Middle picture is a Green Sandpiper.

Top picture (ignoring extreme bacground) - Teal, Common Snipe, Green Sandpiper, Lapwing.

Bottom one - Jack Snipe.

Didn't know there was a bird called that. Most of the pubs round here are named after birds (town planners loved themes by all accounts) and I thought the Jack Snipe was one of the few that wasn't. Well you learn something new everyday. Cheers.

A few pictures i took at a biking event called Hit The North held in Manchester

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/adrianfairhurst/6817040063/[/url
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/adrianfairhurst/6817040063/DSC_2342[/url

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/adrianfairhurst/6817013255/[/url
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/adrianfairhurst/6817013255/DSC_2320[/url

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/adrianfairhurst/6817075151/[/url
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/adrianfairhurst/6817075151/DSC_2373[/url

I mentioned the Photo Zoom software I was trying out, well, I took the plunge, and hope you don't mind here's its effort at your robin, after a Curves boost. It can do better than this, but the file size gets bigger. I reckon it is a far better effort than any of my existing software, has a nice feel about it.

I aim to please! Jack Snipe are pretty hard to see normally. Well camouflaged and very secretive. The harsh weather means that they (and others) are more likely to come out into the open. It was for that reason I walked through the snow to go and look for them - paid off! Also saw a Water Rail, another bird that likes to keep hidden (although more often seen).

FA - intersting. Personally, I don't use editing software - just take things as they come out of the camera! The exception being I sometimes crop to make the image bigger - as for the Jack Snipe and Green Sandpiper. Invariably though, that's for unusual things as a record and more often than not taken from a distance in poor light (with ISO 6400) - so the enlarged image is often poor (sadly). Maybe I should splash out on a professional quality lens? However, if I has a couple of thousand quid to spare on hobbies, I would probably buy a telescope first.

wow www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... -Utah.html

wow www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... -Utah.html

Quote ="Dally"FA - intersting. Personally, I don't use editing software - just take things as they come out of the camera! The exception being I sometimes crop to make the image bigger - as for the Jack Snipe and Green Sandpiper. Invariably though, that's for unusual things as a record and more often than not taken from a distance in poor light (with ISO 6400) - so the enlarged image is often poor (sadly). Maybe I should splash out on a professional quality lens? However, if I has a couple of thousand quid to spare on hobbies, I would probably buy a telescope first.'" Next time you're bored, download the trial version here: www.benvista.com/downloads It's the full version Pro v.4, but the results are watermarked. Have a play to see if you can improve on your enlargements and see what you think.

Quote ="Dally"FA - intersting. Personally, I don't use editing software - just take things as they come out of the camera! The exception being I sometimes crop to make the image bigger - as for the Jack Snipe and Green Sandpiper. Invariably though, that's for unusual things as a record and more often than not taken from a distance in poor light (with ISO 6400) - so the enlarged image is often poor (sadly). Maybe I should splash out on a professional quality lens? However, if I has a couple of thousand quid to spare on hobbies, I would probably buy a telescope first.'" Next time you're bored, download the trial version here: www.benvista.com/downloads It's the full version Pro v.4, but the results are watermarked. Have a play to see if you can improve on your enlargements and see what you think.

My handsome boy loving the snow!

he certainly is a magnificent looking beast.

I'm just a point-and-shoot snapper, don't understand 90% of the gubbins on this thread...

But this photographer is an artist in every sense of the word ... [urlhttp://art-profiles.com/albums/marshmarshall/1923-denatured-nature/albums.html#photoid=26854[/url

Off to Liverpool for a few days next weekend, anyone suggest any good places for taking some photos. Plan on jumping on the city tour bus and getting on and off at various points, Cavern, Albert Dock and waterfront and the cathedrals, plus hoping to get a 5/6pm trip on the Ferry on Sunday evening.

Any other ideas please?

PS we're going on train so no transport to drive out of Liverpool anywhere.

Get on the Ferry and take Liver Building from the water?

If you want to keep your camera... not in Liverpool

Just bought a new printer which is obviously for work [icough[/i but having a few issues photo printing. It's a Canon Pixma 880 series and does have pretty good detail but I'm having difficulty getting the colour right. I print from the Canon digital photo prefessional (I have Photoshop elements but haven't had much time to really get the best out of it - I use it for mainly correcting exposure and removing unwanted objects fro shot etc.).
What I don't understand is that the Canon software has profiles for the 880 series printer but it's really confusing and I can't get a good colour match. I know the prints won't look like they do on the screen but I tend not to play around with colours when editing the photo so it's pretty much as shot. All I do tweek is contrast, brightness and sharpen a bit.

The first few prints I did were heavy red, then I tried a few of the settings (vivid print, image correction, colour profiles) and all I got was a big green shift. After a lot of fiddling I have got reasonable results by swithing everything off (all colour profiles etc), and manually tweeking colours, brightness and contrast in the print settings.

Question is, should I bee looking at the colour profiles in more detail and does anyone have a basic idea what will work between the Canon software and the Canon printer?

How is it just doing ordinary colour printing rather than photo prints?
Are you using decent photo paper?
Have you calibrated your screen?

You may have to make your own profile for each different brand of photo paper you use but it shouldn't change too much.

Haven't done much ordinary colour printing yet, can't tell.

I am using premium paper - Epson High Gloss 300g

I haven't calibrated my screen, which I know could be contributing (I don't know exactly how to do it if I'm honest), but I tend to not alter colour apart from every now and again when I use RAW files and process them manually. I tend to use the cameras automatic settings for white balance etc. (Canon 50D) and only tweek the brightness/contrast - but then hardly much there either.

Surely there's a "test page" facility, how does that compare?

Is there a firmware upgrade?

Have you checked any printer forums for similar problems/solutions?

Test page looks fine, but difficult to really get an idea of how that compares to photo printing. We're only talking subtle differences here, what I really want to do is have the colours balanced in photo printing and if anyone has an idea how the colour profiles in the Canon software match up with the Canon printer.

Only loaded the software on Wednesday and it performed all updates when I went online.

Tried to search forums yesterday, didn't get too far. Will continue to pursue all options.

Some Jack Snipe for Glasgow Gal:

What really impresses me about the above images in nothing to do with the photography issues involved but I was blown away by just how effective is the bird's camouflage.

You would think their strong back markings would stand out but when they are not in the open (ie 99% of the time) they are virtually impossible to see unless they move. The camouflage is superb.

Looking at getting a longer zoom lens for my Nikon D5100. Currently got 55-200mm lens, but as most men ( and women lol ) would agree, need something a little longer. Worth sticking with a Nikon lens or should I go for something like a Tamron??

Thanks Dally



Likewise. No wonder they are rare to spot. You could walk past them so easily if you didn't know there were there.

I shoot with Sigma lenses and never had an issue with them, far more bang for your buck than OEM.