Snow Egret with Dragonfly

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

G

Gov

Active member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Member's gallery
What could I have done to make this better, capturing the image or processing? Whites aren't too great.
BCG SnowyEgret.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
That's a nice shot. If you shot raw you can check if the white it totally blown out or if you can recover. If they are truly blown there isn't any way to fix it. Next time you can use negative exposure compensation to reign in the overexposed area.
 
Member's gallery
Unfortunately the shadow on the side of the bird is making things tricky to process. If you pull down the whites to the point where they look good, the shadow will be really dark. I’d say try using a brush over the highlights and pull them down(mostly the wing and the shoulder). Otherwise s superb photo!
 
Member's gallery
I agree with above, it is a very nice image. Capturing the bird with its capture. I also agree with the difference in the light amount comparing the bottom and the top of the bird.
I will like to point out my personal bias against completely white or black subjects. For some reason I found them not very interesting as a final product, even when they are well exposed. A tricolored Heron for example is much more pleasing to the eye. The same I have to say about sky backgrounds, it takes away from the end result of the whole photograph. Again, this is just my personal bias and typically I would choose subjects with more color in their natural background vegetation.
www.photo-sapiens.net
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
The blown whites cannot be recovered. Just make a note to self for next time: turn on "blinkies" on the camera to warn you of blown whites. Also to check the histogram.

Nice image. For a different look, maybe try a square crop? And I straightened it a bit..........

BCG SnowyEgret2.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
Just be aware that reducing the over all exposure to avoid blowing out the whites will require post processing to lift the shadows and get the exposure on the rest of the image where you want it. Post processing is often an important part of achieving the image you envisioned when you tripped the shutter! ;)
 
Member's gallery
Butlerkid said:
The blown whites cannot be recovered. Just make a note to self for next time: turn on "blinkies" on the camera to warn you of blown whites. Also to check the histogram.

Nice image. For a different look, maybe try a square crop? And I straightened it a bit..........

View attachment 47911
Click to expand...
Thank you for pointing out the histogram and blinkies features. I use those quite a bit and in my bias ( see above), I forgot to mention them.
 
Member's gallery
Thanks all! I tried again and got it straightened and squared, as Karen suggested (new things for me) and it does look better. I need to learn how to use the brush effectively, but I think the whites on the shoulder are just gone.
With Z9 the blinkies are available just when reviewing pics you're taken correct? I did try to use exposure compensation at times that day (there were a lot of white birds, only one tricolor heron) but I haven't learned to pay attention to the histogram in the viewfinder, or review the pictures as I am taking them.
 
Member's gallery
Gov said:
Thanks all! I tried again and got it straightened and squared, as Karen suggested (new things for me) and it does look better. I need to learn how to use the brush effectively, but I think the whites on the shoulder are just gone.
With Z9 the blinkies are available just when reviewing pics you're taken correct? I did try to use exposure compensation at times that day (there were a lot of white birds, only one tricolor heron) but I haven't learned to pay attention to the histogram in the viewfinder, or review the pictures as I am taking them.
Click to expand...
Experiment with doing image review through the viewfinder. It is a lot better than using the monitor, though I am still getting used to doing it that way. Looking through the viewfinder, you can zoom in 100% and check focus really easily. Give it a try!
 
If you have other shots without the overexposure it could be possible to pick up some texture for this shot. Maybe using the clone tool in Photoshop.
 
Member's gallery
To my mind, the most important take-away from this thread is that an interesting subject trumps technique every time. The photo would have been "better" if the highlights hadn't been blown and the framing had included the feet, but the photo is definitely a keeper by my lights. It is captivating despite the flaws. It's always good to work on your technique, but there's no substitute for field craft. Get in the right place at the right time and your worst photos will outshine the norm by far. On that score, you hit a home run.
 
To me it would have been a wall hanger except for the detail-less section that grabs the eye and doesn't let go.

If it could be repaired using pixels from another shot of the same bird on the same day, I wouldn't have any moral qualms about it.
 
Member's gallery
tclune said:
To my mind, the most important take-away from this thread is that an interesting subject trumps technique every time. The photo would have been "better" if the highlights hadn't been blown and the framing had included the feet, but the photo is definitely a keeper by my lights. It is captivating despite the flaws. It's always good to work on your technique, but there's no substitute for field craft. Get in the right place at the right time and your worst photos will outshine the norm by far. On that score, you hit a home run.
Click to expand...
Encouraging words. Thank you.
 
Member's gallery
When I'm out shooting white wading birds like the egrets, it's a continuous struggle to underexpose so as to not blow the white highlights on the birds, especially if they are flying, wading, landing, and taking off. With the background continuously changing in colour and exposure one finds the exposure on the bird constantly changing. I find I usually have to underexpose by as much as between -1.3 and -2 when shooting these birds against the foliage in the background. The problem then arises when the bird flies up into a much brighter sky, the the images are underexposed.

One way to counter this is to set everything (shutter, aperture, ISO) to manual with the exposure to preserve the highlights. No matter where or how the bird moves, the exposure remains correct all the time provided the ambient light remains more or less constant.

I dedicated one of my Z6II user banks specifically for white birds against the foliage. The two other user banks are set for regular-coloured birds against foliage and for such birds against a bright sky.
 
Member's gallery
Not an expert but as a photographer, I like the photo. Took a couple of birding workshops and was always to keep the entire bird, head to toe, in the frame. The photo looks great.
 
I think it was Steve among others who advise when the bird is in water keeping the amount of space where the feet would be visible. I guess its a Gestalt thing, the mind filling in the rest of the legs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top