The DeSoto IPT ended with lone participant Ed Dow and I sitting in six inches of warm saltwater photographing some tame spoonbills in still blue water … More on Ed in a future blog post. <\/p>\n
If you know of a camera store that has one of these lenses in stock please do not leave a comment. Please call my cell phone at 863-221-2372 or shoot me an e-mail<\/a><\/center>. More on this new lens later today. <\/p>\n Yesterday’s Red Tide Blessings #s 2, 3, 4, & 5. D5\/200-500mm Flight. Mr. Dickhead. And Using Diagonals to Strengthen Your Image<\/em> blog post here<\/a>, prompted some excellent comments. Below are two along with my responses. <\/p>\n I did of course receive a long e-mail from Mr. Dickead who said in part:<\/p>\n Well, well, Artie<\/p>\n What a nasty post. What did I do or say in our last exchange of emails that warrants you using an insulting epithet like ‘Mr Dickhead’ to address me? My name is Richie. You could have used that surely? How ungracious, how ignorant and how ungrateful after the help I freely offered. We are adults after all, not ill mannered louts. That you feel the need to do this speaks volumes about your character – or lack of one. You seem desperately insecure, small minded and vindictive to lash out at someone who although disagreeing with you, nevertheless sat down and spent some considerable time to help you when asked. With respect, you still have a way to go in The Work.<\/p>\n You don\u2019t have to agree with accepted, verified scientific truth – that\u2019s a choice – even though it makes you wrong and as stupid as your meter on a dull day. <\/em><\/p>\n Then he went on to share some excellent information on digital resolution and ppi, two areas that have always baffled me. I will be sharing some of that info with you in the future while crediting it to an anonymous source. I did not bother responding to Mr. Dickhead but I am saving his e-mail both to study the knowledge he shared with me and to consider his criticisms. I will do The Work on the latter. <\/p>\n Artie, I have asked an expert digital imaging friend of mine about this and he says that there is something in it. It doesn\u2019t seem to be just someone\u2019s idea. It seems to be based on science. Could you please explain the idea behind it and why it doesn\u2019t work?<\/em><\/p>\n I responded:<\/p>\n Hi John, Welcome and thanks for posting our question. In short, as I have explained here often and in detail Digital Basics II<\/a> as well, bring your RAW files with the RGB values for the WHITEs at 254, 254, 254 is theoretically correct. So why don’t I do that ? Doing so requires a great deal of extra work in order to get the WHITEs to look good while restoring or bring back the detail. I found that for me, bringing my Canon files into Photoshop with the RGB values for the WHITEs in the mid-230s worked perfectly. Please remember that there I converted my RAW files in DPP and that I enabled Highlight Tone Priority. Once I started using Nikon and converting with ACR I found that bringing my WHITEs into Photoshop with the RGB values in the low to mid-240s was just what I needed to produce nice clean, bright WHITEs with lots of detail. <\/p>\n I call my approach practically correct. \ud83d\ude42 <\/p>\n with love, artie<\/p>\n Artie, yes, that is my understanding too. Using ETTR, one should push the RAW histogram as far as practically possible to the right (254 254 254 in ACR), pull those values back to 230-240 in ACR and then open the image in Photoshop at 230-240? However, the camera histogram only shows a JPEG histogram which could be compressed by as much as 3EV compared to the RAW, so surely it must be a poor guide for judging correct exposure?<\/em><\/p>\n I responded: <\/p>\n Hi John,<\/p>\n As noted above, pulling the WHITEs down from the 250s just does not work well for me. That based on 17 years of digital experience with both Canon and Nikon. If it works well for you, then stick with it.<\/p>\n Yes, the histogram and blinkies are based on the embedded JPEG. I find it a great guide for getting the exposure that I want and then creating images that look great to my eye and make me happy.<\/p>\n with love, artie<\/p>\n Change of subject: Because of your images, I’ve begun using auto ISO. I’m shooting with the Canon 7D II, 1\/2000, no exposure adjustment, in high speed mode. Two different birds in deep shade flying out into bright light. The images shot in the shade were better than past attempts so I was quite happy. However, in each case the images taken in bright light were totally blown out. I’m sure it was due to operator error, though I would like to blame the camera. Was this not a good approach to take under these conditions?<\/em><\/p>\n Hey Jim, The situation you describe in a virtually impossible one. Using Auto ISO with EC is no panacea unless you have a complete understanding of exposure theory and you are working with constant light with consistently similar backgrounds.<\/em><\/strong> (Be sure to see the upcoming blog post on creating pleasing pre-dawn blurs using S or Tv mode, Auto ISO, and the correct EC.) No automatic mode can handle a situation with two birds of different tonalities in the shade one moment and in the sun the next. It can be done with limited success if you are super fast with the exposure compensation dial, if you have completely mastered exposure theory, and if you get lucky … To learn Exposure Theory I have long directed folks to study the section on Applied Exposure Theory on pages 58 to 63 in the original The Art of Bird Photography.<\/a> <\/p>\n The Snowy Egret is beautiful!<\/em><\/p>\n Many thanks with love, artie<\/p>\nSome insightful comments, questions, and answers …<\/h3>\n
John Broadwell\/September 28, 2018 at 6:06 am <\/strong><\/h2>\n
John Broadwell\/September 28, 2018 at 9:16 am<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Jim Howell\/September 27, 2018 at 12:15 pm<\/strong><\/h2>\n