| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/26/2002 04:25:04 PM · #1 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
Was that a trained bird?
Originally posted by Jonniboy:
[i]OK, as the person responsible for the "Sideways Bird" picture I feel I should pitch in here.
[/i]
Yes it's a bird trained for hunting. The real giveaway is if you look at the feet - you can see the leather straps (I think they are called "jesses") that the falconer uses to hold the bird.
This was a display of training by flying the bird with a lure - the falconer swings a pirece of cord with prey at the end and the falcon attempts to catch it.
|
|
|
|
05/25/2002 07:51:33 AM · #2 |
Was that a trained bird?
Originally posted by Jonniboy:
OK, as the person responsible for the "Sideways Bird" picture I feel I should pitch in here.
|
|
|
|
05/24/2002 03:39:30 PM · #3 |
Yeah that too.
I was doing this with indoor shots using a flash so exposure was ok. I guess outdoors you could run into the potential problem of that so you may want to adjust your EV settings accordingly.
|
|
|
|
05/24/2002 03:08:58 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by eddy:
[i]Action shot tip:
Almost covered it: Be aware that half clicking the shutter usually holds both the focus and the exposure. When pointing to an alternate subject to obtain focus lock, the alternate subject needs similar lighting as well.
|
|
|
|
05/24/2002 12:57:05 PM · #5 |
Action shot tip:
Something that may assist with your action shots. If your limited to auto-focus as I am give this a try. Pick your point where your going to shoot your shot, if your at a sporting event this is easier than say the bird shot. Perform a focus lock (half shutter for me) at the point of where your going to shoot. Continue to hold your lock until your object is in the frame then click away. The camera doesnt need to focus when you click, there should be a minimal delay in your click to photo time.
If you have apeture controls (I dont) adjust them ahead of time to give a deeper depth of field if you think your going to need it.
Go out and give it a try, let me know if it helps you. Its worked for me and I have suggested to a few people but nobody with different cameras.
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/24/2002 12:58:01 PM. |
|
|
|
05/24/2002 12:41:51 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by Jonniboy:
I think the real problem in getting this shot with a "regular" Digicam would be shutter lag. The D1 has paritcularly fast responses when you hit the shutter - almost as fast as a film SLR. It also has a fast "motor drive". I was shooting burst of 3 - 4 shots on each swoop. Typically I'd get one shot with the bird fully in the frame per run. I don't know how fast falcons fly at but somebody told me they peak at around 120mph.
I've found my Olympus to have a particularly long shutter lag -- I've had to try and anticipate the shot and "lead" my target. I've managed to get shots of Eagles and a Seagull, but look forward to a new camera soon...probably 2 years when the new chips are in use.
I think that top speed for peregrine falcons is when in a full power dive; my guess is they probably do about 80 (still faster than my car) in the horizontal plane. |
|
|
|
05/24/2002 11:18:14 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by hokie:
That sideways bird shot is awesome and I am envious.
I didn't think that was the best display of upside down so I held back on a 10 but I gave it a 9.
I am also wondering if that shot is possible with a regular digicam or if you need at least an slr with a decent telephoto to get that shot?
I think the real problem in getting this shot with a "regular" Digicam would be shutter lag. The D1 has paritcularly fast responses when you hit the shutter - almost as fast as a film SLR. It also has a fast "motor drive". I was shooting burst of 3 - 4 shots on each swoop. Typically I'd get one shot with the bird fully in the frame per run. I don't know how fast falcons fly at but somebody told me they peak at around 120mph.
Focal length on the shot was record at 98mm (equivalent to 150mm on 35mm) - it was cropped out of the centre.
|
|
|
|
05/24/2002 09:53:21 AM · #8 |
Amphian...I had really considered the Nikon 995 for its macro ability when looking for a digicam.
I also own Nikon film equipment and liked the brand.
