[chickadee]

was only after side shot of head
Have tried to reduce glare on grass right side of devil
2oomm prob should of swapped for 300mm
iso 200 shutter speed 1/90 at f5.6

as usuall constructive coments appreciated

[stepheno]

Nice shot, probably difficult but it would have been nice to see the whole of the animal. I think I might have upped the ISO and gone for 1/200 (assuming he was moving).

[chickadee]

Originally Posted by stepheno

Nice shot, probably difficult but it would have been nice to see the whole of the animal. I think I might have upped the ISO and gone for 1/200 (assuming he was moving).

yes he was , have a full shot in sharing.
i also had made the mistake with camera settings spot metering instead of matrix
live and learn on couple of other shots i had upped to iso 400.
thanks will be going back with plan b

[Rob Barron]

I think because you have got this cropped slightly Sue, I'd go the whole hog and crop in a lot further to show his characteristic face and forget about the legs and rump. It isn't pin sharp so we are not getting a good differential focus but it does capture the Tas Devil in a very recongisable shot so well done.

Cheers,
Rob

[chickadee]

i think you are right Rob ,i think this looks heaps better.Thankyou

[Dabhand16]

I like the cropped version best But the original also works in terms of the composition, but as Stephen said, in this one you really need all of the legs and paws in shot.

[skipper954]

Hi Sue

If your camera has a continuous focus option (LIKE NIKON) , that would be perfect for tas. I think that you could get much sharper focus that way. Also, alas, once again, on my screen, there is decreased shadow detail. Is that apparent on anyone else's screen?

I like the crop a lot. Looks like a nasty critter. Here we have racoons, possums and 'gators as our nasties, along with the largest palmetto bugs (cockroaches) you have ever seen.

skip

[chickadee]

Thanks skip, as it was one of those occasions when ,for some reason the brain was not in gear.Ie wrong camera setting, for the quick movements i should of had jpeg and on continuos shoot ,and have been advised before that when doing wildlife i should have camera in auto focus.
So am eagerly awaitiing to go back and have plan b and concentrate on all settings ,and spend the time to try alternative.
As for deceased shadow ,have noticed some of your coments refer to images dark ,is it your monitor ?(realise we all see images diferent due to monitors.)
as always appreciate your input skip

[skipper954]

It is really weird, this monitor thing, Sue. When I print an image, it comes out nearly exactly (if there is such a thing) as I see it on the monitor. And other images that I see on the web are usually not underexposed.

Ah, I know. It is pixalo!!!!!

That is a joke, crew!

[chickadee]

Originally Posted by skipper954

It is really weird, this monitor thing, Sue. When I print an image, it comes out nearly exactly (if there is such a thing) as I see it on the monitor. And other images that I see on the web are usually not underexposed.

Ah, I know. It is pixalo!!!!!

That is a joke, crew!

it is weird , i too am not far off monitor image to printer ,
agree with you ,all modern technology you think they would have them all same colour

[Sonsey]

Originally Posted by skipper954

That is a joke, crew!

It had better be!!!

[Rob Barron]

Originally Posted by chickadee

it is weird , i too am not far off monitor image to printer ,
agree with you ,all modern technology you think they would have them all same colour

Interesting comment Sue but let me give you something to mull over....

Are you certain that what you see is exactly the same shade as what someone else sees? There is no way to test that perfectly.

The brain is very clever at determining colours in different lighting, hence all the problems we have with white balance in cameras because the processor cannot determine what is white and what isn't like the brain can. We look at a sheet of paper in our living room in the evening under a tungsten light and never question that it is a white sheet of paper, despite the fact that actually it looks a creamy yellow colour.

If you look at a mid-turquoise colour and show it to a hundred people, half will insist it is green and the other half will swear it is blue. That is not because they don't know what blue and green are, it is because their colour perception differs enough that they see one or the other as more dominant.

Print a red block next to a blue block on a piece of paper and look at it: even though they are both the same distance from your eyes, the red one looks like it is more forward than the blue. This is due to the way the spectrum of light is received by the brain and analysed: a common saying in photography is 'Red proceeds, Blue recedes.'

The reason I am saying all this is just to make the overall point that if two people set up their monitors, they will invariably set them up differently. Neither is right or wrong, each has set it to their own perception of colours.

When it comes to printing, it must always be born in mind that ink is entirely different to light so when you mix inks you get very different things to when you mix coloured lights. Hence when you print out something the inks will always appear differently to the way they do on screen, however closely we manage to calibrate our monitor and printer. It is simply impossible to create an identical reproduction, we go for as close as we can but again it will be subjective.

Light is fascinating and the debate about inks, calibrators, colours, etc will go on forever
Cheers,
Rob

[Dabhand16]

Rob - you forgot to mention the poeple like me who are a bit colour blind too!

That really makes calibration difficult! I guess I'll have to get a calibration system one day.

[Markulous]

Think that your close crop is the better option here!

Originally Posted by skipper954

If your camera has a continuous focus option (LIKE NIKON)

Even Sigma has continuous focussing tho' I rarely use it - and indeed, don't always use autofocus but instead prefer to use manual focus. Why? Because there's an awful lot of subjects where autofocus won't work - small objects mainly but also fast ones. So I tend to practice wherever possible!