providing the route to find you, Davoud! :-D -- Regards, David B. Difficult, getting that close to a bird like those in the wild and not spooking them. Unless they are acclimated to people, or you use a long lens.. https://www.dropbox.com/s/rqsbscqwac...on%20birds%20o ys ter%20cathcers%20terns_4192%20crop.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/9fjzuep8syetz60/my%20dinner.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/ycftpxc2x5...%20with%20fish. jp g?dl=0 The images at the links you posted, Peter, are not a patch on the quality of those photographs taken by Davoud (in MY opinion, anyway). OK. You certainly are entitled to your opinion. Reasons for your opinion would be appreciated. I can’t speak for David and his opinion, but I have my opinion, and observations regarding those three shots. Starting with the Oyster catcher. At first I thought this was your old Oyster catcher shot from a few years back, then I saw that this was recently captured with the D500. The image quality (IQ) is awful, and that seems to be a result of several things, including your usual crop, and poor focusing on this particular part of your frame. If this is a demonstration of the IQ capability of the D500, I am disappointed. The hawk shot is just a ridiculously severe crop resulting in an image not much better than a thumbnail. It hardly seemed worth posting. I certainly have managed to wring out better quality images with my D70. The Osprey is a great capture, but again suffers from your cropping, and sharpening techniques in post. The edge halo detracts from the image just as it did when you first shared it. Not wild birds are a lot easier. https://www.dropbox.com/s/mjgquqx9c2h988o/Bailey_Owl_7821.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/r3b1oguvhqc007b/20150614_9309%20owl.jpg?dl=0 OK! I am not going to comment on the image quality other than to say those are better than your other examples. You already know how I feel regarding some of your unique PP methods. However, I am curious as to how you came about identifying the first owl as a “Bailey Owl”. To the best of my knowledge there is no such bird as a “Bailey Owl”.If you have a reference other than the Audubon, Peterson’s, iBird, Cornell Lab, or NatGeo field guides, please let me know. What you have there is a “Great Horned Owl” Bubo virginianus. https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Cu3bgBVyrNw/maxresdefault.jpg http://www.audubon.org/field-guide/bird/great-horned-owl http://www.owlpages.com/owls/species.php?s=1220 http://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/birds/g/great-horned-owl/ https://www.allaboutbirds.org/search/?q=Great%20Horned%20Owl -- Regards, Savageduck |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
My thanks to Davoud!
On 7/26/2017 5:22 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 26, 2017, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 7/26/2017 2:15 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Jul 26, 2017, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 7/26/2017 10:47 AM, David B. wrote: On 26-Jul-17 3:35 PM, PeterN wrote: On 7/26/2017 2:24 AM, RichA wrote: On Tuesday, 18 July 2017 04:45:54 UTC-4, David B. wrote: I've just viewed the most fantastic images of birds - I have never seen finer, EVER! Other folk may view them he- http://www.primordial-light.com/aves.html I've made a note to explore David's work further when I return home to my iMac! Thank you for providing the route to find you, Davoud! :-D -- Regards, David B. Difficult, getting that close to a bird like those in the wild and not spooking them. Unless they are acclimated to people, or you use a long lens.. https://www.dropbox.com/s/rqsbscqwac...on%20birds%20o ys ter%20cathcers%20terns_4192%20crop.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/9fjzuep8syetz60/my%20dinner.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/ycftpxc2x5...%20with%20fish. jp g?dl=0 The images at the links you posted, Peter, are not a patch on the quality of those photographs taken by Davoud (in MY opinion, anyway). OK. You certainly are entitled to your opinion. Reasons for your opinion would be appreciated. I can’t speak for David and his opinion, but I have my opinion, and observations regarding those three shots. Starting with the Oyster catcher. At first I thought this was your old Oyster catcher shot from a few years back, then I saw that this was recently captured with the D500. The image quality (IQ) is awful, and that seems to be a result of several things, including your usual crop, and poor focusing on this particular part of your frame. If this is a demonstration of the IQ capability of the D500, I am disappointed. The hawk shot is just a ridiculously severe crop resulting in an image not much better than a thumbnail. It hardly seemed worth posting. I certainly have managed to wring out better quality images with my D70. The Osprey is a great capture, but again suffers from your cropping, and sharpening techniques in post. The edge halo detracts from the image just as it did when you first shared it. Not wild birds are a lot easier. https://www.dropbox.com/s/mjgquqx9c2h988o/Bailey_Owl_7821.