Part 2 - Off-Topic - advice, experiences, and examples for images being processed in DxO Photolab

[mikemyers]

@swmurray

Steve Perry is one of many youtubers that profess to have the secret key to photography success.

I prefer the works of real photographers such as Michael Forsberg, Melissa Groo, Thomas Mangelson, Joel Sartore and others. Of course, I can’t play the guitar as well as Eric Clapton either!

As I see it, you miss the point. Let’s assume that those “real” photographers are far better than Steve. So what? You can’t “play the guitar as well”, or likely can’t photograph as well.

On the other hand, Steve Perry, and his website/forum is devoted to helping the rest of us (me included) improve… Back Country Gallery Photography Forums. To me, that makes Steve, and his forum, and his participants FAR more helpful than all the “real” photographers you know put together.

Sort of like Ken Rockwell - you may hate him, and his writing style, but he has gathered more useful photography than all the rest of the people doing similar things together - both about things he likes, and things he does not like. Any time I might want to buy something, without fail I check for Ken’s review. If you want to make fun of me for that, fine, go ahead. That he has made a living from doing what he enjoys is a bonus - and if you read his reviews of the Nikon Zf and Z8/9, he has posted things that I’ve never read about anywhere else. Read the Zf review for my latest example - I was almost ready to buy one, to try out ML, but after reading all the things he pointed out, I lost interest. For better or worse, he writes what he thinks.

@JoJu

I think you should name Mike’s beloved Ren Kockwell before you name Perry.

Wrong adjective, informative would be a better word, but I guess I do love the ability to find information from Ken that I couldn’t find from others. As in, with the Zf, everybody was saying how wonderful the Zf was, but Ken pointed out things that changed my mind completely. Factual information is what the world needs, as I see it, not free advertising.

@Joanna

My primary input for Mike tends to be a lot more photography based, not ornithological

I need/want both, but photography related information is what I’m most interested in - although this does lead me calling something a “duck” which I now know was silly.

Regarding all my thoughts to-date on ML cameras, one of my biggest issues if I was to buy one would be battery life. Comparison between Nikon Z6 and D780, running the same ML focusing technology:

D780: 2,260 shots
Z6: 330 shots

( Nikon D780 vs Nikon Z6: Which One Should You Get? )

In the USA and in India, I almost always make it through a full day with one battery, and lots of “juice” left over - but there were some races I covered where I needed two. Never more. The Z6 ? Yikes!!! …personally, I like the D3 and its battery, which I don’t think I’ve ever run dry.

For the future, any questions I have about photography will remain here, even if they make me look quite dumb. Who knows, maybe I am that dumb. But questions about bird photography get lots better answers in Steve’s forum:

Bird Photography with Nikon D780 | Backcountry Gallery Photography Forums

[mikemyers]

This started out as a question for @Joanna, but it’s open to anyone.

I went through my photos from Wakodahatchee Wetlands, keeping in mind Joanna’'s advice for aperture. I thought I had good reasons to use f/5.6, knowing there would be minimal depth of field, but next time perhaps f/8 of f/11 might keep more of my “birds” more in focus.

I found several shots like this one, but only one had the eye sharp and in focus:

780_4416 | 2024-04-04.nef (29.1 MB)
780_4416 | 2024-04-04.nef.dop (13.6 KB)

Mistake #1 - I could have zoomed in closer, but didn’t.
I tried to focus on the eye, and for this image, it worked.

My main question - while I wanted a “sharp bird” in front of a “blurred background”, anything I might have done to make the back of the bird sharper would have done the same for the grass and stuff.

I did capture what I wanted at the time, but based on feedback from Steve’s forum, the image would be better if shot from the hight of the bird, not me on the walkway. Maybe I should have laid down on the walkway, making the camera a good four feet plus lower? Yuck!!