I really like the Nikon D100 but I just can't justify the big bucks for my amount of use. Heck..I dont think I have spent more than $2,000 on camera gear (minus film and developing) in 20 years of shooting pictures and it's hard to spend that on one camera no matter how nice the features :-)
I would love to see a 6 megapixel Digital SLR kit below $1,000 which I think we will see in about a year or so. |
|
|
|
05/24/2002 09:32:27 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by hokie:
I think that is also why we see a lot of macro shots in challenges here. If I feel limitied I can imagine what folks with even more limitations on their cameras feel like.
It's the opposite for me. I shoot a lot of macros partially because my camera is really good at macros and partially because I love macros. In fact, the quality of the macros was one reason I was interested in this particular camera. I don't own any separate lenses and don't miss them more than occasionally. That said, I am looking forward to getting much more built-in zoom (I currently have 2.5X.) when I buy my next camera in a few years.
|
|
|
|
05/24/2002 07:57:07 AM · #10 |
I have a decent film camera setup and the one thing I get so frustrated with on my digicam is the limited optical zoom and its slow response on action shots.
I really miss being able to use a 300mm shot at 1/2000th shutter :-(
I think that is also why we see a lot of macro shots in challenges here. If I feel limitied I can imagine what folks with even more limitations on their cameras feel like. |
|
|
|
05/24/2002 07:52:12 AM · #11 |
That photo was made with an SLR digital camera.. it does make a difference for sure...
I liked that photo also but I didn't think it met the challenge topic very well... I scored it a 7....
|
|
|
|
05/24/2002 07:44:19 AM · #12 |
That sideways bird shot is awesome and I am envious.
I didn't think that was the best display of upside down so I held back on a 10 but I gave it a 9.
I am also wondering if that shot is possible with a regular digicam or if you need at least an slr with a decent telephoto to get that shot?
|
|
|
|
05/24/2002 04:21:29 AM · #13 |
I liked it, too, and scored it pretty high (for me), but somebody's got to keep you anarchists in line. {g}
|
|
|
|
05/24/2002 04:01:15 AM · #14 |
Awww... I loved that photo, it was one of my tens. I didn''t question that it involved the idea of upside down in an oblique way. The wings were vertical while the head was the right way up... I thought that was good enough in a "topsy turvy" kind of way.
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/24/2002 4:02:15 AM. |
|
|
|
05/24/2002 03:54:45 AM · #15 |
OK, as the person responsible for the "Sideways Bird" picture I feel I should pitch in here.
Did I really believe it was upside down when I submitted it? Well, kind of. It was Sunday, it was late, I'd decided that this was the week to make my first post. After half an hour looking at it I'd convinced myself that it was just about upside down ("Well, it's certainly not the right way up...")
Do I believe now that it's upside down? No - I have to agree with most of the comments I got.
Would I post it again if I had my time again? Probably - like I said a week ago I'd rather post and find out what I'm doing wrong.
BTW, this week I'm definitely on topic and my score is lower ;-) |
|
|
|
05/24/2002 03:02:04 AM · #16 |
I do know that the image is in its original orientation, and I did see the horizon. You seem to be confusing 90º (sideways) with 180º, though. It''''s a great catch, but the bird is not, by any stretch of the imagination, upside down. When I said "sideways bird and sideways landscape", I was refering to two different images. Oh, and BTW, I imagine most birds can bank a curve.
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/24/2002 3:04:24 AM.
|
|
|
|
05/24/2002 01:59:24 AM · #17 |
- "why the sideways bird"
If you ask me, I'd tell you to take a second look that the "sideways bird" again and take careful attention to the background. It doesn't appear that the photographer just turned it 180 degrees but the bird is actually flying sideways. The bird flew at 180 degrees. The background is horizontal to the horizon, the way it's should be. What makes the photo so awesome is that it shows you what this bird is compatible of doing: flying sideways, instead of the usual way most other birds do. I applaud to the photographer for actually capturing this bird's natural behavior! -NBT |
|
|
|
05/23/2002 11:38:51 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by eddy:
I liked the Your Cheating Heart shot. So many of the photos for games are just game peices and not the actual game play. You should of submitted that shot, it really conveys the concept of gameplay. What I have learned here from lurking for 5-6 weeks before posting my first shot is there will be common themes or cliches for all the challenges you just have to make sure yours is a good shot (which it was).
