Serendip wildlife sanctuaryModerators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
11 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Serendip wildlife sanctuaryG'day all,
Got up early and went down to the Serendip wildlife sanctuary (in Lara, Melways edition 29 423D2) this morning, there two hours before the gates opened but previously worked out with the ranger about getting in early... Wow, for the bird nuts out there, all I can say is "get down there!"... There's several bird hides and heaps of different types of birds, some falcons, all sorts including wallabies, Kangaroos, emu's etc... Even had my first play with the SB-800 on some of them when close to try and fill-in some dark shadows etc. (never seen "red-eye" on a bird before, I'm yet to learn how to drive the thing properly), but wow that thing's a bewdy!!! Anyway, had a blast, shot about 250 images. I've put a few up on an alternative site while pixspot is down , hope it's back up soon... http://photobucket.com/albums/v491/falc ... Sanctuary/ See what you think (all using the 80-400VR), any advice, critique etc. is eagerly welcomed... Cheers, Mudder Aka Andrew
Well done mate
Love the Tawny Frogmouth, has he got a suss look on his face or what????? Just one thing…how much sharpening are you using in cam or in PP, it looks to me as if haloing is starting to take over. It could be the way the site resizes for display to. Cheers Ray >> All of us could take a lesson from the weather. It pays no attention to criticism<<
Very nice shots mudder - makes the choice between the 70-200VR and and the lens you have used all that much harder
Chris Chris
-------------------------------- I started my life with nothing and I’ve still got most of it left
mudder, you are a dab hand at the wildlife photography, no doubt about it. Very very impressive.
If the Tawny Frogmouth is 4553, I agree with Ray, this one jumped out at me with the attitude on that bird's face. I am not going to insult you by saying that you got these great shots because you have the 80-400VR, but there is no doubt that it is a great lens for this kind of thing, and you really know how to work it. So do I gather you have bought the SB800? That didn't take long cheers Greg - - - - D200 etc
Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see. - Arthur Schopenhauer
G'day,
I noticed it myself but was in a bit of a rush, on the shots: DSC_4392Myfamilytree.jpg especially as that was a crop, but also on DSC_4462inflight.jpg For the first time, I tried playing a bit with sharpening differently by luminance only at full size, then tried a very slight sharpen once down-sized on these ones but I think I stuffed 'em up... I think the rest were just basic sharpening after resize (hmmm, or was it before re-size? Damn the washing!) Thanks for picking it up and noticing, any help goes a long way when learning...
The thing that closed the deal for me was the reach and the $... I wouldn't have been able to go for the 70-200 + tele-conv, and I find I'm using the full 400mm quite regularly... The 70-200 would be a lot easier to get in-flight shots with the AF-S's snappy focus... Spose it depends on how much reach you're after and how may $ you can throw at it...
Greg, yep, I buckled and gave in once I had a play with yours at he mini-meet (shhh, if we talk quietly no-one will know it was really a booze-up)
Thanks Onyx... I'm a sucker for animals... ALthough there was a bloody cat wandering around in one of the bird areas, so I called the ranger who has been chasing it as it's killed a few birds recently, I believe it'll be trapped and "taken care of"... Cheers and thanks all for the advice and feedback, Mudder Aka Andrew
Excellent pics mate.
I really like the expressions on the kangaroo and the tawny frogmouth. Steve.
|D700| D2H | F5 | 70-200VR | 85 1.4 | 50 1.4 | 28-70 | 10.5 | 12-24 | SB800 | Website-> http://www.stevekilburn.com Leeds United for promotion in 2014 - Hurrah!!!
Mudder,
Great shots there - really like the composition for "My family tree" and great moment to catch the kookaburra's expression. Maybe I can suggest you reduce your sharpening amount just a tad as it's starting to produce some artifacts on a few of the shots - but that's just my preference.
Mudder, your wagtail is a wren, but other than that I love the shots..
Tisk tisk on the flash by the way.. PlatinumWeaver / Dean
Asking the Stupid Questions <a href="http://www.platinumweaver.net/" alt="PlatinumWeaver Homepage">http://www.platinumweaver.net/</a>
G'day,
Yep, you're right, I stuffed a few of 'em up when I was trying sharpening different ways...
Thanks PW, not very good with bird types, they're animals with wings to me flash... Had to try the new toy tho Aka Andrew
Previous topic • Next topic
11 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|