Let's focus our attention on this last image. Where this images fails, for me, is the angle at which this image was taken. I am shooting slightly down on the Hyena. This means that the background is close, right behind its head. The result is that I could not blur the background to make the Hyena stand out more. It lacks any kind of wow-factor. The ideal would have been to get down low and shoot from ground level, thereby placing the background much further back, allowing me to blur the background more.

          But what is one to do in the wild? You can't get out of the vehicle lest the Hyenas see you either as a threat to the little ones or as food. Neither of these options are better than the other. In anticipation for scenes exactly like these I brought a mono-pod along. The idea was to lower the camera upside down on the mono-pod to ground level. I was going to trigger the camera with a wired remote release. By using my phone as a monitor for the camera, (bluetooth) I was going to capture a much better image. After all, that is what I learned to do from an OM Systems photographer.

          While I don't know how this OM Systems photographer got away with it, I can tell you that our driver refused permission to use my contraption. You are not supposed to break the silhouette of the vehicle. The animal should only see the vehicle and nothing else outside of the vehicle. The Hyena's were very peaceful and lazy, I strongly doubt if a mono-pod right from the vehicle's side would have made any difference to them. Regardless, we have to stick to the rules. We can just wonder about how others do it.

          Perhaps the lesson to be learned is that the animals come first, not our photography. Sometimes we should just enjoy the experience and do the best we can photographically.

Remember that herd of buffalo? I am still not sure that this specimen was up to here:

As photographers, we never know when these moments will show up. Always be ready so as not to miss them. Here is what I do to make sure that I am ready:

1. Check the space available on my memory card from time to time. The last thing you want is to arrive on a magical scene or pivotal moment just to find out that your card is full.

2. Check all camera settings from time to time. In the mad rush at a scene you may have set your camera a certain way for that situation, but then forgot to return it to some baseline setting. This is not the moment to realize that you images are needlessly to noisy because the camera was still set that way because of the previous dark forest scenes. Or perhaps you just shot a landscape image leaving your camera on F11 or F16 which is not what you want when shooting action. In between sightings set your camera for current conditions and check if the settings are appropriate for where are you now, for what your are facing, and for the lighting conditions. I once lost a shot because my lens' focus limiter was set due to a previous shoot.

3. Check your battery level from time to time. Don't wait to fully run out of battery power before you switch out batteries. Using a battery until it is fully depleted is not healthy for the battery any way. But once again, you don't want to miss a once in a lifetime shot because your battery ran out just at the wrong moment.

4. Check the front element of your lens from time to time. If there is mist, spray, or rain, your shots will be ruined if you did not clean/dry your front lens element. Similarly, things get dusty on safari. Make sure your front element is clean every so often.

5. Be alert. Things can happen quickly. Try to anticipate things. It does not help for your gear to be ready when you are not.

Have fun out there, be safe, and capture some humor.

The Nikon acquired the focus in a jiff. It tracked the dragonfly with easy. I would say that it is quite a bit faster at focus acquisition and better at tracking than my Sony. I am not knocking the Sony here. This kind of photography is not what that camera was intended for. A friend was shooting with a Nikon D850 (most probably the best DSLR ever made by any manufacturer). I handed him my Z8, fitted with the 180-600mm to try on the dragonfly. He was very impressed by what this camera can do. I look forward to shooting dragonflies more in the Spring. One issue I have with some of Nikon's lenses is the length of their minimum focusing distance. I wished that both the 180-600mm and the 800mm PF lenses could focus a bit closer. For small subjects such as these, having to step back to get focus, means that now we have to crop the image considerably, stealing valuable resolution in the process.

          Dragonfly images are often made or ruined by the wings. Unless the light is right their wings can be lost in the image (they are semi-transparent). Back lighting works well for them.

They sat reasonably still, so low shutter speeds due to the darkish forest scene did not cause focus sharpness issues. It was fun to watch them move about in the forest. I was amazed to see them jump. Apparently they have not fear of heights or risk. They are high up in the trees and just jump great distances to get to another tree. Obviously, getting such a jumping image became my goal. But here is where photographic challenges started.

          Jumping monkeys move fast. Fast movement in darkish conditions leaves us with little choice. We have to get the image sharp, which means a fast shutter speed. However, a fast shutter speed is not possible in darkish conditions. Regardless of consequences to noise, I cranked up the ISO. I wanted that shot. But catching that image inside the forest proved near impossible from the confines of a vehicle.

