Eagle at Dawn - Needs PP: Hi, I was excited over the shot as I may never get another shot like it, but the conditions were less than optimal. Will anything salvage it and, for future...

gstephens3 Loc: Northwest Georgia

Hi,

I was excited over the shot as I may never get another shot like it, but the conditions were less than optimal. Will anything salvage it and, for future reference, is there anything I could do differently when I shoot to improve this shot? What upgraded equipment (lens 2.4/400 mm?) would help? It was early dawn before sunrise. Sony a65, f/5.6, 1/2500, ISO - 1600, 300 mm focal length (the longest lens I own).

Eagle with breakfast for babies

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

First of all, I think it's a very cool photo! You have a silhouette because your camera exposed for the lighter sky behind. You'd have to be prepared for that with exposure compensation or other settings.

Longer lenses are very expensive (well, on my budget anyway) and heavy and most need tripod. Up to you! Or check out the many posts (including mine) with the Canon SX50, 40 and P510 as alternate for zoom capabilities.

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

Linda From Maine wrote:

First of all, I think it's a very cool photo! You have a silhouette because your camera exposed for the lighter sky behind. You'd have to be prepared for that with exposure compensation or other settings.

Longer lenses are very expensive (well, on my budget anyway) and heavy and most need tripod. Up to you! Or check out the many posts (including mine) with the Canon SX50, 40 and P510 as alternate for zoom capabilities.

I was banned from here for editing a shot without asking, she may be happy but have you asked, she has not said do it in the original post

gstephens3 Loc: Northwest Georgia

JR1 wrote:

I was banned from here for editing a shot without asking, she may be happy but have you asked, she has not said do it in the original post

Sorry, I should have made it clear. Any editing would be most appreciated. I felt like the shot had potential in the hands of some talented folks but I am not great at all with PP. Hope to improve if I can ever slow down enough to play.

gstephens3 Loc: Northwest Georgia

Linda From Maine wrote:

First of all, I think it's a very cool photo! You have a silhouette because your camera exposed for the lighter sky behind. You'd have to be prepared for that with exposure compensation or other settings.

Longer lenses are very expensive (well, on my budget anyway) and heavy and most need tripod. Up to you! Or check out the many posts (including mine) with the Canon SX50, 40 and P510 as alternate for zoom capabilities.

Thanks. You already made it look much better. That is some great advice.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

gstephens3 wrote:

Thanks. You already made it look much better. That is some great advise.

:) - all I did was crop this one. I tried a couple of other things with my very limited expertise, but couldn't lighten or sharpen it successfully.

birdpix Loc: South East Pennsylvania

Of course a longer lens would have gotten a closer shot under these circumstances but I know several peoople who shoot birds in flight with 300mm lenses. Sometimes they attach a 1.4 Tele extender which gives them 42omm

This photo is probably unrecoverable as the eagle is extremely underexposed. Linda has it correct in that you needed to use exposure compensation if you were shooting in any of the auto modes. If you shot in manual you could have taken a meter reading off on one of the tree trunks and been much closer to properly exposing the bird.

dickerst Loc: California Desert

Cropped tried to do some adjustment, not much there to work with. Did you shoot it in RAW or the JPEG you posted?

gstephens3 Loc: Northwest Georgia

dickerst wrote:

Cropped tried to do some adjustment, not much there to work with. Did you shoot it in RAW or the JPEG you posted?

JPEG. As soon as I don't shoot RAW I regret it. I thought it might be a lost cause but thought is was worth asking.

gstephens3 Loc: Northwest Georgia

birdpix wrote:

Of course a longer lens would have gotten a closer... (show quote)

Never thought of taking a meter reading off of one of the tree trunks. I don't know why but exposure is one topic I seem to have trouble grasping. My mind balks at a few things - algebra, engines, and, apparently, exposure! :( Gotta give it another try.

birdpix Loc: South East Pennsylvania

gstephens3 wrote:

Never thought of taking a meter reading off of one of the tree trunks. I don't know why but exposure is one topic I seem to have trouble grasping. My mind balks at a few things - algebra, engines, and, apparently, exposure! :( Gotta give it another try.

Probably one of the best books out there is Bryan Peterson's "Understanding Exposure". It is in layman's terms and therefore easy to understand.

If you are not expecting an Eagle, then it is difficult to know how to expose. The opportunity presents itself so fast that you don't have time to react especially if shooting manually. If you were out to get Eagles, then you could have used some other object to set exposure from something that was in the same light and approximately a middle gray.

It may have been a good time to have exposure bracketting set up on your camera to take 3 exposures 1 stop apart. It could even be biased to expose one at the meter reading and the next one 1 stop over then two stops over. Dawn has its own problems because the light is constantly changing too.

Keep trying!

Bram boy Loc: Vancouver Island B.C. Canada

gstephens3 wrote:

Hi,

I was excited over the shot as I may never get another shot like it, but the conditions were less than optimal. Will anything salvage it and, for future reference, is there anything I could do differently when I shoot to improve this shot? What upgraded equipment (lens 2.4/400 mm?) would help? It was early dawn before sunrise. Sony a65, f/5.6, 1/2500, ISO - 1600, 300 mm focal length (the longest lens I own).

Its a lot of luck : ishoot eagles also, there all over the place here , not a day goes by that i dont see them if i go out any where , my lens zooms to 300mm
Which is equal to 450 mm on my dx . But it sure would be nice to have a 500mm which would get me to 750mm equal on my d90. That would fill the
frame a lot better than trying to crop it up . How many shots did you take of
this one . I just hold my finger down on these shots . It does not look like
light is in your favour . On dull days i open all the way , over expose the sky
up to one or two stops . If you use a pod on eagles a monopod is the best

Your snapping away , and it jumps of the tree limb it will be easery to follow it
With your finger on the trigger snapping as many as you can
one or two stops

gstephens3 Loc: Northwest Georgia

birdpix wrote:

Probably one of the best books out there is Bryan ... (show quote)

Just got out of the office and to the camera store. Buying the book right now. Maybe is will help!

tinfoilpixels

Here's my attempt, improved a little.

(I'm going to try to upload, but after Photoshop it's taking up more space hope this works)

gstephens3 Loc: Northwest Georgia

Bram boy wrote:

Its a lot of luck : ishoot eagles also, there a... (show quote)

I would love a longer lens. Maybe in July. Looking at a 400 mm, don't think the budget will swing a 500 mm yet. I was debating about a monopod. Tripods just are a pain when I want to move fast but a Monopod might work. Thanks for the hints.