African wildlife

shakari · 10-01-2006, 07:38

Here's 3 images for comment...... hope I've managed to get the posting right!

This one was taken in Namibia.

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d2...amibiaLion.jpg

South Africa

Tanzania

Arkady · 10-01-2006, 08:08

Hi there. I like the cheetah, but it looks a little soft to me, as does the lion, which is very soft indeed - maybe a bit of camera shake there, matey.

The cheetah may just be back-focussed a little, maybe at the back of the eye towards the ear - remember that at these distances and with long lenses, your depth-of-field is practically nil if you shoot wide-open. Trouble with AF is that it's sometimes tricky to see where the point of focus actually is.

The heffalumps look like a bad scan from an old print, so I'd like to see that done better before I post comment on that - OK composition though - shot from a vehicle, I take it? Needs a bit more space on the left for the rear heff to 'move into'...

Matty · 10-01-2006, 08:10

i would agree with Arkady, some post precessing will really help these shots come out, if you have no objections im sure people here will have a little go and see whats possible for you!

shakari · 10-01-2006, 08:27

The Lion pic was taken when I was on foot without a tripod - but I don't understand what you mean by "soft" - perhaps you could explain....... did you mean soft focus?

I took the cheetah pic when I was laying down and I was trying to get an effect of back lighting using the natural light that was available...... do you think a filter would have improved things?

The Elephant shot was taken from a vehicle and the Elephant was walking past at an angle so I just had to keep clicking....... I've regretted not giving him more room from the day I took the pic!........ you're right, it's a scan of a print. The light really was that colour as it hadn't rained for about 18 months and the first rains were coming in......... a really spectacular moment.

One of the best images (IMO) I've ever (potentially) taken was ruined by camera shake....and I'll try to post it later today for comment. (Hope I'm not taking up too much bandwidth with all this!)

I don't know what post precessing is I'm afraid, but I have no objection at all to someone doing to show me how to improve my work.........

Venomator · 10-01-2006, 08:31

I agree with the previous comments on lion and cheetah (my fave big cat) - probably all to do with the point of focus in your shots ... the eyes don't appear to be it !

The lumpy one is really rather eerie ... and I mean that in a good way.

spectacular is absolutely spot on as far as the scene itself goes.

As for post-processing ... you have some real experts to call on here using pretty much all the usual proprietary software ! This is all new to me too and they have all been very helpful - you only have to ask !

Quick tip though - do a search in the forums first as a lot of stuff will have been covered before from previous questions ! I know this !?!

dod · 10-01-2006, 09:49

I really like the colours in the third. The only thing I find slightly disappointing is the tip of the trunk looks like it's been cut off

SammyC · 10-01-2006, 10:42

Ahhh, beautiful animals!

Well at least you get the chance to go and improve those shots!

CT · 10-01-2006, 10:50

We say an image is 'soft' when it doesn't appear to be critically sharp, which is usually due to poor focusing but also, sometimes due to camera shake, although the latter is usually more obvious.

I like your lion shot but it's a bit washed out and you're not really getting the benefit of that beautiful African light in your shots. You haven't ticked your 'Editing OK' box under your avatar to show you don't object to people editing your shots, but as you've stated you don't mind I had a quick play with your lion shot.

As you'll see it's sharpened up quite appreciably and I've adjusted the saturation and contrast to give the shot a bit more punch. The shot is rather noisy - I'd have thought you could have used a lower ISO setting in that much light?

Either look at the sharpening settings in your camera or disable sharpening altogether and deal with it in post processing which is the better option. You shouldn't consider the shots out of your camera as a done deal - all shots benefit from a little tweaking in post processing and it's something you need to get into to really get the best out of your digital camera.

Your cheetah shot would also benefit fom a little tweaking in much the same way.

shakari · 10-01-2006, 11:12

Ah, I see what you mean....... do you do that with photoshop? - I'm using a film camera and not digital...... does that make a difference?