[mikemyers]

@stuck

My longest lens is a Canon EF-S 55-250. It’s little more than a ‘kit’ lens but I’m happy with what I can do with it. For example, this shot of a pair of Red Kites:

It suffers from all the faults that @Joanna has pointed out in @mikemyers bird photos but I don’t care. I like it

While I hope @Joanna and others do continue to point out all the faults they can find in my images, there is a huge part of me that loves photos like what you posted for their own sake. Excluding the “what if” stuff (can you print it as a mural), you did great and you even captured a blue sky - and had I taken this, I would have an ear-to-ear grin! There are two of “me” here, one of whom wants to satisfy @Joanna and @Wolfgang, and another me who just has a great time and enjoyment of most of what I do. Had I taken your image, later that day I would have emailed it to everyone interested in my photos. I will give it an AAA rating. …and I write this despite the fact that it will suffer from the same issues I’m guilty of, as in pixelization. Oh well. But phooey on that part, it’s a wonderful, FUN, image and I think you did great!!!

For me, I won’t stop until Joanna and Wolfgang are satisfied, but that’s me.

Were you to post this in Steve’s forum, I think you would get a zillion compliments!

[mikemyers]

I’ve spent much of this morning trying to find bird photos I took recently that both @Joanna and the people in Steve’s forum might appreciate. I always second guess photos I think I like - usually it’s best to wait a day until I decide if a photo is worth posting.

One last photo - most of my enjoys it as a “capture”, but with all the mud on the beak of the bird, and a few other things, I’m likely to get negative feedback. Anyway, for better or worse, here goes - and to satisfy Joanna, I very specifically did NOT use the PhotoLab tools that she doesn’t like - especially ClearView Plus.

Another “mistake” I may be making - I often enhance the colors and sharpness using PhotoLab tools - which makes me wonder if it is still a “realistic” image after I’ve done so?

I never dreamed that bird photography would be as much fun as it’s turning out to be.

[stuck (Canon, PL7 on Win 10 + GTX 1050ti)]

@mikemyers

Had I taken your image, later that day I would have emailed it to everyone interested in my photos.

I think I did share it with friends on-line but I also printed it. Only at A5 size though, the flaws become too obvious any bigger. The print hangs on a wall at my sister’s house.

[swmurray]

@milkemyers
I clearly understood and strongly disagree.

Steve Perry, Ken Rockwell, and their brethren are clickbait. This has been mentioned several times by other posters. Good for creating “views”, and perhaps a shred of truth along with the entertainment, but neither will help you become skilled in the craft of photography anymore than the hot stock tips sites will make you a better investor.

Many other posters have offered resources to help you with your photographic journey. One suggestion was to study the masters, or at least photographers you like.
The photographers I mention are all masters in the art of nature photography (National Geographic level). I’ve had the great opportunity to hear them speak and describe their techniques and approach to their photography.
One common theme from their websites and talks has been repeated here too - Previsualize your photograph then use appropriate camera settings and proper framing to capture the image.

I find studying the masters much more useful than regurgitating Nikon marketing material and dubious clickbait.

So why do I bother with this thread you ask?
Well, it’s a bit like watching episodes of Mayberry with you starring as Barney Fife. Sometimes it’s fun to poke.

[Joanna (Joanna Carter)]

@mikemyers

I found several shots like this one, but only one had the eye sharp and in focus:

Except this one doesn’t have the eye in sharp focus…

The feathering in the neck is sharp but it looks like you missed the eye.

Which focus mode were you using? Single point I hope?

Do you use a DoF calculator? If not, why not?

Looking at the EXIF data, the focus distance was 3.3m (about 10ft) and, when I dialled that in to TrueDoF-Pro, at f/5.6, that gives a DoF of only 71mm, which is less than 3"

Even at f/32, you would still only get 405mm (16") DoF and it is obvious from this enlargement that the point of sharp focus was actually on the top part of the neck and not the eye.

You really need to get to know how DoF changes with focal length. For example, at 3.3m, with a 50mm focal length, at f/5.6, you end up with 1.5m DoF - but the problem is the you would end up with a small bird in a big frame

Next time you go, take a series of photos of the same bird, at the same distance, but reducing the aperture at each shot. Of course, that would mean altering the shutter speed and/or ISO.

For example, to get the same exposure as you had at f/5.6, at f/32, you would need 5 stops more exposure time - 1/6400sec +5EV = 1/200 sec. Since you need at least twice the reciprocal of the focal length 2 x 1/220 sec, to avoid camera shake, that would mean you need a minimum shutter speed of around 1/500 sec.

So, from 1/200 sec to 1/500 sec is 1.3 stops, so you are going to have to increase the ISO from 1250 to 3200.

