Is lighting the problem or something else?

[jmcunha]

My photographs are not as clear as I would like them to be--even the most

focused features do not contain the detail evident in, for example, the

pictures this man takes of birds.

 

http://www.pbase.com/parrothouse/image/83356165

 

Here are two samples of mine:

http://www.photo.net/photo/7166229

http://www.photo.net/photo/7141077

 

People often say my photos look like paintings, and that's nice, but I'm trying

to figure out why they lack the clarity. Do I need better lighting, like a

flash?

 

I use a Nikon D40X w/ 55-200mm vr lens. It is difficult to photograph parrots--

they don't stop moving, and strobe lighting is frightening to them. Suggestions?

 

I'm considering the SB-600 bounce flash w/ a diffuser--do you think that would

help?

 

Many thanks,

 

J

[marcphotography]

It looks like maybe you need to bump your aperature up to get a little more depth of field. What are you using for your light source right now?

Do you edit your pictures in photoshop? If so try deepening the blacks or upping the contrast or clarity to bring out some detail. Here was my attept at a bird picture

I also lost some detail towards the bottom of the picture becuase I used a wide aperture to blur out the background.

[jmcunha]

Hi Andrew--

 

I'm using two constant photography lights with umbrellas. I do edit my photos in photoshop--they look very different from the originals when I am finished. (Although they don't seem to effect the sharpness.)

 

Your bird picture is gorgeous!! I've found that my detail is much easier in sunlight, I'm really struggling with the indoor lighting. If I bring the lights too close to the subject there's overexposure... My in camera flash creates a shadow behind...

 

Perhaps I need to take a course to really get down the aperture/shutter speed. I've been trying to understand it, and experimenting with it in my camera, but can't seem to get the aperture to be less than f/4.6. I usually shoot with my aperture priority setting.

[marcphotography]

So you are using your on camera flash in addition to the continuous lights? I would recommend not using your on camera flash at all. It is too close to the lens and it will cause you to lose detail in in the birds feathers. That could also be why you are getting over-exposure. Your shutter speed can only go 1/200th or 1/250th of a second when your flash is on. In order to bring the exposure back down you would need a higher shutter speed or smaller aperture (higher f/value) Just google "shutter speed and aperture" and you will find tons of resources explaining what they do. Your aperture probably cant go lower than 4.6 becuase your lens wont support it. if you go to s ahorter focal length you will notice that you will be able to lower your aperture.

[picturesque]

To me it is bumping up color saturation and applying local contrast (Clarity in Lightroom), and possibly sharpening.

[William Michael]

There are several issues most likely contributing their own little bits to the whole picture . . . (pun intended).

 

Looking at the image comparisons:

 

1. He uses a prime 105mm / F2.8 lens closed to F5.0; you use a 3.5x zoom F4 zoom nearly wide open and at what FL? :

 

We would expect the prime to have more contrast, better acutance and less CA, fewer distortions: basically an all up a sharper and more contrasty lens, and he is working this lens stopped down, most likely close to or at its aperture sweet spot.

 

On the other hand you are pushing an (economical) x3.5 zoom at near full aperture and at what FL? Your DoF is greatly reduced if you are winding the lens out to 200mm.

 

2. He uses a StoFen and a reasonably powerful flash, allowing him to work at 200ISO and he knows the colour temperature he is using: you use continuous lights (what power? at what distance?), into an umbrella and sometimes the on camera flash ? and at what ISO ?

 

He is getting good and powerful light distribution, and an even colour balance from the light: this allows 200ISO, less post production especially any Colour Corrections . . .as his lens is most likely more contrasty and sharper, and post production manoeuvres are thus `better`.

 

Your continuous lights might be out of colour balance relative to each other by maybe 400 Deg K, who knows? And then you are then popping in low dose 5500 to 6000 K flash into the mix which requires pushing and shoving the overall colour in post production, each at a cost.

