PDA

View Full Version : Mor Eagle Pics


phecksel
04-08-2007, 09:18 PM
I was fussing over the temporary loss of my first eagle pics. Even if they were not of the best quality. Finally found the original file, and working to clean it up so I can at least print a 8x10, figuring I'd never get another chance...

Well, sitting in the big fluffy chair, not real happy about the 20 deg F temperatures on a dewinterized boat, when a large dark object catches my attention and lands about 10 houses away. Woo Hoo my buddy has returned to give me another opportunity. Grabbed the camera, lock open the screen door, and wait, for a whole 5 minutes.

[http://www.hecksel.com/images/Phil/nature/eagles/a/images/DSC_10264.jpg

Here's the rest (http://www.hecksel.com/images/Phil/nature/eagles/a/index.html)of the pics

chudson
04-08-2007, 09:21 PM
Great job!!! Those are excellent, Cool watchin nature at work!!!

phecksel
04-08-2007, 09:29 PM
Leroy,

Responding to your message in the other thread, did you click on the picture and expand it to the full size I posted? The actual raw data file is very very sharp. I may try an experiment to take this pic up to poster size....assuming I can find a place to put something like that, LOL.

Thank you for looking

Phil

Leroy
04-08-2007, 09:32 PM
Phil;

I did and even expanded that 50% more and it just kept looking better!

Great shot! Tell me about your camera setup!

milkmania
04-08-2007, 10:11 PM
awesome pics!

thanks for sharing:)

phecksel
04-08-2007, 10:17 PM
Phil;

I did and even expanded that 50% more and it just kept looking better!

Great shot! Tell me about your camera setup!
That is essentially a low res jpg

Nikon D50 + Sigma 70-300
100% crop on Raw file. White balance corrected, exposure +.5, Slight USM.
Right now the flash is sitting on the camera to try and pull some of the shadows out, if I ever get another chance like this again.

phecksel
04-08-2007, 10:18 PM
awesome pics!

thanks for sharing:)
Thank you
making up for this F* SNOW and VERY COLD TEMPS!

Leroy
04-08-2007, 11:03 PM
Nice camera, I have same but with Nikon 55-200. I wish I had better glass now!

trickskier
04-09-2007, 08:55 AM
Awesome Pic Phil.......The Bald Eagle has to be one of the most beautiful creatures on this earth!

suedv
04-09-2007, 09:02 AM
Very nice pic!

JimN
04-09-2007, 09:08 AM
phecksel- Look for a magazine called PC Photo and check the ads for digital large format printers. There are some who will take an e-mailed file, print it for you and mail it in a tube. There's one here in Milwaukee called SPLAT! but I don't know if they work that way. I can't see any reason they wouldn't, though.

Upper Michigan Prostar190
04-09-2007, 10:14 AM
Phecksel, your a great photographer!:toast: Dang nice work! I dont care what Hoosier says about you, you do fine work!:D

bigmac
04-09-2007, 10:37 AM
phecksel- Look for a magazine called PC Photo and check the ads for digital large format printers. There are some who will take an e-mailed file, print it for you and mail it in a tube. There's one here in Milwaukee called SPLAT! but I don't know if they work that way. I can't see any reason they wouldn't, though.
Those are all over the place. The best one I've found for JPEGs is Kodak (Kodak Gallery (http://www.kodakgallery.com/Welcome.jsp)) . I've ordered prints as big as 20x30. They're exceptionally well done, printed on Kodak paper, all that stuff. You just edit the photo as you want it, crop it for the size print you want and upload the JPEG file to them. They print it and mail it to you.

They do exceptional work and I've found that they don't dink around with color and exposure. They don't use any custom printer profiles, but if your monitor is calibrated properly it should be no problem. Every print I've ever had from them matched my color expectations exactly. If you prefer to have prints made from your Nikon .nef file, or if you want it printed from a converted TIFF, I've also used White House Custom Color (http://www.whcc.com/). They're excellent, but spendy. IMHO, there's not enough difference between Kodak Gallery's large prints from JPEG and WHCC's large prints from RAW to justify the cost except in cases where we're talking a gallery showing.

phecksel
04-09-2007, 08:19 PM
Nice camera, I have same but with Nikon 55-200. I wish I had better glass now!
I went with the 18-70 and sigma 70-300
Then bought the 85mm 1.8, which is turning into my fav lens
Bought the SB-800 flash, and it drives me crazy. It has added a factor or two to the complexity of photography.
Next on the purchase list, is likely to be the 70-200 2.8, which would be my first step into pro glass.

phecksel
04-09-2007, 08:23 PM
Those are all over the place. The best one I've found for JPEGs is Kodak (Kodak Gallery (http://www.kodakgallery.com/Welcome.jsp)) . I've ordered prints as big as 20x30. They're exceptionally well done, printed on Kodak paper, all that stuff. You just edit the photo as you want it, crop it for the size print you want and upload the JPEG file to them. They print it and mail it to you.

They do exceptional work and I've found that they don't dink around with color and exposure. They don't use any custom printer profiles, but if your monitor is calibrated properly it should be no problem. Every print I've ever had from them matched my color expectations exactly. If you prefer to have prints made from your Nikon .nef file, or if you want it printed from a converted TIFF, I've also used White House Custom Color (http://www.whcc.com/). They're excellent, but spendy. IMHO, there's not enough difference between Kodak Gallery's large prints from JPEG and WHCC's large prints from RAW to justify the cost except in cases where we're talking a gallery showing.

There's a reason why the photography forums recommend staying away from Kodak. Honestly don't remember why.