Then it happened! We witnessed them jump across the road. They were high up in the trees and simply jumped from one tree to the next, right over the road. So we waited for more of them to jump, and we were rewarded:

You can see from the dull cloudy sky that the light levels were low. If you want to find out how I deal with noisy images check out the blog I wrote about that recently - there is amazing software that deals with that. We waiting and were rewarded yet again.

This was a thoroughly enjoyable experience. Photographically speaking this experience reiterated the point that getting a sharp image is more important than getting a noise free image. Noise can be removed, an out of focus image is not salvageable. As photographers we often deal with tradeoffs. We have to make tough decisions. Never compromise on getting the image in focus, most other tradeoffs have software and or editing solutions.

          One day in Tanzania it was a slow day. So I practiced my own advise. I noticed some lovebirds going back to the same tree over and over. So I thought that perhaps I could find a nest. I walked over to that tree and just started searching. I looked and looked, but the nest was never found. Neither did the lovebirds pose nicely. There were too many branches and leaves in the way. If you have read my bird image blogs, you will also know that bird images are typically best when taken from their eye level. Standing on the ground beneath a tree shooting up into a tree is hardly going to provide great bird images. However, even without an image taking it slow and genuinely looking around may reveal something we can photograph later on. So I still recommend it.

          Yes, you guessed it, I did find something. It was not the birds that I were initially after. But taking it slow and looking helped me to discover what I would have never seen otherwise. There was no movement. There was no noise. There was no way to find it but to slowly look and search. This is what the search revealed:

It may not be the greatest image but it is the only image of a bat that I ever took. A few moments later, while I was still looking I saw:

Slowing down and looking may not always produce results, but the information we gather may help our photography as we possibly uncover a nest, a bat, a snake, droppings that may alert us to something going on, finding a favorite perch, etc. It also helps us to enjoy nature and to get out of the rat race, even for just a while.

1. You have a long lens on that does not work for how close you are to the buffaloes. I can hear you suggest to just change lenses ... but read on.

2. There is dust in the air. You are in the midst of a herd. This is not the time to change lenses. If only I had a second body with a different lens on ... wishful thinking.

3. There are too many of them and there always seems to be one in the way.

At times there are moments where one just needs to put the camera down for a few moments to enjoy the experience, to listen, to marvel. But we are photographers and we want images. How do we solve these problems?

Despite all the qualities of a long prime lens (sharpness, larger aperture, better blurred backgrounds) I love the versatility offered by zoom lenses. Here I used my 180-600mm lens and simply zoomed out as far as I could. Secondly, as I have suggested so many times before, try to shoot at the edges of the chaos. Your chances of isolating something there is exponentially higher than what it would have been in the midst of the chaos. Even at 180mm, we were still too close most of the time.

Well, then look for something else. After all, even if you do manage to get the perfect portrait of your favorite buffalo, how many portrait shots do you need? Go for variety. Shoot as many different images as you can. That may mean that your main subject no longer features as your main subject. That does not matter. Get whatever shots present themselves.

Profile images becomes another possibility. To ensure variety, choose to go for a young one, or a very old one. Get something different. Also see if you can combine species ...

Here we have a portrait but what makes it more interesting and different is the committee meeting taking place in the background. Be on the lookout for scenes that provide a variety of opportunities. We don't just want to walk away with only portraits. Observe and take in the scene for a few moments. Just enjoy the scene, but as you do, start looking and searching for a variety of possible images and then get to work.

One possible solution is to forgo the carcass scene and shoot on the edges of the scene so as to isolate one or two vultures. We have to find a way to not have just chaos. Now don't get me wrong, chaos can make for great images, but not if there is only chaos. Something has to stand out. Something must not be chaotic or something needs to be the focal point on interest. If you can find a scene in which you have a clear focal point of interest in the midst of chaos then you may have a golden opportunity for making good images. But how do you find that clear focal point of interest in the midst of chaos? This is no easy task.

The solution is to be patient, but ready. You have to watch the scene intently through the camera's viewfinder, ready to click away at any moment. Chaos is constantly changing. We just have to wait for that change to favor us. Wait for something to stand out, for something to be different. Wait for something to be clear amongst the chaos.

Sooner or later some vulture has to pose. The carcass has to be exposed at some point. perhaps that only happens towards the end of the feast. We just have to be patient to catch those moments. Those moments work best if we can see something of the carcass and some bird stands out. Perhaps it is only a head, but there has to be something that is clear and not just chaos. In the end you may be rewarded.