 

3. I would bet he uses a monopod at least, perhaps a tripod, you use . . . ? It is really difficult to tell from the image posted, but in the imager of your black (coloured) bird, there seems a little (downward) camera movement.

 

Digital is not that different to film in this regard: the better the neg the better the possible print.

 

Maxims to consider:

 

1. You gotta get it right on the neg.

 

2. You gotta get the light right: photography is a lightscape

 

3. Spend $X on the camera, $3X on the glass.

 

In regard to maxim 1, I think you might need to revisit: Aperture / DoF / Lighting Techniques, and perhaps borrow a prime lens and see the difference.

 

WW

[garry edwards]

You've picked a difficult subject here, it would present a challenge to a lot of experienced photographers.

 

William W is 100% right and has made some very helpful suggestions. IMO you're approaching the whole thing backwards - you've learnt how to improve your shots in PS and you're spending a lot more time rescuing poor images on computer and drawing fancy frames around your photos than you've spent on the most important bit - the photography!

 

You won't be able to move forward until you've taken the time and trouble to learn the basics of photography and learned the importance of lighting.

[dave404]

Birds even "slow moving" turkeys move very quickly and are prone to blur because the shutter speed is not enough. However, the shot posted looks more like a DOF problem. Usually with birds the heads move so fast they show a blur unless you maintain a high shutter speed. In this case the beak is sharp, the eyes are sharp but DOF is very short and misses the back of the head. It's not a bad shot. Increase ISO shorten the aperture. I don't think this subject would tolerate lot of flash exposures.

[g._armour_van_horn]

Is the light really frightening to them? Or is it the noise? Actually, in my very limited experience shooting parrots, what really spooks them is anything above them. I'd think in terms of using broad reflectors, big enough and still enough to not put them on guard, and then light the reflectors from floor level with a lot of power.</p>

 

<p>But before you do that, you should probably find out where your current problem is. My gut says you need higher speed, provided by the strobes, to stop the action of the bird. You can find out by perching a teddy bear right where the bird would normally be, with the camera on your current tripod and using your current lights, and then look to see if the fur is sharp enough. If it is, then you're dealing with motion blur and you need the fast lights to stop it.</p>

 

<p>I would be shooting with a manual focus prime, probably trying to stay in the f/8 to f/11 range. My first choice would be my Vivitar Series One 90mm/f2.8 - I'd focus for where the bird's face is going to be, then ignore it. I prefer to focus and frame through the viewfinder, then actually time my shots looking straight at the subject rather than through the lens. It's easier for me to relate to human subjects that way, and I don't move around as much so it would be less to disturb a high-strung bird.</p>

 

<p>I don't have any VR glass, so I don't speak from my own experience on this point, but everything I've read says to turn VR off in the studio.</p>

 

<p>Here's <a href="http://www.organicbirdfood.com/templates/E-vector_B2B-shop/images/body_bg.jpg">a parrot</a> I shot a few years ago. Lighting was two flash heads in 45-inch umbrellas flanking me in a room that was too small for the parrot to get comfortable. Worse, the owner of the bird was just holding the branch in his hands, extending it in front of the camera and trying to get the bird to pose in a way that was useful as a background for his website, and I was not on a tripod. The full-frame images were plenty sharp, with all the detail you might want in the primaries (where you can actually tell how sharp things are).</p>

 

<p>You're getting great shots, but I think you can probably do better on the technical aspects.</p>

 

<p>Van

[jmcunha]

"So you are using your on camera flash in addition to the continuous lights? I would recommend not using your on camera flash at all. It is too close to the lens and it will cause you to lose detail in in the birds feathers."

 

Not usually using flash, no. It causes too many shadows to edit out, and yes, probably loss of detail.

 

What about a bounce flash? Same problem?

 

 

 

"That could also be why you are getting over-exposure. Your shutter speed can only go 1/200th or 1/250th of a second when your flash is on."

 

I don't know if you can help me with this, but I'll ask anyway. I have a Nikon D40X and have the DVD but am still struggling to figure out how to adjust my shutter speed AND f-levels at the same time?