If I’ve got the maths right, that should mean, for this particular shot, to get more DoF but not too much, you should have shot at 1/500 sec @ f/32 at 3200 ISO.

---

Step by step…

1. estimate the distance to the subject
2. estimate the front to back size of the subject
3. read the focal length from your lens
4. you now have the three numbers you need to use in TruDoF-Pro to calculate the required aperture
5. after entering the focal length and distance, slide the aperture pointer until the DoF is large enough to accommodate the front to back size of the subject.
6. double the reciprocal of the focal length to give you the minimum shutter speed
7. set the resulting aperture and shutter speed on the camera and use the ISO dial to find the correct exposure according to the spot meter.

---

@mikemyers

My main question - while I wanted a “sharp bird” in front of a “blurred background”, anything I might have done to make the back of the bird sharper would have done the same for the grass and stuff.

Unfortunately, that’s down to the laws of optical physics.

@swmurray

I find studying the masters much more useful than regurgitating Nikon marketing material and dubious clickbait.

Indeed.

---

Helen has just reminded me - take a little notebook and note down your most popular shooting scenarios and the preferred settings. Then you can quickly refer to it when you are ready to shoot.

---

I have committed to memory two essential settings combinations…

1. to have everything in focus from 2.64m to infinity, avoiding diffraction, use f/10 and focus on 5.28m
2. for basic correct exposure on a sunny day, 100 ISO, 1/100 sec @ f/16 (Sunny 16 rule)

[OXiDant (Peter)]

@Joanna

take a series of photos of the same bird, at the same distance, but reducing the aperture at each shot. Of course, that would mean altering the shutter speed and/or ISO.

This is even automated in features i believe.
Bracketing aperture in 3 or 5 images burst.

So set iso on auto WITH a restriction at the point of IQ dropoff.
Set on bracketing mode. Choose 5 brackets.
Choose a starting aperture and aim and focus on the right spot, pull the trigger.
(ok push the button gently.)

So you don’t have to worry about DoF mistakes.
1 of the 5 should be in the right amount.

Often i use the manual technique: Aperture mode and start in IQ sweetspot of the lens, f4 in my camera.
And go up or down depending of the scene.
I keep in mind that 200mm-300mm needs a f8-f9 to have some DoF.
F16 is about my camera’s dropoff for diffraction.
So til f11 it’s ok to use if needed.

When shooting pictures of life animals which are not contained in a Zoo then is controlled automation your friend.
Preload your shooting conditions and if you wander off from them in a situation use the no animal moments to check your settings.
Tracking focus mode looks great but is often delaying you by lock and release moments, often is box, point and AFC more sufficient.
Stationairy distance supertele moments i use backfocus lock so the lens don’t start hunting around every time i raise my camera to shoot.
Ok dslr’s can be set on FL range with in it needs to stay i believe but i don’t have that so i use AF lock (and AE lock if this speeds up the aim and shoot.
That in combination of small burst of 2-5 images wil get you some keepers.

[Joanna (Joanna Carter)]

@OXiDant

This is even automated in features i believe.
Bracketing aperture in 3 or 5 images burst.

Hmmm. Maybe, but the object of the exercise is to familiarise oneself with the optimum rather than “spray and pray”

[OXiDant (Peter)]

It’s not spray and pray.
You still need to know which aperture holds a certain DoF on a certain distance.
The longer your focallength the more shooting angle vs object comes in play.
You don’t always have the time to “check your list of dofvsdistance”
Do’s animals don’t wait and pose for you wile you set your camera.
Pray and pray is when you don’t a clue if it’s done right.
Using automated features is shorten time in continues changing circumstances.

[Joanna (Joanna Carter)]

@OXiDant

You still need to know which aperture holds a certain DoF on a certain distance.

Absolutely. And that was my point. Take the time to find out what works, note it down and take a quick peek at your notebook for those times when you can’t remember.

[mikemyers]

@swmurray

Many other posters have offered resources to help you with your photographic journey. One suggestion was to study the masters, or at least photographers you like.
The photographers I mention are all masters in the art of nature photography (National Geographic level). I’ve had the great opportunity to hear them speak and describe their techniques and approach to their photography.