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/r3b1oguvhqc007b/20150614_9309%20owl.jpg?dl=0 OK! I am not going to comment on the image quality other than to say those are better than your other examples. You already know how I feel regarding some of your unique PP methods. Both have done reasonably well in local competitions. The Snowy has done exceptionally well. However, I am curious as to how you came about identifying the first owl as a “Bailey Owlâ€. He is a resident of the Bailey Arboretum. They are attempting to rehabilitate him. That was not intended as an ID of the bird. To the best of my knowledge there is no such bird as a “Bailey Owlâ€.If you have a reference other than the Audubon, Peterson’s, iBird, Cornell Lab, or NatGeo field guides, please let me know. What you have there is a “Great Horned Owl†Bubo virginianus. https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Cu3bgBVyrNw/maxresdefault.jpg http://www.audubon.org/field-guide/bird/great-horned-owl http://www.owlpages.com/owls/species.php?s=1220 http://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/birds/g/great-horned-owl/ https://www.allaboutbirds.org/search/?q=Great%20Horned%20Owl -- PeterN |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
My thanks to Davoud!
On Jul 26, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ): On 7/26/2017 5:22 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Jul 26, 2017, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 7/26/2017 2:15 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Jul 26, 2017, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 7/26/2017 10:47 AM, David B. wrote: On 26-Jul-17 3:35 PM, PeterN wrote: On 7/26/2017 2:24 AM, RichA wrote: On Tuesday, 18 July 2017 04:45:54 UTC-4, David B. wrote: I've just viewed the most fantastic images of birds - I have never seen finer, EVER! Other folk may view them he- http://www.primordial-light.com/aves.html I've made a note to explore David's work further when I return home to my iMac! Thank you for providing the route to find you, Davoud! :-D -- Regards, David B. Difficult, getting that close to a bird like those in the wild and not spooking them. Unless they are acclimated to people, or you use a long lens.. https://www.dropbox.com/s/rqsbscqwac...rson%20birds%2 0o ys ter%20cathcers%20terns_4192%20crop.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/9fjzuep8syetz60/my%20dinner.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/ycftpxc2x5...g%20with%20fis h. jp g?dl=0 The images at the links you posted, Peter, are not a patch on the quality of those photographs taken by Davoud (in MY opinion, anyway). OK. You certainly are entitled to your opinion. Reasons for your opinion would be appreciated. I can’t speak for David and his opinion, but I have my opinion, and observations regarding those three shots. Starting with the Oyster catcher. At first I thought this was your old Oyster catcher shot from a few years back, then I saw that this was recently captured with the D500. The image quality (IQ) is awful, and that seems to be a result of several things, including your usual crop, and poor focusing on this particular part of your frame. If this is a demonstration of the IQ capability of the D500, I am disappointed. The hawk shot is just a ridiculously severe crop resulting in an image not much better than a thumbnail. It hardly seemed worth posting. I certainly have managed to wring out better quality images with my D70. The Osprey is a great capture, but again suffers from your cropping, and sharpening techniques in post. The edge halo detracts from the image just as it did when you first shared it. Not wild birds are a lot easier. https://www.dropbox.com/s/mjgquqx9c2h988o/Bailey_Owl_7821.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/r3b1oguvhqc007b/20150614_9309%20owl.jpg?dl=0 OK! I am not going to comment on the image quality other than to say those are better than your other examples. You already know how I feel regarding some of your unique PP methods. Both have done reasonably well in local competitions. The Snowy has done exceptionally well. However, I am curious as to how you came about identifying the first owl as a "Bailey Owl". He is a resident of the Bailey Arboretum. They are attempting to rehabilitate him. That was not intended as an ID of the bird. You might not have intended to ID the bird by the label you used, but the effect was misleading, as there was no mention of the Bailey Arboretum. A casual viewer without birding knowledge of the true ID, or access to reference guides, could easily be confused, and be led to believe that you were actually identifying the bird rather than indicating the shooting location. I was also concerned that somewhere along the way you might have been provided erroneous information, and I was being a tad pedantic. To the best of my knowledge there is no such bird as a "Bailey Owl”. If you have a reference other than the Audubon, Peterson’s, iBird, Cornell Lab, or NatGeo field guides, please let me know. What you have there is a "Great Horned Owl" Bubo virginianus. https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Cu3bgBVyrNw/maxresdefault.jpg http://www.audubon.org/field-guide/bird/great-horned-owl http://www.owlpages.com/owls/species.php?s=1220 http://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/birds/g/great-horned-owl/ https://www.allaboutbirds.org/search/?q=Great%20Horned%20Owl -- Regards, Savageduck |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
My thanks to Davoud!