 

For instance, if I adjust my camera to be on "shutter priority" the pictures only come out black unless there's a flash.

 

If I adjust to Aperture priority the pictures are sometimes blurry sometimes not. But I can't seem to adjust my shutter speed when on aperture priority?

 

I'm sorry to be asking idiotic questions--I'm getting nervous and desparate!

 

"In order to bring the exposure back down you would need a higher shutter speed or smaller aperture (higher f/value) Just google "shutter speed and aperture" and you will find tons of resources explaining what they do. Your aperture probably cant go lower than 4.6 becuase your lens wont support it."

 

Ok--yes, this is the problem. I try to move my aperture down and sometimes it won't go lower than 5.2, other times it'll go to 4.6... never below. You are absolutely correct. Would a 50mm (or is it 55mm?) lens address this?

 

"if you go to s ahorter focal length you will notice that you will be able to lower your aperture."

 

OK--so perhaps using my 18-55mm lens would help? I just feel very limited with this lens, unable to get as close as I'd like.

 

My gratefulness for your feedback and help!

 

Jennifer

[jmcunha]

Nadine--

 

"To me it is bumping up color saturation and applying local contrast (Clarity in Lightroom), and possibly sharpening."

 

I use photoshop 7. I generally use "auto contrast" or adjust the contrast myself--could you explain local contrast? Sharpening would be just using the sharpening tool in certain areas?

 

My apologies for being dense. :)

[marcphotography]

"What about a bounce flash? Same problem?"

 

Bounce flash would give you some nice details in the feathers but dont use it together with your continuous lights unless you put a filter in front of your flash to match the color temperature.

 

"I don't know if you can help me with this, but I'll ask anyway. I have a Nikon D40X and have the DVD but am still struggling to figure out how to adjust my shutter speed AND f-levels at the same time?"

 

If in shutter speed priority mode your Aperture will automatically be set to get the right exposure based on the shutter speed you pick. If your aperture number is blinking then you probably cant get a low enough aperture expose the scene properly with shutter speed you chose. You cant adjust your shutter speed on aperture priority because your cameras automatic metering sets the shutter speed for you based on the aerture you choose. The only way to adjust both of them manually in is manual mode but I suggest that you learn to understand TV and AV modes first.

 

"Ok--yes, this is the problem. I try to move my aperture down and sometimes it won't go lower than 5.2, other times it'll go to 4.6... never below. You are absolutely correct. Would a 50mm (or is it 55mm?) lens address this? "

 

I probably didnt explain this well. Your lens has limits on how small its aperture value can be (larger opening) it might be something like 3.5-5.6 which means at 18mm it can go down to 3.5 but at 55mm it can only go down to 5.6. You can buy more expensive lenses that have a fixed aperture of 2.8 or lower no matter what focal length you are at. I know a few good primes for canon lenses that are cheap with a large aperture, but im not sure about Nikon.

[jmcunha]

William--

 

You are so very kind to give me such detailed and thoughtful feedback.

 

"1. He uses a prime 105mm / F2.8 lens closed to F5.0; you use a 3.5x zoom F4 zoom nearly wide open and at what FL?"

 

OK--what is "prime" vs. zoom?

 

What does "nearly wide open" mean? My F-level is usually 4.6-5.4.

 

"We would expect the prime to have more contrast, better acutance and less CA, fewer distortions: basically an all up a sharper and more contrasty lens, and he is working this lens stopped down, most likely close to or at its aperture sweet spot."

 

Ah--so the lens does count a lot. ;) I am looking to invest in another lens at about $300-$500 in the near future to improve these pictures.

 

How do you find a lens's "aperture sweet spot"? What would mine (55-200mm) be?

 

"On the other hand you are pushing an (economical) x3.5 zoom at near full aperture and at what FL? Your DoF is greatly reduced if you are winding the lens out to 200mm."