I have three answers to your post. Regarding what you wrote, in the 1960’s, I spent almost three years at a major Ivy League college in the midwest, studying engineering. When I decided that was not for me, after a long (very long) meeting with the dean of the Art School at this same college, I did as you suggest, and a LOT more before I graduated, and accepted a job at a local engineering company, working with the same owner through this company, and his next, for around 30 years or so - which ended when I got far more interested in computers, and eventually moved to Florida. While I did NOT feel that way at the time, in retrospect that is one of the best things I ever did. In my first photography class, I failed. I re-took the class, doing things their way, not my way, and aced it. I expected my life to center around photography, which turned out to be partially true, but not how I was to earn a living.

To be honest, I didn’t see the point back then about learning “history” (painting, sculpture, and so on) rather than learning more about photography, but I had plenty of other ways to learn photography, from all the editors I eventually “collected” and sending them stories and photos that they paid good money for - let alone sending me all around the world.

So yes, what you wrote was/is good advice. Thank you.

@swmurray

One common theme from their websites and talks has been repeated here too - Previsualize your photograph then use appropriate camera settings and proper framing to capture the image.

More good advice, but I feel it is just as important to be adaptive, and while I may not capture the image I wanted, “going with the flow” very often allows me to capture an even better image.

@swmurray

So why do I bother with this thread you ask?
Well, it’s a bit like watching episodes of Mayberry with you starring as Barney Fife. Sometimes it’s fun to poke.

I didn’t ask. For that matter, as far as I can remember, you haven’t posted any photos which would help me decide if you are someone worth listening to. Poke all you want, I’ll listen/read, and if it’s worthwhile, even pay attention. But as of today, I don’t remember you having posted any photos at all, good or bad. If you can’t do photography well, why should I pay you any attention?

@swmurray

Steve Perry, Ken Rockwell, and their brethren are clickbait. This has been mentioned several times by other posters. Good for creating “views”, and perhaps a shred of truth along with the entertainment, but neither will help you become skilled in the craft of photography

When you get older, you get to learn from many people, and while for you they are “clickbait”, I find them fascinating sources of information. If you don’t know anything about bird photography yourself, you are unlikely to ever realize this. And for Steve’s forum, there are a huge number of people there discussing bird photography, and I’m constantly learning. As for Ken, pick almost any item in the photography world, and read Ken’s article that he most likely has already published, and updated. You’ll learn the good, and the bad. If you don’t like him as a person, you’re not alone - but based on my own experiences over many, many years, he turned out to be correct. He has recently saved me a few thousand dollars that I was considering spending on the Nikon Zf - all the other websites pointed how great it was, while Ken also pointed out the faults.

Whatever camera you are using, suppose your first photo is image001.jpg, or image0001.jpg. How many photos do you think you can take, before the counting is re-started at zero? Try that for the new Nikon Z cameras.

[mikemyers]

@Joanna

The feathering in the neck is sharp but it looks like you missed the eye.

Which focus mode were you using? Single point I hope?

Do you use a DoF calculator? If not, why not?

Looking at the EXIF data, the focus distance was 3.3m (about 10ft) and, when I dialled that in to TrueDoF-Pro, at f/5.6, that gives a DoF of only 71mm, which is less than 3"

Even at f/32, you would still only get 405mm (16") DoF and it is obvious from this enlargement that the point of sharp focus was actually on the top part of the neck and not the eye.

You really need to get to know how DoF changes with focal length. For example, at 3.3m, with a 50mm focal length, at f/5.6, you end up with 1.5m DoF - but the problem is the you would end up with a small bird in a big frame

I agree with everything you wrote. The bird was moving around, and I got six photos, with this one looking “best” to me. Never done this before - my friend took me to Wakdahatchee Wetlands for my first time and I spent much of the morning correcting mistakes as I identified them. Yes, spot metering, for the eye, as best I could. I shot as many birds as I could, gradually getting more used to doing so, and dealing with their seemingly random movements. Maybe a year from now I’ll be reasonably acceptable at this.

No, I didn’t use a DoF calculator. I was mostly just struggling to keep the camera zoomed in on a bird. I got better, slowly.

