Jump to content
Whatbird Community

lonestranger

Members
  • Posts

    4,725
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Posts posted by lonestranger

  1. 21 minutes ago, rita said:

    But I'll take a look and see if I find anything wrong with it.

    I don't want to make work for you over something that can be solved with a Google search, @rita, which I will probably use as my default search engine going forward now that @Greyhawk has brought my attention to that very simple workaround to my search issues. I appreciate what you do for us behind the scenes but I don't want it to become more work for you over something I have already found a solution for. 🙂

  2. I guess I should have also pointed out that the aperture can be used for exposure compensation/adjustments too. I wouldn't recommend it for our purposes but adjusting the aperture is another method of exposure compensation.

    That's all manual exposure is, exposure compensation. If you are using exposure compensation in the field in one of the automated modes, then you are manually adjusting the exposure because you want it brighter, or darker. Manual exposure mode is no different, with the exception that you get to decide how, and how much, to change the exposure. You can pick one setting and adjust the associated dial/button this way or that way to compensate for dark/light conditions, or you may want to incorporate a second adjustment to complement the first adjustment. It's all just exposure compensation but I think it becomes more intimidating when it gets called Manual exposure. I'm not saying it's better than automated modes because there's many arguements to be made in favor of automated modes in certain conditions, but Manual mode isn't as intimidating when you look at it as exposure compensation and play around with it a bit. 

    • Thanks 1
  3. On 6/8/2024 at 9:57 AM, lonestranger said:

    In Manual mode you could have set your aperture to f/5.6, set your shutter speed to 1/500 or faster, and then used your ISO to adjust the exposure compensation. The principal of exposure compensation is the same but the results can be drastically different.

    I should have pointed out at the time that you could also set your aperture to f/5.6, your ISO at 800(or any fixed number), and use your shutter speed for exposure compensation/adjustments, which is probably/possibly a better suggestion. If you find your shutter speed gets too slow, just increase your ISO and readjust the shutter speed for the desired exposure. If noise becomes more of an issue at ISO 800 than I think it will, just set a lower ISO. Ultimately it is up to the operator to decide which part of the exposure triangle they want to use to adjust exposure compensation, ISO and/or shutter speed are two easy ways of doing this and I should have mentioned both earlier. Better late than never, right?  Right!!!

    • Thanks 1
  4. 23 hours ago, lonestranger said:

    I'm just not seeing that effect in your Seaside Sparrow photo.

    I now see the halo effect that others have mentioned. It took some pixel peeping but I can see that the vertical flow/grain of the background grasses looses it's vertical flow around the edge of the bird. The colour is the same to my eyes with the exception of the vertical streakiness missing from the closest pixels surrounding the bird. Now that I have found it up close, I can see it along the back of the bird without needing to zoom in, but I really need to look for it. It doesn't jump out at me like it does others. I'm not sure if it's my failing eyes or my lower standard of quality, but I don't see this halo as a problem that I would worry about. Now that I know that it's not always obvious to me, I might look for it a little closer in my photos and try to make sure I don't make it worse in processing, but it's just as likely I won't be looking that closely and likely won't care if I do see a slight halo effect. 🤷‍♂️ Nice to finally know what everyone has been talking about though. 

    • Like 2
  5. Any tips on how to get the search engine to find something that it can't seem to find?  I get frustrated with the search engine so often that I have basically given up on it. Quite often the search results are overwhelming, even after refining the search, and because of the sheer volume I find them of little help. It's more frustrating when I know my search is kind of unique and should be easy to find but the search engine says there's no results to be found. As an example, my previous attempt was to find the "Before and After" thread I had started in the Photo Sharing forum. I knew it had fallen back several pages but i didn't know how many and I didn't want to scroll through each page to find out just how far back it had fallen, so I tried to search for it. No matter what I did, "Before and After" returned no results so I ended up scrolling through each thread title until I finally found what I was looking for on the fifth page. Is it just the limits of a poor search engine and it is what it is, or is there a way to make it work better?

  6. BRDL 873
    🥚🥚🐦🥚
    🥚🥚🐦🐦
    🪶🥚🐦🐦
    🥚🐦🐦🐦
    🥚🐦🐦🐦
    🐦🐦🐦🐦

  7. 28 minutes ago, lonestranger said:

    I did notice a halo effect in your recent Bobolink photo, @stitch58, but I'm just not seeing that effect in your Seaside Sparrow photo. For what it's worth, I have taken photos with that halo effect right out of the camera and have always attributed it to shooting conditions and not camera settings. I honestly don't know what actually causes the effect though. 🤷🏼‍♂️

    I think I have learned something knew and drawn my own conclusions from the tidbits I've read. Those that know better can correct me if I'm wrong. 

    The halo effect happens at edges with high contrast, which is condition specific and beyond our control, but the effect can be reduced in post processing by reducing contrast and/or sharpness. Some lenses at certain apertures and longer focal lengths can exaggerate the halo effect. I am left with the impression that it just happens and post processing can increase or decrease the effect if you're so inclined.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  8. I did notice a halo effect in your recent Bobolink photo, @stitch58, but I'm just not seeing that effect in your Seaside Sparrow photo. For what it's worth, I have taken photos with that halo effect right out of the camera and have always attributed it to shooting conditions and not camera settings. I honestly don't know what actually causes the effect though. 🤷🏼‍♂️

    • Like 3
  9. 9 hours ago, stitch58 said:

    Seaside Sparrow

    216A2642.jpg

    I'm having a hard time seeing the halo effect being mentioned here, @MichaelLong, @Charlie Spencer, even after coming inside to view it on the bigger computer screen. The photo looks sharp to me, with good separation from the background. Even when I zoom in on the image, I see no artifact that I would call a halo effect. The background might not compliment the bird as much as it could, but I see no adverse halo in the image. Am I missing something blatantly obvious or is the halo effect subtle enough I am just over looking it?

