Bird Photography help

[JustinP1]

GetCarter said:

That was a D2X with a Nikkor 70-300 ED. It was however... pretty close to the subject (using the motion sensor)

This was hand held from about 20 feet



Sharp is always cos it's sunny! (So I can set speed to about 1000th sec)

Ahh - maybe this is the key!

I have a Canon 400D and a 'Bigma' and whilst I get the reach without having to crop and see pixellation which is nice, I never seem to be able to get the image that razor sharp.

With my kit in all but the brightest sunlight, I am shooting at around 125th of a second which is OK at getting a decent shot as long as the bird is not actively moving, but it is not that sharp.

Should I be trying to get up to 1000th to get that sharp?

[Simpo Two]

JustinP1 said:

Should I be trying to get up to 1000th to get that sharp?

Hi Justin,

Have a closer look at your photos - are they actually out of focus (an even blur) or is the problem camera/subject movement (a directional smear)? A faster shutter speed will help fix the latter but not the former; in fact it could make it worse as you're forcing the camera to use a larger aperture, which gives shallower depth of field

[JustinP1]

Simpo Two said:

JustinP1 said:

Should I be trying to get up to 1000th to get that sharp?

Hi Justin,

Have a closer look at your photos - are they actually out of focus (an even blur) or is the problem camera/subject movement (a directional smear)? A faster shutter speed will help fix the latter but not the former; in fact it could make it worse as you're forcing the camera to use a larger aperture, which gives shallower depth of field

Hi Jon,

I think it is the former.

Is there a quick and magical fix. As you are aware, photography is not my profession by any means, but I know what the buttons on my Canon are for if that helps...!?

[Simpo Two]

Focus with long lenses can be critical, and the bigger the aperture the harder it gets. First thing (once you've got the shutter speed you need to freeze the action) is to use the central focus point as they're usually the best, and make sure it's aimed at an area with good brightness and texture. That wil help the AF system to get the best lock. If you do all that and it's still not sharp, it may be that your AF system/lens combo simply isn't up to the task. Check in front of and behind the focus point - if any other areas are sharp, that confirms your problem. In that case switch to manual focus and squint through the viewfinder - or better, get a clip-on magnifier or right-angle finder (£10-20 for a cheapo one on eBay) - to help you focus more accurately.

[JustinP1]

Here's some of my favourites. This is with the 400D and the Bigma. The Wood Pigeon is actually through double glazing....!







I would like photos like these but super sharp - help!

[Simpo Two]

Well if you took those they're pretty damn good already.

Maybe we're moving from 'sharpness at the time of aquisition' to 'digital sharpness' - ie the visual perception of how sharp a load of dots actually looks. When you resize an image, it gets softer and you need to apply sharpening. Do you have PS? If so, go to Filter/Sharpen/Unsharp Mask and fiddle about. For very small images, sometimes Filter/Sharpen/Sharpen (usually a blunt instrument) can work well. Remeber, sharpness at this level is just an illusion

[JustinP1]

Cheers!

By magic, posting them on here seems to make them sharper!

I guess it is because it has been resized. Perhaps I just need to post them online to make me more happy with them.

I use Aperture on the Mac and that has full RAW file editing so I can use the 'definition' slider to sharpen them. It is also good as my bird photography at home - like the Pigeon - is through my conservatory double glazing, and the settings in Aperture very quickly get rid of the greeny hue of the glass as if it wasn't there.

I think what is happening is that my focusing is not quite there. On those photos above, it is most noticeable on the Sparrowhawk. I think maybe the AF on the 400D is not as good as the cameras some of you guys are using.

[RobDickinson]

Simpo Two said:

Focus with long lenses can be critical, and the bigger the aperture the harder it gets.

This ^ at 400/f5.6 you have a very vey small DOF and focus is critical. Even f8 if the subject is within 15-20m DOF is very shallow.

[Simpo Two]

JustinP1 said:

By magic, posting them on here seems to make them sharper!

You're seeing the effect of scale - pound for pound, the same TV picture on a 22" screen *appears* sharper than the same image on a 42" screen. You also have to allow for the PH Autocrunch Machine, which resizes all images down to 758px wide and doesn't overly care how it does it. Best to optmise your images for each task. My website needs to sell my work so I resize to 800px wide and optimise the sharpening for that. However if you tried to make a large print from the same images they'd look awful.

JustinP1 said:

On those photos above, it is most noticeable on the Sparrowhawk. I think maybe the AF on the 400D is not as good as the cameras some of you guys are using.

The sparrowhawk photo is dramatic but has no sharp areas at all. If you want ultimate image quality, don't shoot through double-glazing

[JustinP1]

Simpo Two said:

The sparrowhawk photo is dramatic but has no sharp areas at all. If you want ultimate image quality, don't shoot through double-glazing

Funnily enough, that one wasn't through double glazing....!

That one was a bit of a chance of a lifetime shot - I was at home and heard an awful cacophony, looked out of the window and saw half a dozen magpies jumping from roof to roof joined by a crow.

I thought they must have been hacking at some bird, but couldn't see anything. Looked down to the driveway and saw a male and female sparrowhawk on the driveway, with the starling. It was the starling making the awful noise fighting the female off.

All of the shots were handheld out of the bedroom window and of course I had little time to plan for the photo!

After taking the photos I realised that the poor thing was going to get a slow and noisy death being picked to death alive on our suburban driveway, so I went down to chase it off, the male scarpered and the female couldn't pick the starling up more than a couple of feet off the ground but took it into the back garden. I chased it round and the local cat jumped out from the hedge and it dropped the starling and went!

It was shocked for a while and hid under the hedge, and I saw it a couple of hours later still waiting in it. Then in the afternoon I went for a close look and he flew away seemingly unharmed!

The rest of my photos aren't half as exciting. I set up a tripod in the conservatory, and I have hung food in a tree and set up a bird table.

[Simpo Two]

Any good?



I think that under the pressure you did remarkably well.

[JustinP1]

John - How did you do that!? It looks like it is the same photo but focused perfectly!?

I have ramped the 'Definition' slider on Aperture up to max to where it looks totally overblown and it still does not look anywhere near as clear as that.

What you have just done is exactly what I have been missing from my photos - please spill the beans!

[Simpo Two]

JustinP1 said:

John - How did you do that!? It looks like it is the same photo but focused perfectly!?... What you have just done is exactly what I have been missing from my photos - please spill the beans!

Actually I wasn't that impressed with my efforts so I'm pleased you like it

In Photoshop:

1) Cropped it for slightly better composition (although that's subjective)

2) Resized it to 750px wide, which is the optimum width for PH (this avoids the PH Autocrunching Machine and means it will stay looking as intended). You can actually do Crop and Resize in one go which is handy sometimes.

3) Apply 'Unsharp Mask' (sorry can't remember the settings) to the whole image

4) Selected the heads of each bird in turn (Elliptical Marquee Tool) and gave them an extra helping of Unsharp Mask

5) Whizzed the Blur Tool over the background between the birds hopefully to make them look sharper in comparison.

I find the term 'unsharp mask' misleading - what it really is is a way to control very accurately the amount and type of sharpening applied - it's more than a 0-10 thing. And as with most things in PS, it can be applied to a defined area.


I don't know Aperture but perhaps it doesn't have the kind of flexibility to do this.

[RobDickinson]

'Unsharp mask' comes from film days where you make a slighlty out of focus image as part of a sharpening process, the digital equivelant still works the same way in effect.

[central]

Craig Jones has loads of tips in his blog -
http://www.craigjoneswildlifephotography.co.uk/

ETA Craig's started another thread.

Edited by central on Saturday 6th March 15:28