Thanks. I think what made me reluctant was to see someone else post the same idea in the forums. Next time, I'll just ignore it.
|
|
|
|
05/23/2002 02:26:34 PM · #19 |
I'd say you should even be careful judging those things that look like set shots. I know my picture this week looks like it was a studio shot with carefully controlled lighting -- in reality, I shot on the top of a cardboard box using the quickly shifting direct sunlight from a window. Every couple of seconds I had to move the elements of my image in order to keep them where I wanted in relation to the light. Yes, I did set it up, but I feel like it was also very much a grab shot -- just one of a different nature.
|
|
|
|
05/23/2002 02:10:54 PM · #20 |
I gave you a very good score, 9.
I admit, I am pretty generous at
grading, but it was a FUNNY,
opportunistic shot, in GREAT
focus. I have a much harder
time GRADING UP "set shots", as
the photog "has all day" to get
it right. For me, opportunity
shots, done well, get far better
grades than set shots.
|
|
|
|
05/22/2002 10:20:52 AM · #21 |
Amphian,
I liked the Your Cheating Heart shot. So many of the photos for games are just game peices and not the actual game play. You should of submitted that shot, it really conveys the concept of gameplay. What I have learned here from lurking for 5-6 weeks before posting my first shot is there will be common themes or cliches for all the challenges you just have to make sure yours is a good shot (which it was).
Ed |
|
|
|
05/22/2002 01:20:30 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
amphian: someone mentioned 5 aces as cliche and i responded to them that I did NOT think it was cliche.
Yeah, I should have just gone ahead with it anyway.
Thanks for the compliments, gr8photos. I like the photo a bit more today, and now I'm kicking myself for not submitting it. |
|
|
|
05/21/2002 08:29:49 AM · #23 |
the rankings and placement are definitely weird. but to me it's the process and the comments. if i win i win, but i'm not obsessed with it.
amphian: someone mentioned 5 aces as cliche and i responded to them that I did NOT think it was cliche.
lisae: i know, it's such a cute fuzzy belly!!
hokie, irae, dpcontest discussers, et al: that bee kicks butt and i've not seen many images in our contest so poppingly perfect - no offense anyone.
fsiederaski: your 'Hmmm' picture was quirky and interesting because it illustrated a thought process. It made me, as I wrote, wonder what the girl was looking at. it wasnt a special effect picture as much as a psychological study, IMO.
|
|
|
|
05/21/2002 07:18:28 AM · #24 |
Amphibian, I really liked your outtake, too. Didn't think it was too busy, and liked the DOF and composition.
Originally posted by Amphian:
[i]OK, here's the best of my shots, which I was going to call "Your Cheatin' Heart"
Here's why I didn't submit it: ...
|
|
|
|
05/21/2002 05:15:46 AM · #25 |
Originally posted by lisae:
Well, here are my opinons on some of the photos mentioned here:
"Water Stand" - I have no idea why this one ranked so low, because as I commented, I loved the framing. Maybe it's because my main occupation is 3d animation, but I love action shots. If there's a line of action or some motion blur or something like that in a photo, I respond to it. This one seemed to be a girl caught in motion, with water drops in the air, and the legs curving gracefully off to the side. So... I liked it :)
Thanks for the compliment on my photo. I really wasn't too concerned that it didn't place higher due to the fact that I was only able to get off three handstand shots before my son said "enough!" I had already made him dive off the diving board about 5 times without catching the shot I really wanted and the water was still a little too cool for swimming. You can make a 16 year old do a lot for you out of guilt on Mother's Day. Oh and I love it that you thought he was a girl. Now I can have fun teasing him.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 07:07:35 PM EDT.