Today's modern cameras will automatically recognize the subject's eye and focus on it. These systems work brilliantly, generally speaking. There are situations though, like this one, where the wind is swaying those out of focus leaves back and forth. Those leave end up right in front of the Lion's eye. This can trick the camera's autofocus system and leave you frustrated at best, missing the shot at worst.  So how do we solve that problem?

          The best solution is to use what Nikon's users often refer to as the hand-off technique. We use a wide area box to tell the camera to only focus on what is found in the box. When focus has been generally acquired (on the Lion versus on the moving leaves), then we would hand focus off to the eye tracking to take over. The problem is when the focus is on the leaves the Lion's face is so blurred that the camera cannot discern the eye. By using the box the get the focus in the ball park we get the Lion's face reasonably in focus which allows the camera to now make out the eye.

          It is best to program two autofocus modes on two different buttons. I use the two front buttons, next to the lens. This means that I can switch focus modes in a split second. Thus using two different focusing modes solves the problem and gives us what we want, sharply focused eyes.

          To my knowledge there is no saving an out of focus image. Due to modern technology noisy images can now be saved (somewhat). That makes the choice clear, I will take a noisy image any day before taking a blurry image. So how high of an ISO do I accept these days? The truth is that I no longer care. Yes, I still prefer to get as clean of an image as I can get. But I am not going to loose a shot because of ISO. Here is how I deal with too high ISO.

These two images were taken on the edge of the day. It was overcast and I did not have much light to work with. A fast shutter speed was required as these birds move quite quickly. The one image was taken at ISO 16,000 and the other at ISO 18,000. Yes, you read that correctly! The raw files are noisy, and years ago I would have just thrown these images away. Now I can look at this image at 100% magnification and it is clean. So how do I get noisy images clean?

          Firstly, I ran these images through DXO Photo Lab (DXO PureRaw would also work). Their noise reduction is probably some of the best noise reduction out there. This software creates DNG raw files which I then import into Photoshop. Since it is a raw file, Photoshop pulls these files into Adobe Camera Raw. Guess what? Adobe also now has AI noise reduction. This is where I run the file through noise reduction again (a second time). Voila, the image is clean.

          Don't give up on noisy files. Clean them. My priority in shooting fast moving wildlife now is shutter speed first, ISO second. I will not worry about the ISO but I must shoot at the right shutter speed.

Yes, this bird, in this shape, is not going to win any birding beauty contests. But the image is interesting to me. It makes me ask questions. Did it just escape from a predator chasing it? Is it just windy? Did the bird ruffle its feather like we would take a stretch? How did the feathers come to be this way? Why is the right side looking so much worse than the left side? Perhaps the image evokes some emotion or calls for a chuckle. The image has character. It is that character that makes the image.

          Not every bird image needs to be combed and brushed to perfection. We can relate to this bird because we also have similar days. I would caution though, that birds are probably best presented either preened or badly unkept. I do not think that halfway in between works very well. So I am not dinging my preening friends. If just a feather of two are drawing attention away, by all means, comb those feathers. But when an image like this presents itself, don't pass the opportunity by because the bird is badly unkept. That is where the character comes from.

          So I ask myself, is it always necessary to fill the frame with just the bird? Do images work where the bird is a small part of the image? Can we use the rest of the frame space to tell the story of the bird?

Here is an example. This Kingfisher is small-ish in the frame. Yet the image works for me because of two reasons. Firstly, the perch makes up for the small size of the bird. The perch is telling a story. It is dry. The leaves are busy drying out and dying. The second reason is the background, for it is telling the same story as the perch. There is no water here, it is dry. The background does not have much green in it. This is not what you will typically find on a river bank or besides a pond. The Kingfisher is fishing for insects instead of fish. The Kingfisher seems out of place here. But that is precisely what is making the viewer wonder and ask questions. That means that they are engaging with the image.

          Imagine this same image where the bird filled the frame. Almost all of the leaves and the expansive background would be lost. Would that image ask questions and make one wonder what is going on? I think that there is a place for images like this to break the monotony of frame filled images and to tell a little bit of a story.

          These two Buffalos were the first to reach the water. They walked right in. One has to shoot quickly as the rest of the herd crowds out the space fast, making it difficult to get a shot of just one or two specimen. As I was photographing them I decided to watch the Oxpeckers. There were more than just Buffalo actors present.

Including other actors enhanced the image significantly. Would this have been an interesting image had it only included the Buffalo? The Buffalo is pretty static. It is the other actors performing the action. These birds make this image. One of them is busy at the Buffalo's eye. Another is coming in for a landing, and yet another is taking a drink perched on the Buffalo. The Buffalo tolerate the Oxpeckers because they cleanse them from ticks. The Oxpeckers want to be there to harvest the ticks, yummy! This is a classical symbiotic relationship.