@Joanna

Step by step…

1. estimate the distance to the subject
2. estimate the front to back size of the subject
3. read the focal length from your lens
4. you now have the three numbers you need to use in TruDoF-Pro to calculate the required aperture
5. after entering the focal length and distance, slide the aperture pointer until the DoF is large enough to accommodate the front to back size of the subject.
6. double the reciprocal of the focal length to give you the minimum shutter speed
7. set the resulting aperture and shutter speed on the camera and use the ISO dial to find the correct exposure according to the spot meter.

The above sounds good reading it here, but long before I completed even step 5, the bird would have moved on. What I think I need is a good starting point from now on, as you are suggesting.

@Joanna

Helen has just reminded me - take a little notebook and note down your most popular shooting scenarios and the preferred settings. Then you can quickly refer to it when you are ready to shoot.

• Shutter speed - 1/2000th or higher
• Aperture - perhaps f/8 of f/11
• ISO maybe ISO 5000 or higher

Joanna, from my point of view, ALL of what you wrote is important, but for starters I need to make many more trips to Wakodahatchee Wetlands, and just get used t capturing photos of the birds, from finding them, evaluating them, and deciding how, when, and where to capture an image. I’ll likely make lots of mistakes, but that’s all part of the learning process.

@OXiDant

This is even automated in features I believe.
Bracketing aperture in 3 or 5 images burst.

So set iso on auto WITH a restriction at the point of IQ dropoff.
Set on bracketing mode. Choose 5 brackets.
Choose a starting aperture and aim and focus on the right spot, pull the trigger.
(ok push the button gently.)

So you don’t have to worry about DoF mistakes.
1 of the 5 should be in the right amount.

Often i use the manual technique: Aperture mode and start in IQ sweetspot of the lens, f4 in my camera.
And go up or down depending of the scene.
I keep in mind that 200mm-300mm needs a f8-f9 to have some DoF.
F16 is about my camera’s dropoff for diffraction.
So til f11 it’s ok to use if needed.

When shooting pictures of life animals which are not contained in a Zoo then is controlled automation your friend.
Preload your shooting conditions and if you wander off from them in a situation use the no animal moments to check your settings.
Tracking focus mode looks great but is often delaying you by lock and release moments, often is box, point and AFC more sufficient.
Stationairy distance supertele moments i use backfocus lock so the lens don’t start hunting around every time i raise my camera to shoot.
Ok dslr’s can be set on FL range with in it needs to stay i believe but i don’t have that so i use AF lock (and AE lock if this speeds up the aim and shoot.
That in combination of small burst of 2-5 images wil get you some keepers.

Hmm, I can learn how to use bracketing on the D780 now, and leave that setting on. I need to learn how to even do the above. I’ve only used bracketing for exposure, until now.

[mikemyers]

@swmurray

Many other posters have offered resources to help you with your photographic journey.

Good thought - if you want me to pay attention to what you write, you need to post enough of your photos here so I can decide if you are worth listening to. If you have already been doing so, I apologize - but don’t see much in way of photographs from many “experts” in this forum.

[stuck (Canon, PL7 on Win 10 + GTX 1050ti)]

@mikemyers

don’t see much in way of photographs from many “experts” in this forum.

That’s because, as has been explained many times before, this forum is not a general photo discussion forum. It’s a forum for DxO software users to help each other learn about the many features of DxO software.

[Joanna (Joanna Carter)]

@mikemyers

More good advice, but I feel it is just as important to be adaptive, and while I may not capture the image I wanted, “going with the flow” very often allows me to capture an even better image

@mikemyers

In my first photography class, I failed. I re-took the class, doing things their way, not my way, and aced it.

You need to justify how you can believe both of these views. Once you have learnt how to do things the right way, then and only then, will you have sufficient adaptability to “go with the flow”.

From time to time, you might have a “happy accident” but so does everyone who snaps away with their phones.

@mikemyers

But as of today, I don’t remember you having posted any photos at all, good or bad. If you can’t do photography well, why should I pay you any attention?

Because, as Stuck says…

@stuck

That’s because, as has been explained many times before, this forum is not a general photo discussion forum. It’s a forum for DxO software users to help each other learn about the many features of DxO software

---

@mikemyers

Whatever camera you are using, suppose your first photo is image001.jpg, or image0001.jpg. How many photos do you think you can take, before the counting is re-started at zero? Try that for the new Nikon Z cameras

What on earth are you talking about now? And how does that fit in with discussing DoF? Are you really saying you are likely to take more than 1,000 or 10,000 pictures on the same card? That’s just plain screwy.

