I would never have guessed that the area around LA had so many great areas for bird life. The shooting opportunities abound, and some of the scenery in the midst of urban areas is quite nice. The pictures below were taken at Crystal Cove State Park. That stretch of beach provided me with a full day of exploring and photo ops. Wish I could have taken better advantage of them, and I would certainly visit this park again next time I'm in the area.
Shot handheld with a 7D and 400mm f5.6.
1. Whimbrel - One of the challenges I found in shooting at this location was that the subjects were pretty much always between me and the sun. I guess earlier and later in the day might be better. Aside from flash, how do you beach frequenters deal with brightly backlit birds?
2. Whimbrel Silhouette - I wish I was a bit lower in order to reduce the area of in-focus water behind the bird, but overall I like the effect I was getting. To get the shot, I had to wait for a bigger wave set. The spectral highlights in the foreground were from when the water receded back down the beach.
I like both shots - 1 looks great to me as far as exposure. so it seems you're dealing with backlighting just fine. I always use Manual mode for a backlit shot, and some flash if I have it with me. I looked for this bird while I was living in WA and never did see one. Nice work.
Yep, there's lots of pockets of nature here in So Cal, Ken, more than most folks -- even those who live here -- are aware of. And birds, of course, don't care if the greenery is in Compton, or bordering a freeway (Hepatic Tanager and Scissor-tailed Flycatcher, respectively), they'll go where the food is! And you're right about early morning and evening being the best times/possibilities for getting the sun at your back. For dealing with backlit birds, as with the recent GHO fledgling, I shoot in RAW, underexpose the bird, then re-adjust things in DPP RAW software,using Tone Curve Assist and RAW brightness adjustment, to where you can see the bird's details yet still have highlight control around the flared edges. It's a bit tricky, but it works well enough for me...
2 is a great shot, but I have one minor knit. For me the silhouette should be sharp against that background. Right now it looks like the background is the focal point.
DonGut wrote:
Lovely image in #1. That is a weird effect in #2, but very appealling as well. Don
Thank you for the supportive comments Don. Yes, the edge effect on the bird is a bit weird. That was the first time I tried shooting directly into the sun with the 400.
ashley138 wrote:
I like both shots - 1 looks great to me as far as exposure. so it seems you're dealing with backlighting just fine. I always use Manual mode for a backlit shot, and some flash if I have it with me. I looked for this bird while I was living in WA and never did see one. Nice work.
Thank you for the comments Ashley. Much appreciated.
trailhiker wrote:
Yep, there's lots of pockets of nature here in So Cal, Ken, more than most folks -- even those who live here -- are aware of. And birds, of course, don't care if the greenery is in Compton, or bordering a freeway (Hepatic Tanager and Scissor-tailed Flycatcher, respectively), they'll go where the food is! And you're right about early morning and evening being the best times/possibilities for getting the sun at your back. For dealing with backlit birds, as with the recent GHO fledgling, I shoot in RAW, underexpose the bird, then re-adjust things in DPP RAW software,using Tone Curve Assist and RAW brightness adjustment, to where you can see the bird's details yet still have highlight control around the flared edges. It's a bit tricky, but it works well enough for me...
chupacabra31 wrote:
2 is a great shot, but I have one minor knit. For me the silhouette should be sharp against that background. Right now it looks like the background is the focal point.
Thank you for the comments. I don't mind the soft edges, as in some respects as the surrounding highlights are a big part of the overall look. But the amount of in focus background is what I wish I could have eliminated/reduced. A lower angle would have helped to a degree. A crisp silhouette may have looked good too, but I don't have one for comparison unfortunately.