          This image reminds me that we need to include all the actors but know what to exclude. This image would not have been impactful had there been a number of Buffalos included. Sometimes we can be so focused on getting the image of the main subject that we forget the other actors. At other time, the other actors can become the main subject with rich reward.

I think not! This image was taken on exactly such a day. Based on the blog that I referred to above, get some images while the sunlight is harsh (shooting for back lit images and rim-lit images). Those are not the only kind of images we can get on such days. All that is needed to get an image such as this one is patience. Yes, just wait. Those clouds are moving. It is just a matter of time before one of those clouds gets between you and the sun. Once that happens you have diffused light for a few minutes. Shoot now!

          The clouds will keep moving, so before long you will no longer have diffused light but harsh light again. Great, use this time to watch the insects, to position yourself, to look at possible backgrounds, and to find your next subject. Then just wait. Soon another cloud will have mercy on you and provide better light. For as long as there are clouds and a bit of wind up there you should get more diffused light opportunities to shoot in. Just wait.

All the zebras are grazing except one. All of them have their heads down, except one. The more the other zebras form a boring, monotonous pattern the more our one exception zebra will stand out. But that is what makes the shot. Would you have liked this image of this lone zebra just standing there without the pattern of the other zebras? Have you not seen a million lone zebra images before? What makes this image is not just the lone zebra but the fact that it is different. It is standing out from the others. The boring, monotonous pattern of the others together with the exception is what makes this image. The boring, monotonous pattern is precisely what makes our different zebra different. Without the pattern this is not a good image. Without one being different, we don't have a good image. It takes the combination of the pattern and the breaking of the pattern (that which is different) to make the image.

          So how do we find images like this? Look for boring, monotonous patterns, then find a way to break that pattern. Wait for the exception. Find anything different and you have your image.

Someone may argue, "but surely, you have to check your exposure and your focus. What is the point of having more images if they are all out of focus or wrongly exposed?" I get the argument. But can we not look at the histogram in the viewfinder to ensure correct exposure? Can we not look at the camera's focus indicator in the viewfinder (the focus block turns green when focus is locked)? If you don't trust these, then sure, look at one image, but please don't look at every image you take. Just shoot, shoot, and shoot.

This is the image I got. I am very happy with this image. But if I showed you all the other possible shooting angles you would also see the dilemma that I faced. There were buildings in the background, in all directions but one. We often get so excited by our subject that we forget about the background. In fact, when looking through the viewfinder we often don't even notice the background because we are only focused on the subject. This image would have been an automatic deletion had I taken it from any other angle.

          So consider the subject, the composition, and the light. These are the things that photographers are taught to pay attention to. But if you want your nature images to go to the next level you also need to consider the background. I have written about this before, but with birds and insects it is also important to shoot at their eye level. So please consider all these things to get the best possible image given what you are presented with.

          However, if the subject is thin-ish and we get the angle to the light right, we can have both back lighting and rim-light. The back lighting will not be that strong since it has to penetrate more petals or two wings, or perhaps a bird's wing. Nevertheless, here is an example of what we can create:

Neither the backlighting or the rim-light is as strong as in other examples, but we can see the vivid color in the wings caused by the back lighting and we can see some rim-lighting on the back edge of the wings. An image like this definitely beats the same image taken with the harsh light coming from behind the photographer.

          The lesson is simple. We tend to see a subject, walk towards it, and take the image. We need to stop and think first (provided the subject will wait for us or return again). We need to ask ourselves questions. How does the light look? From which angle is the light going to be more flattering? Can I use the weakness of bad light as a strength? Given what I am facing here, what is the best possible image I can get?

          When the light is harsh, we do have a problem. But that very problem also provides a strength or two if used intentionally and creatively. Why can't we turn the harsh light into a feature of the photograph? Can we position ourselves and the subject in such a way to create the beautiful rim-light effect? Or what about taking a back lit image to take advantage of the strong light?

The back lighting, although harsh, helps to separate the subject from the background - it stands out better. It helps us to see things that we typically cannot see under soft diffused light, such as the veins, the structure, and how the wings are made. So harsh light aught not always to be treated harshly. We can use it's strength to create a different kind of image.

          Sure, harsh light does not usually make for good insect and flower images. So it does not make sense to shoot with that harsh light coming from behind us. We have to move around and figure out how to best use the light we have. In the example, I quite like how the butterfly turned out. It is not your typical butterfly image, yet it is interesting.