@mikemyers

Yes, spot metering, for the eye, as best I could

I was not talking about spot metering, which there is no reason to do from the eye. I was talking about spot focusing.

@mikemyers

No, I didn’t use a DoF calculator. I was mostly just struggling to keep the camera zoomed in on a bird.
…
The above sounds good reading it here, but long before I completed even step 5, the bird would have moved on. What I think I need is a good starting point from now on, as you are suggesting.

It’s really simple. Before you even get to the location, you can estimate how far away you are likely to be and the rough size of the kind of birds you are wanting to shoot. Then you absolutely must use a DoF calculator to set up the camera ahead of time. Things are not going to change that much between shots. And, if you note down a few different scenarios, you can change settings rapidly.

@mikemyers

• Shutter speed - 1/2000th or higher
• Aperture - perhaps f/8 of f/11
• ISO maybe ISO 5000 or higher

That is nothing like that I said. What I said was not a guesstimate, it was calculated, based on the parameters for your example image.

If I’ve got the maths right, that should mean, for this particular shot, to get more DoF but not too much, you should have shot at 1/500 sec @ f/32 at 3200 ISO

The f/32 is important for the focal length you are using. Without it, you don’t stand a chance of getting anything like enough depth of field.

@mikemyers

I’ll likely make lots of mistakes, but that’s all part of the learning process

What is far more important is that you take on board all the advice we have given you and not just go off on your own way - otherwise, I don’t see why you continue to ask for help if you don’t act on it.

@mikemyers

I can learn how to use bracketing on the D780 now, and leave that setting on. I need to learn how to even do the above. I’ve only used bracketing for exposure, until now.

Just don’t! for the kind of shots you want to perfect, learning bracketing is totally unnecessary and will lead you to even more confusion. In all the 60 years I have been photographing, I have never used bracketing, neither for exposure and definitely not for focusing.

---

Let me repeat what Stuck said…

@stuck

That’s because, as has been explained many times before, this forum is not a general photo discussion forum. It’s a forum for DxO software users to help each other learn about the many features of DxO software.

Don’t forget, you have been allowed to get away with your mammoth threads, a lot of which have nothing to do with using PhotoLab, by the good grace of DxO and the patience of other contributors. But don’t abuse that privilege in continuing to find all sorts of general photographic questions that you should already be well practised in. If you do need further tutorial advice, I repeat the suggestion, that others have made several times before, to find a general photographic discussion or learning forum.

[Joanna (Joanna Carter)]

BTW, @mikemyers, this is what we mean by focusing on the eyes…

… but at his kind of macro distance, you ain’t never going to get more than a few millimetres of DoF without using stacking and hoping that the critter doesn’t blink.

[OXiDant (Peter)]

@Joanna

Just don’t! for the kind of shots you want to perfect, learning bracketing is totally unnecessary and will lead you to even more confusion. In all the 60 years I have been photographing, I have never used bracketing, neither for exposure and definitely not for focusing.

Well there’s nothing to learn in activating.
Settings bracket, activate aperture bracket, set amount of images done.
Why should you use it?
Well if done right your set of images shows the sweetspot on a certain focal length of your lens and camera. And if you change focus point and do an other set you can see the change.
Learning form the images instead of use a calculator who’s just cold number.
(you still need to know to apply the 1/3 focusplaine 2/3 rule on horizontal level and this rule shifts when the shooting angle change due lifting dropping lens or wile panning a bird.)
I use often the photography-app afterwards to understand the problem i got with a taken shot. Yes in front it’s better, but scene’s are fluid and could change quickly when you looking in your app to perfect the settings.
By using different settings and different techniques on the spot i have failures, keepers, and damnn nearly good.
The keepers => see what the settings are and if it’s having a patern, well that should be the right way to approach those kind of shot’s.
Failures? What’s the error, why it’s a failure? Shutterspeed? Isovalue? Aperture? Angle of view? Framing? Diffraction? Edge softness?
And the damnn nearly good’s wel why is it “nearly”?

When i was on the car show i did /tried allkinds of things knowing there will be failures, throw away’s. Doens’t matter.
You learn more from Failure’s and nearly keepers then the nailed one’s.