    • Like 4
  10. BRDL 872
    🥚🥚🥚🥚
    🪶🥚🥚🥚
    🥚🥚🪶🐦
    🪶🥚🥚🐦
    🪶🪶🥚🥚
    🐦🐦🐦🐦

    Quote

    I doubt there's much of a spoiler below, but just to be safe, I've hidden my comment at the bottom of this quote.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Those banding code 'confusion species' can be rather confusing. I prefer that kind of confusion over the confusion created with banding codes of global birds not found in my North American field guide though.

     

  11. BRDL 871
    🪶🥚🥚🥚
    🥚🐦🥚🥚
    🥚🐦🪶🥚
    🐦🐦🥚🥚
    🐦🐦🐦🐦

  12. @Jagularr, another option, probably one that's already being considered, is to just create a separate game for the audio. Playing different birds in the audio game than the visual game would prevent one side of the game from spoiling the other side. The visual game could have a sound bite at the end, and the audio game could provide a photo at the end. Twice as much fun if there's two separate mysteries to solve.

    Again, just food for thought that you can chew on.

    • Like 3
  13. On 6/7/2024 at 1:14 PM, Avery said:

    A distinctive, monochrome bird of limited U.S. range, this bird likes to make its presence known. One interesting fact is that this species communally roosts at night, some individuals travelling several miles to do so!

    On 6/8/2024 at 12:29 PM, Avery said:

     More patterned than Groove-billed Ani

    On 6/9/2024 at 9:24 AM, Avery said:

     This bird has many other members of its genus within the U.S.

    21 hours ago, Avery said:

    This bird is white, gray, and black. 

    21 hours ago, Avery said:

     This bird does not have a eponymous name

    1 hour ago, Avery said:

     This bird can be frequently seen in suburban areas within its range. 

    Just putting all the clues/hints together and pointing out that @Greyhawk's recent guess was overlooked.

  14. On 6/6/2024 at 5:11 PM, stitch58 said:

    One thing I haven't seen mentioned though is if your camera is capable of shooting in burst mode you should enable it.

    This is good advice for several reasons, as @stitch58 has already mentioned. Here is my reasoning behind using burst mode over the single shot option.

    Besides birds being active, even when they're perched, and them always trying to blur our photos with those erratic movements that cause the motion blur that can obscure field marks, we're also not always as steady as we think and can easily introduce our own motion blur into the image from camera shake. One of the easiest times to do this is when we press the shutter button. That initial press of the shutter button can cause the camera to twist slightly in our grip or get pulled/pushed in one direction or another. By shooting a burst of 3 to xxxx photos, we not only increase our options of potentially different posses to choose from, we also get a few backup photos incase that initial press of the shutter button wasn't quite gentle enough. The only down side I can see to using burst mode is the extra storage space needed if the extra photos result in more keepers, and/or needing to empty the trash folder more often.

    • Like 3
  15. A few more random thoughts on the new audio feature @Jagularr. Right now it is a 6 guess game whether you listen to the audio or not, what if it was a 10-12 guess game with the audio independent of the visual part of the game instead of both options at once? What I am thinking is 5(pick your own numbers) visual clues showing pieces of the bird, and then 5 audio clues playing pieces of the song, and then the last clue showing the whole bird with the whole song together. Just sharing ideas here, even if I see problems with them. One problem with delaying the audio feature until later in the game is the fact that people who solve the visual game part of the game before the audio part kicks in, well they will miss out on the, 'name that tune in as few notes' as possible part of the game.

    My brain is in high gear and I'm just tossing ideas out as they come to me so don't expect them to be fully thought through. 

    What if the game had the option of choosing the source of our clues? You could make the player decide if they want each individual clue/guess to be visual or audio as they progress through the game. Right now, if someone wants to hear more audio they have to progress through the visual part of the game to get to the next audio clue, and as you progress through the visual part of the game more of the audio is revealed, perhaps some separation between the two would be interesting. If the players could use their guesses in any combination of ways between the two sources, it might make it more challenging since it would be one less guess for the other side depending on which source we've chosen.

    Just food for thought, you can decide if there's any real flavor there. 🙂

     

     

  16. BRDL 870
    🥚🥚🥚🥚
    🥚🥚🥚🪶
    🥚🥚🪶🐦
    🪶🪶🥚🐦
    🐦🐦🐦🐦

  17. 4 hours ago, Avery said:

    Yeah, sorry. I’m not on as often as I used to be, I try to check in a couple times a day, but sometimes I forget. 

    Not to worry, if we forget to tag someone when we post a guess, we'll just tag them when we remember. 😉

    • Like 1
  18. 11 hours ago, Ruslan Balagansky said:

    Leaves something to be desired, but I'm pretty happy with this one.

    https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/620247571

    image.thumb.jpeg.f8e2cc125496a43794b014eb4206b163.jpeg

    Do you use a filter on your lens, @Ruslan Balagansky?  I ask because your background reminds me of an effect that I used to encounter when I used lens filters in the past. Once I realized that the effect was a result of the filter, I removed the filter and stopped recommending them like I had in the past. I used to use filters to protect all my lenses, now I just use the lens cap when I need to protect my lens.

×
×
  • Create New...