          The next time the light is harsh and you are presented with a shooting opportunity, it might be better to find ways to take advantage of what that kind of light offers than to forgo shooting at all.

          However, whether an image is easy or difficult to take, does not, in my mind, determine the beauty of an image. Yes, I fully believe, as I have written in these blogs numerous times, that actions image are more engaging and generally better photography. But for today, I am going to indulge, just for beauty's sake, to look at a classic clean bird shot.

Yes, I know, I can almost hear the pros yelling at me, "that perch is to thick for the size of the bird." They are right. This image will look much better had the perch been smaller. Some photographers would make the perch smaller in Photoshop. So there you have it, I formally agree with the pros. However, that is not my topic today. I just want to focus on the beauty of the classic clean bird shot.

          What is the classic clean bird shot? This is it. There is no clutter, no branches going in different directions, no distracting leaves (or anything other than the bird for that matter). The image is clean - free from distractions and pretty much everything but the bird and its perch. Another feature of the classing clean bird shot is the buttery smoothly blurred background. Even the background is clean. This is that classic shot. And "yes," even though it is an easy shot to take with no technical difficulty, these kind of images are still beautiful.

          Do I prefer an action shot? Yes! But from time to time I just want to relax. I just want to slow down. I don't want a heart throbbing, "oh wow," or "that's incredible" moment. There is a time and a place to simply look at uncluttered, quiet, peaceful, and clean beauty.

It is so tempting to zoom in closer, to fill that frame with the bird. And yes, I do recommend filling the frame. But in this case the frame is filled. Perhaps not by the bird but by the whole story. This image tells the story of this bird and how it hunts, where it lives, and the weapons it uses. Not every image needs to be of just the bird. I love that the twigs with their thorns make part of this image's story. Good composition is in place. The bird is strategically placed in the frame. The zoom is set so that the twigs fill the rest of the frame. The bird has space to look into. Its eye is clearly visible. The longer tail plays its part in balancing the composition.

          Overall, I like that this image tells the story. Perhaps some images are just better suited to story telling than others. For the photographer the skill is to know when to zoom in to capture the bird or the action and when to zoom out to tell the story.

I think so. I really like this image. Some may argue, as I have discussed on previous blogs, that I should have cropped this differently, vertically perhaps. That idea was played with. In the end this crop was settled on. So what draws me to this image? I like how the tail feathers fit neatly between the thorn branches. The bird's eye contact is special to me. The bird is almost saying, "did you get it?" The smooth background is a bonus. The bird stands out nicely from the background. All in all, I just find this a pleasing image.

          You don't always have to be out in the wild to get nice images. This image was taken right in the camp. Granted, the camp is in Tarangire. One can argue that the camp itself is in the wild. But what I means is that even in the hustle and bustle of people moving around and about buildings there are still images to be made. You don't always have to be on the safari vehicle to get the goods. By the way, this is a mousebird.

This image follows the basic rules of composition. However, the plant on the top left corner of the image is distracting. Some would say, "just crop it out." Others may add, "and while you are at it, also crop the distraction out or the top right corner." Often in life the solution to one problem creates another problem. You are just exchanges one problem for the other. I thought long and hard on whether to crop the top left corner plant out of the image. But when you do you create two other problems. Firstly, I rather like the fact that the plant to the right of the offending one does not leave the side of the image leaving it without a base. I want it to go down rather than leave the image on the left. Cropping the left plant out would also remove the plant to the right's base on which it stands. Secondly, that would leave less space for the bird to look into. The rules of composition say that there always needs to be enough space for movement to move into or to look into. To me, cropping the left plant out places the bird's head closer to the left edge of the image that I want.

          Now I can almost hear you say, "but if you were to also crop out the distracting plant in the top right of the image there would proportionately be more space in front of the bird to look into than there would be behind the bird." I would have to concede, that you are right. As usual, that now introduces a different problem. By the time all the cropping is done you may not be left with enough resolution to keep the image printable. It does not take that much resolution to fill a 4k screen. But that basically limits a print's size to roughly 8X11. Cropping both ends of the image would also mess with your aspect ratio. How will you frame your odd ratio image without incurring the cost of a custom frame. Many other printing options will actually be eliminated with such an aspect ratio.

