A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

My thanks to Davoud!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old July 26th 17, 07:15 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default 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  
Old July 26th 17, 08:40 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,254
Default 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  
Old July 26th 17, 09:08 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default 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  
Old July 26th 17, 09:28 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Davoud
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 639
Default 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  
Old July 26th 17, 09:35 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,254
Default 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  
Old July 26th 17, 10:22 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default 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  
Old July 27th 17, 04:50 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,254
Default 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 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.



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



--
PeterN
  #18  
Old July 27th 17, 05:34 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default 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  
Old July 27th 17, 01:18 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,254
Default 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  
Old July 27th 17, 02:17 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
David B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 96
Default 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

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.