 

Yes, often it is at 200mm--and therein is the DoF problem. OK--that makes sense. I understand the concept of DoF but have not been able to adjust it as easily as I'd like on my camera--it sounds like hte lens is still the problem.

 

"2. He uses a StoFen and a reasonably powerful flash, allowing him to work at 200ISO and he knows the colour temperature he is using: you use continuous lights (what power? at what distance?), into an umbrella and sometimes the on camera flash ? and at what ISO ?"

 

Goodness--you are psychic! ;)

 

Continuous lights--30 w perfect daylight 6400K bulb, usually 2-4 feet distance. Yes, into an umbrella, sometimes the flash, usually not though. I'm not sure what ISO--I can check when I'm at home.

 

"He is getting good and powerful light distribution, and an even colour balance from the light: this allows 200ISO, less post production especially any Colour Corrections . . .as his lens is most likely more contrasty and sharper, and post production manoeuvres are thus `better`."

 

"Your continuous lights might be out of colour balance relative to each other by maybe 400 Deg K, who knows? And then you are then popping in low dose 5500 to 6000 K flash into the mix which requires pushing and shoving the overall colour in post production, each at a cost."

 

How can I tell the color balance relative to each other? Both lights are from the same source, acquired at the same time.

 

Yes--lots of editing postproduction for me.

 

"3. I would bet he uses a monopod at least, perhaps a tripod, you use . . . ? It is really difficult to tell from the image posted, but in the imager of your black (coloured) bird, there seems a little (downward) camera movement."

 

At this point, nothing. I move around a lot to take the pictures and found the tripod bulky.

 

How can you tell the downward camera movement? (The blurring of the crest at the top?)

 

I usually take 100-200 pictures of each parrot and hope 10-15 "come out" -- and come out is still not at the quality I would like.

 

"In regard to maxim 1, I think you might need to revisit: Aperture / DoF / Lighting Techniques, and perhaps borrow a prime lens and see the difference."

 

Thank you, again, William for your thoughtful and thorough feedback. For the type of photography I am attempting to develop (parrot portraits), do you have a lens recommendation?

 

I will definitely go back and revisit DoF/Lighting Techniques/Aperture/Shutter Speed.

 

Jen

[jmcunha]

Hi Gary,

 

"William W is 100% right and has made some very helpful suggestions. IMO you're approaching the whole thing backwards - you've learnt how to improve your shots in PS and you're spending a lot more time rescuing poor images on computer than you've spent on the most important bit - the photography!"

 

Yes--this seems to be the case. I spend a lot of time editing the pictures in photoshop. :)

 

"You won't be able to move forward until you've taken the time and trouble to learn the basics of photography and learned the importance of lighting."

 

I've been reading books and I've watched the D40X DVD several times, but it seems that at this point (either I'm thick headed or these birds are hard!) perhaps it would be best to take a course. The local community college offers a basic course--but it's in film, black and white, and that course is the mandatory starting one. Would you recommend an online course instead? If an online one, any "schools" or courses you think are better than others? I had been looking into the NY School of Photography, but is there another that is the same quality and less $? (I am an impoverished poverty lawyer!)

 

Thanks for your thoughts!

[jmcunha]

Hi David,

 

"Increase ISO shorten the aperture. I don't think this subject would tolerate lot of flash exposures."

 

If I understand all of the comments correctly, with my lens (Nikkor 55-200mm VR) the DoF/Aperture aren't going to be very adjustable, esp when I'm using it at the 200mm length?

 

Thanks!

 

J

[jmcunha]

Hi Van,

 

"Is the light really frightening to them? Or is it the noise? Actually, in my very limited experience shooting parrots, what really spooks them is anything above them. I'd think in terms of using broad reflectors, big enough and still enough to not put them on guard, and then light the reflectors from floor level with a lot of power."

 

In the area I'm photographing, almost all of the birds are pretty nervous in general about being there--I have to go very slowly, and getting them on the basket itself is a feat.