          So what do you prefer, because you have to choose which problem to live with? Do you prefer cropping tighter but loose the ability to print at a decent size, or do you prefer the image as it is thus retaining the ability to print it larger? If you never print your image then cropping it more would make sense. If you want to print the image then maybe not so much. However, I will still argue that an odd aspect ratio image does not look that nice on a 4k display either as much of the screen's real estate will be unused. My personal conclusion is to just leave it as it is.

So how do we get nice images such as this one? Here are a few tips:

• Overcast but bright days are best. The soft defused light just works well with birds. Long lenses need light because even if your bird is sitting still, your camera and lens is still moving as you are holding them. This means that you will need a fast shutter speed. So make sure that you have enough light so as not to necessitate a too high ISO.

• Get as close to your bird as you can without impacting the bird's behavior. This means you will need less cropping leaving you with higher resolution files. Secondly, this also helps to blur your background better. Your distance to the subject impacts depth of field.

• Choose a perch where the background is far back. The further the background the better it will be blurred. Creamy, blurred backgrounds make birds pop and stand out.

• Consider the perch. The image above is not a set up. It was taken in Tanzania, in a field. Still, choose where you wait to maximize your success. Images of birds sitting on perches that are large in proportion to the bird tend not to look that great. So take images of birds on smaller perches.

• Shoot from the bird's eye level. Shooting up or down on birds results in images that are not the best. Sometimes you have no choice and those images can be nice, but the best images often come from shooting at eye level to the bird.

Enjoy being out there with the birds.

          Birds do bath. Placing yourself near a water source highly increases your odds of seeing some action. You may want to just sit and observe for a while. We want to take notice of the general flight paths preferred by our winged friends. They tend to use the same routes. Now that you know where they come from and to where they go when they are done, we can choose where to position ourselves.

Consider your background. Get as clean a background as you possibly can. Think about the direction of the light. Based on how small your bird is and the lens you are using, it is now time to select your distance. You must also choose a spot that will not alter the bird's behavior, otherwise they will just fly another way and you will not get your shot. Besides, it is always better not to impact the wild life we photograph. Now just sit and wait.

          I took this image in Tanzania near a water hole. Just be patient and enjoy the experience. Set yourself up for success and you will be more successful.

          Having said that, I also like close-up work. In true macro photography the detail of what is being observed is what tells the story. In close-up photography it is the insect or subject in it's environment that tells the story. Both stories are worth telling. Perhaps, for me, macro's story is more fascinating whereas close-up photography's story is more beautiful. Macro photography can be more interesting while close-up photography can be more pleasing. When looking at a macro image of an insect I have never felt, "wow, that is beautiful," fascinating and interesting, yes, but beautiful not so much. In fact, some insects seen from too close up are ugly as can be. It is a good thing that these insects are small. Can you imagine looking in the face of a fly as big as a dog's face? Don't get me wrong, I do like both kinds of images, but for different reasons.

This is a close-up image. The bee and the flower tells the story. If we were to look at a true macro image of the bee's face, then the face itself would be the story. The two genres are closely related but they are also vastly different. True macro photography is more technically difficult to do. The extremely narrow depth of field is difficult to deal with. Using focus stacking adds a layer of complexity.

          If you are a beginner, I would suggest that you start with close-up photography and work yourself towards macro as your skill level increases. Enjoy the journey there and remember, close-up photography in and of itself is fun and beautiful.

This image is rather interesting since the bee's right wing shows well, whereas its left wing is moving so fast that it is not well defined. A ghost shape is there, but I would have preferred if that wing was a little more defined. The light from a flash is extremely fast, so it should catch the wing. But there are other settings that may impact this. We have to look at the balance or ratio of flash versus that of the ambient light. The smaller the aperture and lower the ISO the more we rely on the flash. The more we rely on the flash the smaller the role played by the ambient light. The more we rely on the flash, the less we worry about the shutter speed. The light from the flash acts as a very fast shutter speed. But that also means that if the wing is not at the right angle to the light when it fires, then the wing is not going to show well.

          The idea is to get the balance right so that the wing is showing a bit more. It is perfectly okay to have it blurred, but it has to show. Had my settings and the light conditions allowed a bit more impact from the ambient light the wing would have showed up better. Or perhaps the wing would have showed up better had the wing been at a different angle when the flash fired. It takes a lot of trial and error. Just keep on trying, the perfect image will come.

These two images were taken during the same session at a garden. Which one do you prefer? Do you know why you prefer one over the other? At first glance I prefer the top one because the bee seems slightly bigger in the frame and is therefore slightly more impactful. But the more I look at both of these images, the more I start to favor the bottom one. Why? It all comes down to the details.

