Thank you. I achieved the long exposure by taking a picture right after the sunset, when light becoming low, it is a little bit 'tricky' to calculate the exposure because the light is changing in every second.
Direct link |
Posted on Feb 27, 2012 at 10:15:41 UTC
as 1st comment
Just for clearing: The drop of water is real, not photoshopped!!! The king fisher was standing on a branch, I didn't hold it in my hands!!! I was sitting in a tent and waited for the kingfisher to get out of the water, I missed the landing, but I caught the water drop. The uncropped frame (that was printed and is hanging on my wall) is here: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6945761380/photos/66631/353_5333?inalbum=birds There is no PP manipulation in this picture, it is not my way. Every one is invited to see the original frame on my computer, this is the only thing that I can say for all the scepticals. I hope that I gave the right answets for you all.
Again, thank you all for commenting on this picture.
The drop of water is not brightened,the bright sky and bright objects from the far BG reflects in the drop of the water an causes it to be bright.
Direct link |
Posted on Jan 5, 2012 at 06:45:30 UTC
IMHO the uncroped pic it's far nicer ... more balanced, less "porno-look"
it is a definitive moment, that's for sure
gashô
Thank you. I think that you are right, especially for printing, but for the challenge that I sent this picture "Extraordinary timing" the crop is focusing the observer on these details.
Direct link |
Posted on Jan 4, 2012 at 19:39:30 UTC
If water is just dripping off the fish, it would have been a split second from getting it off the water, and yet the bird is just sitting there.
If the droplet is that large, it will have to be a very viscous liquid, like treacle. For it to be water, the drop would have to be very much smaller.
Mr KimTeo, the picture was taken in a pond were a lot of photographers here are shooting kingfisher pictures, I can't understand why you are so anxious to harm my cridibilty. I also gave you the uncropped picture im my former post. P.s. The picture is the first of 5 pictures series that I took in 1 second, as I mentioned before, I tried to catch the landing but I missed it, so this picture is right after landing.
Direct link |
Posted on Jan 4, 2012 at 17:15:02 UTC
Just for clearing: The drop of water is real, not photoshopped!!! The king fisher was standing on a branch, I didn't hold it in my hands!!! I was sitting in a tent and waited for the kingfisher to get out of the water, I missed the landing, but I caught the water drop. The uncropped frame (that was printed and is hanging on my wall) is here: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6945761380/photos/66631/353_5333?inalbum=birds There is no PP manipulation in this picture, it is not my way. Every one is invited to see the original frame on my computer, this is the only thing that I can say for all the scepticals. I hope that I gave the right answets for you all.
Again, thank you all for commenting on this picture.
Direct link |
Posted on Jan 4, 2012 at 16:52:08 UTC
as 22nd comment
| 5 replies
salesgenie: Great picture! I don't think it is photoshopped but common Kingfishers do not stab their prey...they grasp it in their beak.
However if you hold the birds legs and stab a minnow onto the beak it makes the shot possible. Search google images for "kingfisher bird hand" and you will see how it is possible.
Still a great photo even if staged...congrats.
Would be nice to see uncropped.
This is the uncropped picture: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6945761380/photos/66631/353_5333?inalbum=birds I can't understand claims like "if you hold the birds legs", this is very odd... The kingfisher is diving very fast to the water, sometimes when the fish is little bit large for him he is stabbing the fish like an arrow, I have few more examples for this.
Direct link |
Posted on Jan 4, 2012 at 16:45:30 UTC
Solarcoaster: Fish and water drop look photoshopped. So much for real photography.
sorry to dissapoint you, no PS here with the drop of water, this is not my way and I am not doing these kind of manipulations in my pictures!!!
Mr. KimTeo your assumptions are very wrong and the fact that you are 100% sure is annoying, I would invite you and every one to take a look at my original picture to see the drop of the water. Just a little fact, the kingfisher and the fish are very small, you can make a search on the net to see the size of this kingfisher...
Direct link |
Posted on Jan 4, 2012 at 16:33:55 UTC
> That's quite a shot. I've been trying to get something half this good here in Japan, but have not been very fortunate. How close were you to the bird?
Very close, 3-4 meters approx.
Direct link |
Posted on Apr 17, 2011 at 20:45:33 UTC
as 2nd comment
> Looks so artificial is it a model mocked up in a studio?
This is almost without a post-processing, as a matter of fact I don't like heavy PP in any of my pictures. The light on the rock came from the moonlight, it wasn't full moonlight, in that way I got dark sky with seen stars. It is so sad that people cannot accept that my results are 'pure' photography in nature...
This picture was taken using my digital camera while my film camera took a 6 hours (approx.) exposure of this picture: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6945761380/photos/54352/star-trails?inalbum=star-trails This picture was scanned from positive slide, FujiChrome Provia 100F.
Direct link |
Posted on Mar 26, 2010 at 20:57:21 UTC
as 1st comment
Thank you for your comment. I got the human shade in the tent with few seconds of exposure, the place was very dark and after using my light to fill the frame (where I wanted) the left hours were totally dark.
Direct link |
Posted on Mar 15, 2010 at 16:48:39 UTC
as 1st comment
Israel
Thank you.
