> I had been trying to get the fella on the water in the sunset shots but
> was losing light. I was about to take the flash off and noticed these
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=2225232509&size=l
WTF has happened to that foreground bird.
Colin_D - 28 Jan 2008 23:28 GMT
>> I had been trying to get the fella on the water in the sunset shots but
>> was losing light. I was about to take the flash off and noticed these
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> WTF has happened to that foreground bird.
Obviously the camera was panned to follow the birds landing, and the
foreground bird is swimming the other way; a slow shutter speed because
of the low light despite flash being used. If you are a photographer
you should know this.
Colin D.

Signature
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Colin_D - 29 Jan 2008 01:07 GMT
>> I had been trying to get the fella on the water in the sunset shots but
>> was losing light. I was about to take the flash off and noticed these
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> WTF has happened to that foreground bird.
You, 'the one' are new on this group, aren't you?
So far your posts have been rude, aggressive, and downright profane for
no good reason.
There's more than enough of your kind inhabiting these newsgroups,
hiding behind made-up names and posting from nowhere (you think) and we
don't need another one.
Shape up, be considerate and reasonable, helpful even, and if you can't
do that, then ship out.
Colin D.

Signature
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Not4wood - 29 Jan 2008 03:36 GMT
>> I had been trying to get the fella on the water in the sunset shots but
>> was losing light. I was about to take the flash off and noticed these
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> WTF has happened to that foreground bird.
After cropping out that one bird in the foreground, I would say its a great
shot. I had fought trying to get a couple of shots of these magnificent
birds last summer. Couldn't get a good shot in, also the timing and
lighting wouldn't cooperate for me, LOL and I didn't have a lot of time to
spend hunting them.
Not4wood
On Jan 28, 11:01 pm, Father McKenzie <father_mcken...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> I had been trying to get the fella on the water in the sunset shots but
> was losing light. I was about to take the flash off and noticed these
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=2225232509&size=l
I agree with not4wood... The effect on the foreground bird is just
too surreal and that part looks just like what it is - a motion-
blurred pelican with a frozen flashlit component... Crop it off and
it looks much better, imo.
The rest of the shot is great - and it looks as if the flash hasn't
provided much (any?) illumination to the two other birds, which have
been kept sharp quite nicely by the panning.
Just curious, what shutter speed was it - I'm guessing about 1/100 or
thereabouts?
Father McKenzie - 29 Jan 2008 04:55 GMT
> On Jan 28, 11:01 pm, Father McKenzie <father_mcken...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> Just curious, what shutter speed was it - I'm guessing about 1/100 or
> thereabouts?
Thanks for replying Mark, The One and Not4wood
As I said when i posted it I wasn't keen on the water refelction on the
pelican in the water. I will crop it out and see how it looks.
It was actually just something different to post after a night of
playing with pano's and HDR.
Mark settings are
Exposure: 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture: f/5.6
Focal Length: 55 mm
ISO Speed: 100
mark.thomas.7@gmail.com - 29 Jan 2008 07:09 GMT
> mark.thoma...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 28, 11:01 pm, Father McKenzie <father_mcken...@yahoo.com>
[quoted text clipped - 34 lines]
> Focal Length: 55 mm
> ISO Speed: 100
Thanks, Fr... (O: It's a nice effect, and one I hadn't thought of
trying -it's alway nice to come up with something different so as to
avoid the NABS syndrome.
(Not Another Bloody Sunset)
Paul Furman - 29 Jan 2008 05:34 GMT
>> http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=2225232509&size=l
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> provided much (any?) illumination to the two other birds, which have
> been kept sharp quite nicely by the panning.
Yes the other 2 are sharp.
Very nice,
Also liked
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=2170908903&size=o&context=set-7215760017
9283345
Father McKenzie - 29 Jan 2008 10:56 GMT
> Very nice,
>
> Also liked
> http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=2170908903&size=o&context=set-7215760017
9283345
> Very nice,
>
> Also liked
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=2170908903&size=o&context=set-7215760017
9283345
Thanks Thomas, not sure if you saw the story on that one.
Another flickr member called me and said he would be in the area if i
wanted to meet up to take some shots.
As usual someone wanders up without a camera and started telling us it
was a crap sunset then went on with this and that.
I basically ignored him and he returned with some a4 prints there
were a couple of good ones but living opposite there for 30 years he
should have a lot better.
He then went on to tell me it is cheap to print on his printer but you
shouldn't view when hot as the sweat can cause spots, he then proceeded
to show me some sweat spots.
We decided to have some fun with him when he told us for the 10th time
it was a crap sunset that we would probably sell the prints at the
markets for $100 a pop he then told us if that was the case we either
pay commission cause his boat was in the picture. I told him it
wasn't going to happen and he started getting a bit upset and said
either you pay 10% or destroy the photos I laughed and said I'd sink
your boat before I destroyed my shots.
He didn't like that and walked off.