          In the first image the bee's face merges with its right front leg. It is difficult to figure out what is what. The profile is more confused because of this. In the second image, the leg and face are separated. The profile is not confusing. To me, it just makes for a more pleasing image. Things like these are small details, but they make a huge difference. Such details tend to be out of our control. That is why I shoot macro images at ten frames per second. I shoot in short bursts, precisely because I want a sequence of images to choose from. There will be little details that can make a huge difference. These details cannot be edited in or out later. When you cull your image haul from a shoot, make sure to pay attention to little details.

An engaging macro image (of insects) usually requires making eye contact with your subject. You need to get to their level and look them in the eyes. Insects like bees don't just sit there posing for us. They are at work gathering pollen. How do we get them still-ish? The best technique is to take hold of the plant's stem with your left hand while holding the camera in your right hand. As the bee moves, we counter that movement by turning the plant in the opposite direction. We move the plant with our left hand to place the bee where we need it.

          That means that all the weight of the camera gear is on our right hands. We are holding the camera with one hand only. For macro photography, that would include a flash and a diffuser. Perhaps I am weak, but after twenty minutes my right hand hurts. The size of the gear becomes uncomfortable (I realize that I have small hands). The weight starts to feel heavier. It is a real problem.

          Now, if you, like me, shoot a wide variety of subjects (from landscapes to animals and birds to macro), then it is probably not worth making gear decisions only based on size and weight. However, if you shoot primarily macro, there is definitely an advantage to be gained by using smaller and lighter gear. For how long can you hold your gear with a flash with just one hand?

In this image we show the side profile of the moth. Because the whole insect is basically on the plane of focus the whole insect is basically in focus. Photographing your subject from a side angle works really well and solves the depth of focus issue. Like most issues in life, things are not always that simple for every situation we face. Not all subjects show well from a side angle. In this case, a side angle works well because the moth does not have any body parts coming our way. What should we do to solve the depth of field problem if the subject also had wings that were open? For example, if this moth opened its wings then it would be near impossible (without focus stacking) to get the wing and the moth's eye in focus.

          Therefore, at times, a side view does not work well and we should consider other angles such as a frontal view. Let's look at a different kind of subject such as a dragon fly.

A side profile would render the wings out of focus. Yes, the tail would be in focus. So the photographer needs to make a decision. Either the tail or the wings are going to be out of focus depending on whether we are approaching the dragon fly from the side or the front. For me, this images works because the face, from this angle, is so powerful. The wings help to move the viewer's eyes to that face. The tail is just not that important, in this image. In fact, I wish I could have taken this image even more from the front. I could not since I was already dangerously leaning over the water and had I gone any further I would have landed, camera and all, into the water. If, however, I could have shot this image directly from the front I could have hidden the distracting tail behind the dragon fly's head and the wings would have been even more in focus.

          The bottom line is that there is not one answer that solves all our photographic problems. What we are photographic should dictate the angle of attack we choose. At times, a side angle works best and at other time a frontal angle is best. Let your subject determine what you should do.

          Shoot many images, oh, and just be patient. Here is what I am talking about:

Okay, the background is beautiful. But the stem right behind the bee is a distraction for me. I would much prefer if the background right behind the subject did not have anything behind it other than a blurred background. There is nothing we can do to solve this. The bee flies off too soon. There are too many unknowns, we don't know where it is going to land. In cases like this, the only way to get rid of that stem is to follow the bee as it moves and shoot, shoot, and shoot. Most of the time you will get another image without the pesky stem behind your insect.

The other alternative is to pick your flower, to position yourself in such a way that you have a nice background, and then just to sit and wait for the insect to come to your flowers. Sometimes that works well, sometimes following the bee works. I have been successful both ways. The point that I would like to highlight is that the "background" does not just refer to the distant background but to any and everything behind your main subject. Sometimes, that background is not in the distance but right behind your subject.

          Twigs right behind a bird, tend to ruin your photograph. Brush behind animals mostly don't make for great images. Stems behind insects can also be problematic. Whatever technique you chose, try to make sure that your subject does not have something distracting behind it. Yes, you can still tell a story and show the environment of the animal by including that which makes part of its life, but place that to the side and try to do your best to have nothing distracting directly behind your subject.

          Let me show you an image:

If you look at the bee's wing, on your right-hand side you can see that in the background there is an out of focus lighter line going from the white petal to the top right of the image. It is not too bothersome because it is blurred and not too bright, although I would prefer that it not be there at all. That line would bother the viewer much more if it intersected with the bee's body (rather than just being behind the wing). Let's say that that brighter line did find itself right behind the bee's body. What can you do about it? It is not possible to reach over the bee to move it out of the way, as the bee will fly away.