I achieved the long exposure by taking a picture right after the sunset, when light becoming low, it is a little bit 'tricky' to calculate the exposure because the light is changing in every second.
Thanks. It is one shot, if you enlarge the picture you can see some motion blur in some parts.
Yes it was taken on film (slides).
Thank you
elroyie: Thank you all for your comments.
Just for clearing:
The drop of water is real, not photoshopped!!!
The king fisher was standing on a branch, I didn't hold it in my hands!!!
I was sitting in a tent and waited for the kingfisher to get out of the water, I missed the landing, but I caught the water drop.
The uncropped frame (that was printed and is hanging on my wall) is here: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6945761380/photos/66631/353_5333?inalbum=birds
There is no PP manipulation in this picture, it is not my way.
Every one is invited to see the original frame on my computer, this is the only thing that I can say for all the scepticals.
I hope that I gave the right answets for you all.
Again, thank you all for commenting on this picture.
The drop of water is not brightened,the bright sky and bright objects from the far BG reflects in the drop of the water an causes it to be bright.
putomax: congratulations elroyie!!!
IMHO the uncroped pic it's far nicer
... more balanced, less "porno-look"
it is a definitive moment, that's for sure
gashô
Thank you.
I think that you are right, especially for printing, but for the challenge that I sent this picture "Extraordinary timing" the crop is focusing the observer on these details.
KimTeo: An unrealistic picture.
If water is just dripping off the fish, it would have been a split second from getting it off the water, and yet the bird is just sitting there.
If the droplet is that large, it will have to be a very viscous liquid, like treacle. For it to be water, the drop would have to be very much smaller.
Mr KimTeo, the picture was taken in a pond were a lot of photographers here are shooting kingfisher pictures, I can't understand why you are so anxious to harm my cridibilty. I also gave you the uncropped picture im my former post.
P.s.
The picture is the first of 5 pictures series that I took in 1 second, as I mentioned before, I tried to catch the landing but I missed it, so this picture is right after landing.
Thank you all for your comments.
Just for clearing:
The drop of water is real, not photoshopped!!!
The king fisher was standing on a branch, I didn't hold it in my hands!!!
I was sitting in a tent and waited for the kingfisher to get out of the water, I missed the landing, but I caught the water drop.
The uncropped frame (that was printed and is hanging on my wall) is here: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6945761380/photos/66631/353_5333?inalbum=birds
There is no PP manipulation in this picture, it is not my way.
Every one is invited to see the original frame on my computer, this is the only thing that I can say for all the scepticals.
I hope that I gave the right answets for you all.
Again, thank you all for commenting on this picture.
salesgenie: Great picture! I don't think it is photoshopped but common Kingfishers do not stab their prey...they grasp it in their beak.
However if you hold the birds legs and stab a minnow onto the beak it makes the shot possible. Search google images for "kingfisher bird hand" and you will see how it is possible.
Still a great photo even if staged...congrats.
Would be nice to see uncropped.
This is the uncropped picture:
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6945761380/photos/66631/353_5333?inalbum=birds
I can't understand claims like "if you hold the birds legs", this is very odd...
The kingfisher is diving very fast to the water, sometimes when the fish is little bit large for him he is stabbing the fish like an arrow, I have few more examples for this.
Solarcoaster: Fish and water drop look photoshopped. So much for real photography.
sorry to dissapoint you, no PS here with the drop of water, this is not my way and I am not doing these kind of manipulations in my pictures!!!
Mr. KimTeo your assumptions are very wrong and the fact that you are 100% sure is annoying, I would invite you and every one to take a look at my original picture to see the drop of the water. Just a little fact, the kingfisher and the fish are very small, you can make a search on the net to see the size of this kingfisher...
ParomaGhosh: OMG..this is your second challenge of challenges win isn't it? Great going!!..and of course an excellent pic :)
Yes it is the second time, lucky me :)
Thank you.
Thank you all for your words, it was great to see that.
Thank you all for your words
> That's quite a shot. I've been trying to get something half this good here in Japan, but have not been very fortunate. How close were you to the bird?
Very close, 3-4 meters approx.
very good use of the moonlight.
Thank you all for your words and thank you for the voters.
> as an off-roader - I must say this is a dream photo
> even i drive a real Jeep :-)
> /Karl
>
Karl, this picture combines my two hobbies, photography and 'offroading', this jeep was a dream for me few years ago and now I own one...
Excellent frame!
Thank you for your words.
Thank you!
The picture was taken in Israel, Palmahim shore.
> Looks so artificial is it a model mocked up in a studio?
This is almost without a post-processing, as a matter of fact I don't like heavy PP in any of my pictures. The light on the rock came from the moonlight, it wasn't full moonlight, in that way I got dark sky with seen stars.
It is so sad that people cannot accept that my results are 'pure' photography in nature...
This picture was taken using my digital camera while my film camera took a 6 hours (approx.) exposure of this picture: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6945761380/photos/54352/star-trails?inalbum=star-trails
This picture was scanned from positive slide, FujiChrome Provia 100F.
Thank you for your comment.
I got the human shade in the tent with few seconds of exposure, the place was very dark and after using my light to fill the frame (where I wanted) the left hours were totally dark.
Thank you for your words.
You are right, the model moved slightly during the exposure, fortunately it was reasonable to the final result.