I have been using www.mpix.com. Their product is unbelievable, and very high quality. Another one that gets excellent reviews, is Costco. I don't have one close by, and the one print they did for me was great.

phecksel
04-09-2007, 08:27 PM
Phecksel, your a great photographer!:toast: Dang nice work! I dont care what Hoosier says about you, you do fine work!:D

Thank you for the compliment.

I got the camera for the sports of our youngest. Had quite a few photos printed in the local paper. Last one, still has the publisher fussing at me. They cleaned out her supply of papers in hours! Here's the link (http://www.hecksel.com/images/Phil/published%20photos/2007_03_29%20belleville%20area%20independent.pdf)t o the PDF of that issue

bigmac
04-09-2007, 08:35 PM
Next on the purchase list, is likely to be the 70-200 2.8, which would be my first step into pro glass.

I have the 'big three' in pro Nikkor zooms (17-35/2.8, 28-70/2.8, 70-200 VR, plus a few other speciality lenses) but I use that 70-200/2.8 lens more than any other I own. I highly recommend it. It's a behemoth though, so you have to be a little careful using it on a lighter camera like the D50 where there's no titanium frame to secure the lens mount.

atlfootr
04-09-2007, 09:39 PM
Awesome Pic Phil.......The Bald Eagle has to be one of the most beautiful creatures on this earth!DittO Phil.
Other than our backyard "FLA GATOR" :rolleyes:

phecksel
04-09-2007, 09:45 PM
I have the 'big three' in pro Nikkor zooms (17-35/2.8, 28-70/2.8, 70-200 VR, plus a few other speciality lenses) but I use that 70-200/2.8 lens more than any other I own. I highly recommend it. It's a behemoth though, so you have to be a little careful using it on a lighter camera like the D50 where there's no titanium frame to secure the lens mount.
That 70-200 is worth drooling over, LOL
Can't say that I could justify the other two you have. The 18-70 does a good enuff job for what I used it for. If I want the low light or portrait, the 85 is the key. I had an 18-200 on order, and while waiting, cancelled it. Professional photo friend is trying to get me to look at the sigma 70-200. 1/2 the cost {although no VR}, but it's supposed to focus even faster. I don't think it will be on the list this year, but maybe next.

phecksel
04-09-2007, 09:46 PM
DittO Phil.
Other than our backyard "FLA GATOR" :rolleyes:
no killer peacocks?

atlfootr
04-09-2007, 09:46 PM
phecksel- Look for a magazine called PC Photo and check the ads for digital large format printers.
There are some who will take an e-mailed file, print it for you and mail it in a tube. Wal-Mart Photo Dept. makes GAINT POSTERS from digitals / 35mm's or even prints! :)

betsy&david Harrison
04-09-2007, 09:49 PM
What beautiful pics you take! We just had a chick hatch out on one of our islands off the coast. There maybe web pics at Channel Islands National Park site.

bigmac
04-09-2007, 10:12 PM
That 70-200 is worth drooling over, LOL
Can't say that I could justify the other two you have. The 18-70 does a good enuff job for what I used it for. If I want the low light or portrait, the 85 is the key. I had an 18-200 on order, and while waiting, cancelled it. Professional photo friend is trying to get me to look at the sigma 70-200. 1/2 the cost {although no VR}, but it's supposed to focus even faster. I don't think it will be on the list this year, but maybe next.
30 years of photography...never been a big fan of Sigma. The optics are OK, but the few Sigma lenses I've owned over the years have just never had the quality I wanted nor have they tended to stand up to the kind of abuse I need a camera and zoom lens to endure. The Nikkors OTOH have never let me down and that's about the only way I go these days. But they are spendy.

phecksel
04-09-2007, 10:42 PM
30 years of photography...never been a big fan of Sigma. The optics are OK, but the few Sigma lenses I've owned over the years have just never had the quality I wanted nor have they tended to stand up to the kind of abuse I need a camera and zoom lens to endure. The Nikkors OTOH have never let me down and that's about the only way I go these days. But they are spendy.
I'm new to photography, "borrowed" my dad's minolta equipment from mom after he passed away. Quickly realized I HAD to go to digital. Sigma was a compromise to SWMBO, to stay within budget, and for that lens, is better then the equivalent Nikkor. My equipment is babied, worse then the Mastercraft, LOL. The other thing Nikkor lenses have going for them, is resale value. I picked up the 85 used, super cheap... From a guy who said it was too soft. Yes it was soft, close up, 1.8 OUTDOORS! He mixed up dof and focus, to my benefit. Somebody at nikoncafe just had a 70-200vr for sale, for $1150, it was gone in a couple of hours. I did promise SWMBO to not buy any more equipment for awhile, LOL

bigmac
04-10-2007, 07:55 AM
....Quickly realized I HAD to go to digital. Sigma was a compromise to SWMBO, to stay within budget, and for that lens, is better then the equivalent Nikkor. My equipment is babied, worse then the Mastercraft, LOL.

Yep. Film is dead. Within a few years it will be the same curiousity as vinyl LPs for music.

My D2H really gets abused - what a great camera. I've contemplated a D2Xs but I don't really want that much resolution. I'm waiting/hoping for a D3H.

phecksel
04-10-2007, 05:11 PM
Yep. Film is dead. Within a few years it will be the same curiousity as vinyl LPs for music.

My D2H really gets abused - what a great camera. I've contemplated a D2Xs but I don't really want that much resolution. I'm waiting/hoping for a D3H.

Biggest problem I had was getting film developed properly, was either the pictures were color shifted, or couldn't get good digital images. Local popular camera store's film developer and I had an extremely long discussion about jpg size and "pixel" size. She had something messed up on her equipment and refused to believe it. Few months later store manager and I were talking about some camera equipment, and happened to mention that discussion. Apparently even though she insisted their equipment was set up properly, they brought the mfg back in who discovered their equipment was broke.