Here's the camera shake shot I mentioned...... and yes, I really was that close! The two shots were taken in RSA and the Lion is one of two (fully grown) brothers who had been hand reared and then released into the bush to live wild. (ish). They were still habituated to man and I bumped into them one day when I was out walking with the guy who had reared them....... guess I got lost in the lens a bit and just kept shooting pictures. The subject walked right up to me as I was kneeling down and sniffed the lens. (1st shot) then he yawned and I took the opportunity of putting my lens into his mouth for the second shot...... until then I was nice and steady but as I took the shot his brother who had snuck up behind me, licked the back of my neck.......hence the camera shake!....... scared the life out of me. Had the guy who reared them not been with me, I obviously wouldn't have taken the chances I did........ I appreciate they're beyond saving, but thought it might be fun to post them for comment anyway.

Steep · 10-01-2006, 11:21

When you are scanning from prints, use the best optical resolution your scanner can do, forget about any interpolated guff it has. At the best oprical res you will have the best chance of a good copy but your image file may be huge and difficult to work with, you can always cut it down once you have it on your hard drive though.

I can understand the camera shake at that distance

a bit of unsharp mask in PS will remove some of the fuzzyness though.

Arkady · 10-01-2006, 11:25

Film? You hero.

A lot of the people here have only got digital cameras and so a lot of the info here is applicable to that medium.
There are however a few crumbly old gits like me who remember that 'real' photography used to be all about silver halide crystals and not pixels.

Keep posting and sod the bandwidth - that's what it's here for - as long as you follow the image-posting guidelines you'll be fine.

What film/lens combinations do you use?
With the light you have available down there, you want to be using a medium-speed/fine-grain film to get the best possible quality from your images. Other considerations would be slide or neg film depending on wether you want to project your images or make prints from them. If you want to sell your images, it used to be the case that slide film was the way to go.

These days with the increasing move towards digital capture as the accepted form of all phographic imagery-generation, other considerations come into play.

Keep asking questions, mate and we'll do our very best to keep the answers coming.

CT · 10-01-2006, 11:26

I'm not sure I'd have been able to keep the camera still with a bloody great lion licking the back of my neck!

***Dave*** · 10-01-2006, 11:37

A rush cloning job, but another example of post processing in PhotoShop :-

shakari · 10-01-2006, 11:46

I use a Canon EOS 50E with Sigma 28-300 lens. As to film, I have to use whatever I can get over here....but my usual choice is Fuji 200 print film. (When it's available!) Used to use slides but storage is such a hassle. Now I just have the film put onto a CD.

I wouldn't have thought my images are good enough to sell, but if they were, I'd be happy to do so....... but wouldn't know where to start or who to go to.

So far, my only experience with the commercial side is having the odd pic printed in a coffee table book and the odd magazine.......didn't get paid for anything though!

shakari · 10-01-2006, 11:47

DJW, So what did you do to improve it so much?

CT · 10-01-2006, 11:48

Sorry Shakiri, I had to break a couple of your image links as the file sizes were over our 160 kb max limit. You can either leave the links as they are or resize the pics and replace your IMG tags.

Thanks.

Arkady · 10-01-2006, 11:51

That's the sort of framing you should be aiming for - it gives the subjects 'space' to move into.

CT · 10-01-2006, 11:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakari

DJW, So what did you do to improve it so much?

What Dave has done there is to use a technique called cloning to enlarge the image by copying bits from other parts of the shot. It's done by hand and it's a pretty advanced level of photoshop work but not as dfficult as you might think with practice, but... Rome in a day and all that.

10-01-2006, 07:38	#1 (permalink)
shakari Quite Chatty Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Near Kruger Park RSA Posts: 51	African wildlife Here's 3 images for comment...... hope I've managed to get the posting right! This one was taken in Namibia. http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d2...amibiaLion.jpg South Africa Tanzania Last edited by shakari : 10-01-2006 at 12:08.