So i offered @mikemyers a way to learn.
Not to be lazy and keep it in bracketing.
If it’s done for a wile he don’t need it any more because he’s knowing when his camera and lens needs what to preform. (And when you want to boost the keepers rate in a difficult situation a bracket could be a helping hand.)

So @mikemyers , postproccesing isn’t only editing the image which you want to keep. It’s also examining those you want to throw away!
If you find the why you “know” the next time to avoid that.

[mikemyers]

@Joanna

You need to justify how you can believe both of these views. Once you have learnt how to do things the right way, then and only then, will you have sufficient adaptability to “go with the flow”.

Simple - if I go out to capture a photo of something, I usually feel I am in control, can set up, and adjust for/to the scene, and create my image.

With birds, that idea goes out the window, especially because of my lack of experience. I rarely can predict what is going to happen.

It’s like what I did long ago, shooting sports. I don’t “act”, I “re-act”.

That’s what I mean by “going with the flow”.

One thing that helps is probably “experience”, which I certainly lack.

…and until now, the feedback from you certainly has shown me how to prepare better, so I’m more likely to get a better image. These are things I need to do ahead of time, as in camera settings.

@Joanna

You need to justify how you can believe both of these views. Once you have learnt how to do things the right way, then and only then, will you have sufficient adaptability to “go with the flow”.

Absolutely agree with you there. But my lesson wasn’t about my learning, it was about following instructions, and “the customer is always right”. Do what the teacher/instructor asks for. Take photos that I know my editor is going to like. That sort of thing.

@stuck

That’s because, as has been explained many times before, this forum is not a general photo discussion forum. It’s a forum for DxO software users to help each other learn about the many features of DxO software

Yeppers, agree. I need to teach myself to ignore advice from “experts” until after they’ve demonstrated that they are worth while for me to do so. My mistake. Better to just ignore them.

@Joanna

What on earth are you talking about now? And how does that fit in with discussing DoF? Are you really saying you are likely to take more than 1,000 or 10,000 pictures on the same card? That’s just plain screwy.

If you read Ken Rockwell’s article on the Z cameras, you’ll find out what I mean. The numbering system for file names on your camera and mine goes up to 9999 and then resets. According to Ken, the Z camera file numbering starts over again at a much lower number. I’ll find what he wrote later, and copy it here, but not now. If you read his review on the Nikon Zf, you’ll find lots of things that turned me off on that camera. It’s designed to look good, not to be functional.

@Joanna

I was not talking about spot metering, which there is no reason to do from the eye. I was talking about spot focusing.

Me too, but my fingers screwed up. I guess I need to correct that.

@Joanna

What is far more important is that you take on board all the advice we have given you and not just go off on your own way - otherwise, I don’t see why you continue to ask for help if you don’t act on it.

Not sure you realize I have only made one trip, ever, so far, to Wakodahatchee Wetlands, and all my bird photos were captured in one morning’s shooting. All the discussion here, and in Steve’s forum, is based on a morning of shooting almost a month ago. I haven’t had a chance yet to act on anything. In three weeks or so, I expect to go back there, and hopefully make use of what I’ve learned here.

As you also suggested, I will probably be better off posting future bird photos in Steve’s forum, rather than here.

On the other hand, the photos I’ve posted here over the past weeks have been selected and edited differently, based on feedback here.

And there are still some compromises I need t think about. To make the rear end of a bird perfectly sharp by going to perhaps f/22, or whatever the calculator shows, means that all the “background” stuff in the photo will also be much sharper. What is more important, making the rear end of a bird sharper, or keeping the background less sharp? But this is something I will ask in the BackCountry Gallery forum.

And after several weeks of searching, I haven’t yet found an appropriate longer focal length lens to buy. The Nikon AF-S Nikkor 80-400 f/4.5-5.6G ED VR is what I’m considering, but it’s also around $1,000. I’ve mostly decided to hold off on buying anything right now.

[mikemyers]

@Joanna

BTW, @mikemyers, this is what we mean by focusing on the eyes…

… but at his kind of macro distance, you ain’t never going to get more than a few millimetres of DoF without using stacking and hoping that the critter doesn’t blink.

Amazing phot - no idea what it is of, but those eyes are really something!!! Did you take it, and if so, how?