Hummingbird flash placement

[george_hager]

I'm doing some hummingbird photography and am having trouble getting

the throat of the males to take on an iridescent sheen. I have the

birds, background and flower lit well enough, (with three flashes),

but would appreciate it if someone can tell me the best placement for

another flash to get the throat to take on that iridescent glow.

 

At this time, I have one flash 60 degrees off the lens axis to the

right and slightly above the bird, and one flash 20 degrees off axis

to the left and about even in elevation with the bird. The birds are

facing to the left.

 

Should I move the flashes I have or add another one? Should the

flash be close to the lens axis? Below the bird facing slightly up

(unnatural)?

 

Thanks for any help you offer.

[m._huber]

2 Flashes should be enough. Placement seems o.k. Try different film. My shots with Velvia have that iridescent look.

[kurt_heintzelman]

I've had the same problem with Ruby's and found that I had to position the lens for a frontal shot; that is, it seemed to me that the red coloration was most visible when viewing their throats from the front, with front lighting. I found that shooting from the side almost always resulted in "black beards" or throats, unless the bird happened to turn toward the lens at the moment of exposure. If memory serves me, it seems that their throat feathers or scales act rather like a diffraction grating, and when seen from the proper angle, they tend to selectively REFLECT red light, rather than those neck scales or feathers actually being red pigmented. As I recall, the colors of butterflies are due to a similar phenomenon. (Remember how you could see "rainbow" colors when tilting the flat surfaces of a phonograph record around in bright light? The record grooves act as a diffraction grating, breaking up white light into spectral colors). But then again, I could be mistaken!

[john_gerlach]

George,

 

I puzzled over this problem for six weeks in April and May with Anna's Hummingbirds. From my photos, other published photos, and just looking at them, it seems the throat has to face the camera to get the most color. It also helped if I shot slightly up at the hummingbird so I could see more of the belly and especially all of the throat. You can position your sugar water lure (flower) so the bird has to approach it while it's throat faces the camera. Shots from the side often failed to get the colors in the throat. This isn't the answer I was looking for either. I was hoping if I put flash A at angle b and flash B at angle c, I would always get the color in the throat, but no combination of angles worked very well unless the throat was facing the camera. If you find a better answer, please let me know.

[ryan_taylor1]

Full marks Kurt! Although there is some pigment in the feathers, the irridescent coloration is a result of diffraction. The physical structure of the feathers results in a scattering of light except when viewed from a certain angle. Actually more than one angle can be used to see the irridescence but the field of view is relatively small. If you were to hold a hummer in hand (hypothetically) and turn it, you would see the feathers go through several changes of irridescence as the physical structure of the feathers reflected and then scattered light depending on the angle.

 

Kurt was searching for a word for this effect, perhaps you were thinking of the Tyndall effect. This is exactly the effect I just talked about but I think it refers specifically to shades of blue irridescence.

[ryan_taylor1]

Whoops, I should have mentioned as Kurt did, that it is diffraction grating. That is, white light is seperated into its color components and reflected. This occurs only at certain angles; some angles will reflect certain lightwavelengths to the eye, and other angles will scattered away the colors.

 

As John and others have suggested, it seems that photographing the bird in profile probably results in poor iridesence. In this case the angle is such that the light is scattered away. Placing a flash in front of the bird won't help as the light still has to come back to the camera which is shooting from the side. The lens must be facing the bird at such an angle that will result in the irridesence being reflected to the film.

[gregscott]

The answer definitely varies with species. I haven't found ANY flash placement which works reliably with some species. Others, like the broadbills, you just can't miss. Some species, like the Ruby throat, 14 degrees on each side of the lens works just fine. I think this also worked well with broadtails. On the other hand, blue throats, magnificents, and black chins and coasta drove me crazy this year until one evening:

After sunset, with the sky somewhat bright blue and no overcast, in the somewhat dark twilight as I was tearing down my equipment, I saw the brightest irridescence I've ever seen on a magnificant, at least in terms of relative to the other illumination of the bird. First, the light was quite indirect and diffuse, and from overhead. As I pondered, I realized that it's much easier to see the ambience in natural light than flash. I don't your answer in flash, but I found a practical "workaround". Make sure you use a little ambient light. Expose so that your ambient light is 2 stops underexposed. You'll get a natural (but dark) background, or you can use a white card in the background, or whatever. But the ambient light will somehow provide more irridescence. I've got some photos posted on my section (Greg Scott) here, or you can visit my website, www.gregscott.com, to see my examples from year 2006. Warning: some of my "misses" have gorgets "colorized" in photoshop. The brighter the irridescence, the more likely that it's the real mccoy.

[gregscott]

An example of an unmanipulated irridescent blue throat with just a little help from ambient light.<div></div>