On 7/27/2017 12:34 AM, Savageduck wrote:
snip You might not have intended to ID the bird by the label you used, but the effect was misleading, as there was no mention of the Bailey Arboretum. A casual viewer without birding knowledge of the true ID, or access to reference guides, could easily be confused, and be led to believe that you were actually identifying the bird rather than indicating the shooting location. I was also concerned that somewhere along the way you might have been provided erroneous information, and I was being a tad pedantic. That's OK. As long as the issue is resolved. A simple inquiry could have saved you a lot of research time. But I did learn from that. Somewhere in my files, I have an image of a hatchling titled: "Nickerson Beach Chick." I can see lots of ambiguity in that title. BTW when doing portraits, whether animals, birds and flowers, I have a strong personal preference for tight crops, unless there is a reason for doing otherwise, as in these experimental IR images. https://www.dropbox.com/s/31ys41r7vldvnuk/AT%20THE%20BEACK.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/ue0v5o2oeniyu01/20170617_1923.jpg?dl=0 Faux color: https://www.dropbox.com/s/msin96zvnuv633m/20170617_1918%20lowered%20temp.jpg?dl=0 -- PeterN |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
My thanks to Davoud!
On 26-Jul-17 9:08 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 26, 2017, Savageduck wrote (in iganews.com): On Jul 26, 2017, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 7/26/2017 10:47 AM, David B. wrote: On 26-Jul-17 3:35 PM, PeterN wrote: On 7/26/2017 2:24 AM, RichA wrote: On Tuesday, 18 July 2017 04:45:54 UTC-4, David B. wrote: I've just viewed the most fantastic images of birds - I have never seen finer, EVER! Other folk may view them he- http://www.primordial-light.com/aves.html I've made a note to explore David's work further when I return home to my iMac! Thank you for providing the route to find you, Davoud! :-D -- Regards, David B. Difficult, getting that close to a bird like those in the wild and not spooking them. Unless they are acclimated to people, or you use a long lens.. https://www.dropbox.com/s/rqsbscqwac...n%20birds%20oy s ter%20cathcers%20terns_4192%20crop.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/9fjzuep8syetz60/my%20dinner.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/ycftpxc2x5...0with%20fish.j p g?dl=0 The images at the links you posted, Peter, are not a patch on the quality of those photographs taken by Davoud (in MY opinion, anyway). OK. You certainly are entitled to your opinion. Reasons for your opinion would be appreciated. I can’t speak for David and his opinion, but I have my opinion, and observations regarding those three shots. Starting with the Oyster catcher. At first I thought this was your old Oyster catcher shot from a few years back, then I saw that this was recently captured with the D500. The image quality (IQ) is awful, and that seems to be a result of several things, including your usual crop, and poor focusing on this particular part of your frame. If this is a demonstration of the IQ capability of the D500, I am disappointed. The hawk shot is just a ridiculously severe crop resulting in an image not much better than a thumbnail. It hardly seemed worth posting. I certainly have managed to wring out better quality images with my D70. The Osprey is a great capture, but again suffers from your cropping, and sharpening techniques in post. The edge halo detracts from the image just as it did when you first shared it. BTW: here is a D70 shot of Osprey with snack from 2004. https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Shared/Demo/dsc0067C.jpg Your comments say exactly what *I* had thought - thank you. Your link doesn't 'work' for me. :-( -- David B. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|