10-01-2006, 08:08	#2 (permalink)
Arkady Forum Regular Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Aldershot, Hampshire Posts: 1,198	Hi there. I like the cheetah, but it looks a little soft to me, as does the lion, which is very soft indeed - maybe a bit of camera shake there, matey. The cheetah may just be back-focussed a little, maybe at the back of the eye towards the ear - remember that at these distances and with long lenses, your depth-of-field is practically nil if you shoot wide-open. Trouble with AF is that it's sometimes tricky to see where the point of focus actually is. The heffalumps look like a bad scan from an old print, so I'd like to see that done better before I post comment on that - OK composition though - shot from a vehicle, I take it? Needs a bit more space on the left for the rear heff to 'move into'... __________________ "When I hold a camera, I Know no fear..." Alfred Eisenstadt Nikon D2x Bodies x2 14mm f/2.8 Sigma; 17-24mm f/2.8 Nikkor; 28-80mm f/2.8 Nikkor; 24-85mm f/2.8-4 Nikkor; 80-200mm f/2.8 Nikkor; 300mm f/2.8 Nikkor; 600mm f/4 Nikkor SB-800 Flash x2

10-01-2006, 08:31	#5 (permalink)
Venomator Forum Regular Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Hertfordshire Posts: 922	I agree with the previous comments on lion and cheetah (my fave big cat) - probably all to do with the point of focus in your shots ... the eyes don't appear to be it ! The lumpy one is really rather eerie ... and I mean that in a good way. spectacular is absolutely spot on as far as the scene itself goes. As for post-processing ... you have some real experts to call on here using pretty much all the usual proprietary software ! This is all new to me too and they have all been very helpful - you only have to ask ! Quick tip though - do a search in the forums first as a lot of stuff will have been covered before from previous questions ! I know this !?! __________________ V... Nikon Gear ... always

10-01-2006, 10:50	#8 (permalink)
CT Feet under the table Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: West Mids UK Posts: 3,500	We say an image is 'soft' when it doesn't appear to be critically sharp, which is usually due to poor focusing but also, sometimes due to camera shake, although the latter is usually more obvious. I like your lion shot but it's a bit washed out and you're not really getting the benefit of that beautiful African light in your shots. You haven't ticked your 'Editing OK' box under your avatar to show you don't object to people editing your shots, but as you've stated you don't mind I had a quick play with your lion shot. As you'll see it's sharpened up quite appreciably and I've adjusted the saturation and contrast to give the shot a bit more punch. The shot is rather noisy - I'd have thought you could have used a lower ISO setting in that much light? Either look at the sharpening settings in your camera or disable sharpening altogether and deal with it in post processing which is the better option. You shouldn't consider the shots out of your camera as a done deal - all shots benefit from a little tweaking in post processing and it's something you need to get into to really get the best out of your digital camera. Your cheetah shot would also benefit fom a little tweaking in much the same way. __________________ Canon 1DMk2N/ EF 50mm 1.4/ EF 17-40L/ EF180L Macro/ EF100-400L Canon 20D /17-85 EF-S 580EX Flashgun/ Gitzo Explorer

10-01-2006, 11:12	#9 (permalink)
shakari Quite Chatty Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Near Kruger Park RSA Posts: 51	Ah, I see what you mean....... do you do that with photoshop? - I'm using a film camera and not digital...... does that make a difference? Here's the camera shake shot I mentioned...... and yes, I really was that close! The two shots were taken in RSA and the Lion is one of two (fully grown) brothers who had been hand reared and then released into the bush to live wild. (ish). They were still habituated to man and I bumped into them one day when I was out walking with the guy who had reared them....... guess I got lost in the lens a bit and just kept shooting pictures. The subject walked right up to me as I was kneeling down and sniffed the lens. (1st shot) then he yawned and I took the opportunity of putting my lens into his mouth for the second shot...... until then I was nice and steady but as I took the shot his brother who had snuck up behind me, licked the back of my neck.......hence the camera shake!....... scared the life out of me. Had the guy who reared them not been with me, I obviously wouldn't have taken the chances I did........ I appreciate they're beyond saving, but thought it might be fun to post them for comment anyway. Last edited by shakari : 10-01-2006 at 12:10.

10-01-2006, 08:10	#3 (permalink)
Matty Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: kings hill Posts: 5,269	i would agree with Arkady, some post precessing will really help these shots come out, if you have no objections im sure people here will have a little go and see whats possible for you!