 

What kind of reflectors are you speaking of? Would this be ground lighting with some sort of reflective mat/sheet to aim the light toward them? Or an umbrella?

 

This seems like a good idea--I look forward to hearing more about it!

 

"But before you do that, you should probably find out where your current problem is. My gut says you need higher speed, provided by the strobes, to stop the action of the bird."

 

OK--and there's no way to adjust shutter speed or anything else on-camera to compensate for this?

 

"You can find out by perching a teddy bear right where the bird would normally be, with the camera on your current tripod and using your current lights, and then look to see if the fur is sharp enough. If it is, then you're dealing with motion blur and you need the fast lights to stop it."

 

Excellent idea--I shall try this. Thanks!! Very helpful idea!!!!

 

"I would be shooting with a manual focus prime, probably trying to stay in the f/8 to f/11 range."

 

Re: manual focus, at least for me it's very difficult because the birds are moving so very much and so quickly that just when it gets into focus it's out again. Is this the DoF problem with my 200mm lens? If I had a different lens/extension would this be easier?

 

What does "manual focus prime" mean? When I shoot I try to keep it at f/4.6-f5.4--when higher it seems the DoF is even smaller. If in manual focus prime would that be different so f8-f11 would work better?

 

"My first choice would be my Vivitar Series One 90mm/f2.8 - I'd focus for where the bird's face is going to be, then ignore it. I prefer to focus and frame through the viewfinder, then actually time my shots looking straight at the subject rather than through the lens. It's easier for me to relate to human subjects that way, and I don't move around as much so it would be less to disturb a high-strung bird."

 

This is very interesting. So if the bird's face is going to be within approximately a 1-foot depth of field, I can focus on that area with an appropriate DoF / FL and then move around a lot less... Very good idea. I'm assuming you use a tripod. :) I have one but don't use it much. Perhaps that would help.

 

"I don't have any VR glass, so I don't speak from my own experience on this point, but everything I've read says to turn VR off in the studio."

 

Oh really? What is the difference between on and off in the studio?

 

"Here's a parrot I shot a few years ago. Lighting was two flash heads in 45-inch umbrellas flanking me in a room that was too small for the parrot to get comfortable. Worse, the owner of the bird was just holding the branch in his hands, extending it in front of the camera and trying to get the bird to pose in a way that was useful as a background for his website, and I was not on a tripod. The full-frame images were plenty sharp, with all the detail you might want in the primaries (where you can actually tell how sharp things are).

 

You're getting great shots, but I think you can probably do better on the technical aspects."

 

Cool picture--and very good for being under those conditions! Still sharper than many of mine! I think the technical stuff is what's really keeping me down. Any course recommendations? :) I've read books but I think the interaction of a course would help a lot more.

 

Thanks again for your thoughtful feedback!

 

Jen

 

Van

[garry edwards]

*I've been reading books and I've watched the D40X DVD several times, but it seems that at this point (either I'm thick headed or these birds are hard!) perhaps it would be best to take a course. The local community college offers a basic course--but it's in film, black and white, and that course is the mandatory starting one. Would you recommend an online course instead? If an online one, any "schools" or courses you think are better than others? I had been looking into the NY School of Photography, but is there another that is the same quality and less $? *

 

I won't comment on your statement that you're an impoverished property lawyer :-)

 

I stick with my original post - which you seem to accept - that you need to learn the basics of photography and save your photoshop efforts for improving good shots, not for trying to rescue bad ones, but I don't know enough about the American teaching scene to advise you. Hopefully other people can. But a good starting point may be to click on the 'Learning' tab here on PN. Some of the info may be a bit dated now but don't be put off if this is the case, it will be just as relevant.

 

Once you've got that sorted you might like to look at lighting itself, and a good place to start might be the lighting themes in this forum. http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00BjHh

[jmcunha]

Hi Garry--

 

Thanks for your quick response! I'll check out the learning tab and keep reading more about all of this. Lighting themes looks like a good place to start too. :)

 

Have a good day!

 

Jen