 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / September 2006Spike's foreign sister has an appetite
Read this in a Dutch Newspaper, too bad I wasn't the photographer. <http://www.ad.nl/eceRedirect?articleId=386821> The translation goes something like this: Vianen - That blue herons eat frogs, molls and rats is known, but the bird also seems to know its way with small rabbits. Photographer Ad Sprang from Vianen saw, on Monday June 5th, how the heron sneaked upon a young rabbit. When within striking range, it struck and caught the little ball of fur by one ear. The heron flew away with the shrieking and struggling rabbit hanging by its ear from the dagger shaped beak. The heron landed some 50 metres away along side the ditch. After drowning it, the heron swallowed the rabbit in whole.  SignatureBart Bet it had indigestion after that. SignatureJoan http://www.flickr.com/photos/joan-in-manly : Read this in a Dutch Newspaper, too bad I wasn't the photographer. : [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] : side the ditch. After drowning it, the heron swallowed the rabbit in : whole. > Bet it had indigestion after that. The rabbit? : > Bet it had indigestion after that. coughed up a hare ball hyuk hyuk hyuk ;) > : > Bet it had indigestion after that. > > coughed up a hare ball hyuk hyuk hyuk ;) Takes a licking, keeps on kicking! >Bet it had indigestion after that. Heck that's not so indigestible. Here's a Great Egret tossing down a pretty good sized blue crab. Not the greatest of shots, so I'd not posted them before. Though links are given for all three, you can use the next slide arrow to advance the sequence as well. http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/dSLR/wildlife/slides/DSC_1496-01_cr102 4_800.html http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/dSLR/wildlife/slides/DSC_1603-01_cr102 4_800.html http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/dSLR/wildlife/slides/DSC_1613-01_cr102 4_800.html -- Ed Ruf (Usenet2@EdwardG.Ruf.com) http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!) wrote: > Heck that's not so indigestible. Here's a Great Egret tossing down a > pretty good sized blue crab. Not the greatest of shots, so I'd not [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/dSLR/wildlife/slides/DSC_1603-01_cr102 4_800.html > http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/dSLR/wildlife/slides/DSC_1613-01_cr102 4_800.html It's probably a peeler? I could go for a nice softshell sandwich. At least he knows how to pick his crabs that are bigger than the legal limit. Rita >Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!) wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >It's probably a peeler? I could go for a nice softshell sandwich. At least >he knows how to pick his crabs that are bigger than the legal limit. I'm really mad if I missed a peeler that big in my own backyard. -- Ed Ruf (Usenet2@EdwardG.Ruf.com) http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!) wrote: >> It's probably a peeler? I could go for a nice softshell sandwich. >> At least he knows how to pick his crabs that are bigger than the >> legal limit. > > I'm really mad if I missed a peeler that big in my own backyard. LOL! The bird has the advantage because he gets to do all his crabbing in all the prime locations. It's really sad what they are pulling out of the Chesapeake these days. This guy is so big that he eats #1 males for breakfast. http://www.geocities.com/ritaberk2006/pics/Crabby.jpg Rita Puh-leez... That's just a bad cut done digitally, using a layer mask, in Photoshop (or a similar program.). If you look close enough, you can see the "halo" around the rabbit that was caused by not cutting close enough to the rabbit. Either that, or the original rabbit image was oversharpened in the program used to combine the two images. Check out the depth of field, too. It just don't look right. > Read this in a Dutch Newspaper, too bad I wasn't the photographer. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > side the ditch. After drowning it, the heron swallowed the rabbit in > whole. > Puh-leez... That's just a bad cut done digitally, using a layer > mask, in Photoshop (or a similar program.). If you look close > enough, you can see the "halo" around the rabbit that was > caused by not cutting close enough to the rabbit. There was no halo in the original publication, so I must assume it is a down-sampling plus oversharpening artifact. SignatureBart It's a striking image, but I am still not convinced that it's "authentic". What about the difference in the depth of field? Why is the green background so much lighter in the first image than the second? How is the heron holding the rabbit? If there is no ear on the rabbit's left side, where's the blood? Why is there not some blurring action from the rabbit wriggling in pain and fright? If the image was taken at a fast shutter speed, there should be more "noise" in the photo. Where's the "noise"? I could go on but I see no point. How can you be fooled by this? > > Puh-leez... That's just a bad cut done digitally, using a layer > > mask, in Photoshop (or a similar program.). If you look close [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > There was no halo in the original publication, so I must assume it is > a down-sampling plus oversharpening artifact. > It's a striking image, but I am still not convinced that it's > "authentic". What about the difference in the depth of field? What about it? The shots were taken at different spots along the ditch, some 50 metres apart. > Why is the green background so much lighter in the first > image than the second? Ditto. > How is the heron holding the rabbit? If there is no ear on the > rabbit's left side, where's the blood? By its ear and neck skin. Why should there be blood? The rabbit wasn't pierced, it was grabbed. > Why is there not some blurring action from the rabbit wriggling > in pain and fright? When you pick up many young animals by the skin of their neck, they instinctively hold still. It's also the way many animals' parents transport them into safety. > If the image was taken at a fast shutter speed, there should be > more "noise" in the photo. Where's the "noise"? Why? Given that the photographer apparently submits to "birdpix", he probably has long lenses so the image will most likely have been reduced in size. Besides, Canon cameras are known for their low noise high ISO performance, maybe a Canon was used? And then there is software like NeatImage or NoiseNinja which does wonders on noise reduction. > I could go on but I see no point. How can you be fooled by this? Photographers/reporters can be (and are) banned by the media for faking images. Why would one risk his income for a bird picture in a regional newspaper? It isn't weapons of mass destruction we're talking about here ... SignatureBart Try translating the page using an online translator, Bart. Then, read the comments posted by viewers. I did and it seems as though I am not the only skeptic. :) It looks "authentically fake" to me because there are just too many inconsistencies and there's nothing you can say that will change my mind. > > It's a striking image, but I am still not convinced that it's > > "authentic". What about the difference in the depth of field? [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > regional newspaper? It isn't weapons of mass destruction we're talking > about here ... > Try translating the page using an online translator, Bart. Then, > read [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > that > will change my mind. Since a picture says more than a thousand words: <http://www.birdpix.nl/album_page.php?pic_id=62646&sid=3c0cc12b0db026b01536ae1c3d dc1ba3> <http://www.birdpix.nl/album_page.php?pic_id=62945&sid=3c0cc12b0db026b01536ae1c3d dc1ba3> <http://www.birdpix.nl/album_page.php?pic_id=63293&sid=3c0cc12b0db026b01536ae1c3d dc1ba3> <http://www.birdpix.nl/album_page.php?pic_id=63294&sid=3c0cc12b0db026b01536ae1c3d dc1ba3> Looking at the photographer's comments, he used an EOS-20D with an EF-500mm f/4 IS . He used ISO 200, 1/320 sec, f/7.1 with EV -2/3 correction. It was a sequence shot on a bean (rice) bag, from his car. He was so close that the entire bird didn't fit into the first frames, but the later, more distant pixs fit the full bird into the frame. SignatureBart |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.