10-01-2006, 08:27	#4 (permalink)
shakari Quite Chatty Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Near Kruger Park RSA Posts: 51	The Lion pic was taken when I was on foot without a tripod - but I don't understand what you mean by "soft" - perhaps you could explain....... did you mean soft focus? I took the cheetah pic when I was laying down and I was trying to get an effect of back lighting using the natural light that was available...... do you think a filter would have improved things? The Elephant shot was taken from a vehicle and the Elephant was walking past at an angle so I just had to keep clicking....... I've regretted not giving him more room from the day I took the pic!........ you're right, it's a scan of a print. The light really was that colour as it hadn't rained for about 18 months and the first rains were coming in......... a really spectacular moment. One of the best images (IMO) I've ever (potentially) taken was ruined by camera shake....and I'll try to post it later today for comment. (Hope I'm not taking up too much bandwidth with all this!) I don't know what post precessing is I'm afraid, but I have no objection at all to someone doing to show me how to improve my work.........

10-01-2006, 09:49	#6 (permalink)
dod Feet under the table Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Nairn Posts: 1,911	I really like the colours in the third. The only thing I find slightly disappointing is the tip of the trunk looks like it's been cut off

10-01-2006, 10:42	#7 (permalink)
SammyC Forum Regular Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Bristol Posts: 1,466	Ahhh, beautiful animals! Well at least you get the chance to go and improve those shots!

10-01-2006, 11:21	#10 (permalink)
Steep Forum Regular Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inverness Posts: 964	When you are scanning from prints, use the best optical resolution your scanner can do, forget about any interpolated guff it has. At the best oprical res you will have the best chance of a good copy but your image file may be huge and difficult to work with, you can always cut it down once you have it on your hard drive though. I can understand the camera shake at that distance a bit of unsharp mask in PS will remove some of the fuzzyness though.

10-01-2006, 11:25	#11 (permalink)
Arkady Forum Regular Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Aldershot, Hampshire Posts: 1,198	Film? You hero. A lot of the people here have only got digital cameras and so a lot of the info here is applicable to that medium. There are however a few crumbly old gits like me who remember that 'real' photography used to be all about silver halide crystals and not pixels. Keep posting and sod the bandwidth - that's what it's here for - as long as you follow the image-posting guidelines you'll be fine. What film/lens combinations do you use? With the light you have available down there, you want to be using a medium-speed/fine-grain film to get the best possible quality from your images. Other considerations would be slide or neg film depending on wether you want to project your images or make prints from them. If you want to sell your images, it used to be the case that slide film was the way to go. These days with the increasing move towards digital capture as the accepted form of all phographic imagery-generation, other considerations come into play. Keep asking questions, mate and we'll do our very best to keep the answers coming.

10-01-2006, 11:26	#12 (permalink)
CT Feet under the table Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: West Mids UK Posts: 3,500	I'm not sure I'd have been able to keep the camera still with a bloody great lion licking the back of my neck!

10-01-2006, 11:37	#13 (permalink)
*Dave* Pixalo Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 14,816	A rush cloning job, but another example of post processing in PhotoShop :-

10-01-2006, 11:46	#14 (permalink)
shakari Quite Chatty Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Near Kruger Park RSA Posts: 51	I use a Canon EOS 50E with Sigma 28-300 lens. As to film, I have to use whatever I can get over here....but my usual choice is Fuji 200 print film. (When it's available!) Used to use slides but storage is such a hassle. Now I just have the film put onto a CD. I wouldn't have thought my images are good enough to sell, but if they were, I'd be happy to do so....... but wouldn't know where to start or who to go to. So far, my only experience with the commercial side is having the odd pic printed in a coffee table book and the odd magazine.......didn't get paid for anything though!

10-01-2006, 11:47	#15 (permalink)
shakari Quite Chatty Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Near Kruger Park RSA Posts: 51	DJW, So what did you do to improve it so much?

10-01-2006, 11:48	#16 (permalink)
CT Feet under the table Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: West Mids UK Posts: 3,500	Sorry Shakiri, I had to break a couple of your image links as the file sizes were over our 160 kb max limit. You can either leave the links as they are or resize the pics and replace your IMG tags. Thanks.

10-01-2006, 11:51	#17 (permalink)
Arkady Forum Regular Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Aldershot, Hampshire Posts: 1,198	That's the sort of framing you should be aiming for - it gives the subjects 'space' to move into.