          The best thing to do is to move that line by moving your position. If you move to the left somewhat, that line will also move to the left, placing that line right behind the bee's body. If you move to the right, that line will move to the right (relative to the position of the bee). The closer the object is the bee, the less it will move relative to your movement. The further it is away from the bee, the more it will move as you move. In this case, I did not want that line right behind the bee's body, nor behind the orange section of the flower. So I moved so that that line's position relative to the bee changed to the right of the bee (to behind it's wing).

          So you might ask, "well, why didn't you move even more to get that line more to the right of the image so that it is not behind the wing anymore?" I could have, but we also want to pay attention to the bee's eyes. I did not want the bee to look too much to the left of the image (which would have happened had I move too much to the right). In macro photography, being on eye-level and making eye contact is important. So you want to photograph the insect from their front. Catching the insect from the side does not make for an engaging image. There are some exceptions thought. If you have an insect that does not have its two eyes facing forward but one on either side of the head, then side images work well (think moths or butterflies).

          Whether you are shooting still life pictures, landscapes or macros, always consider your angle of attack and that angle's impact on the background.

1. Since I take multiple stacks of the same scene (to make double sure I got the shot), and since my camera was moving when I took the stack, and since the insect may have also moved, I examine the stacks first. I look for composition, the pose of the insect, and most importantly FOCUS. The quality of your focus will be determined by how smoothly you moved the plant and the camera closer together as you took the stack of images.

2. I now choose the stack that I am going to process and load them all into DXO PhotoLab (DXO Pure Raw will suffice if you want to save money).

3. All that is basically done in DXO is noise reduction. You may say that there should not really be much noise at such low ISO values. That is true, but I just hate noise and love super clean images, so my first step is always to reduce noise using DXO. Their noise reduction is legendary and probably still the best today.

4. Next the stack is loaded into focus stacking software. Here I recommend three different choices. Luminar NEO, Helicon Focus, and a macro favorite Zerene Stacker. Even though Zerene Stacker seems to be favored by many, personally I do not use Zerene stacker because of two reasons. Firstly, I refuse to work with companies that charge you based on what you use your images for. What I use my images for is none of their business. They are my images and I strongly resent a company trying to lay claim to them is any form (or wanting to share in their profit). To charge me more because I sell my images is nonsense. Imagine buying a car and the dealer tells you that the car costs $10,000 if you are the only one to drive in it, but $20,000 if your friends join you in the car, and $30,000 if you use the car to Uber because you profit from using the car. I will never do business with any company employing this strategy. Secondly, their software seems pricey to me. Although it must be said that I find Helicon Focus a bit pricey too. Either way, this software will take the in focus parts of each image in the stack, put them together and output an in focus image. I export the file as a DNG file.

5. The DNG file is now processed using Adobe Camera Raw and Photoshop. The final image is saved as a TIFF file for future use and as a JPG prepared for web use (internet).

That is it. I hope that this series on macro photography was helpful.

          Just like any other photograph, composition matters, background matters, angle of view matters, and color matters. Let's look at an example:

This image is not staged. It is not taken indoors or using a studio type setup. Everything about this image is natural, even the background. But the way the image turned is no accident. Everything about this image was intensionally orchestrated to come out that way. Let's see what we can learn from this image by looking at each element.

1. Compositionally speaking, you can see that the rule of thirds are used here.

2. The ladybug is looking into the image and has room to move into the image. You never want your subject to leave your image as so will your viewer.

3. There is action. Interaction between animals makes images more interesting. Have your insect interact with another animal or with a water drop, or with a leaf or a flower or something. Images that show behavior, interaction, and movement will most always be more interesting than static images of the bug just sitting there doing nothing and looking half dead.

4. With insects, just like with birds, try to get to their eye level. The worse kind of shot is the boring angle right from above or from a 45 degree angle from above. We want the viewer to engage with the insect, they need to make eye contact with the subject. Get down low.

5. Since the stem this ladybug is sitting on is controlled with my left hand, I can slightly move the plant. So move it in such a position that the background is pleasing. Backgrounds can make or break our images.

6. Direct sunlight on insects often do not make for great images. I deliberately placed myself between the insect and the sun to place the subject in my shade. Let your flash manage your light and let that diffuser do its work. If your position relative to the insect and the plant's stem does not make for a nice composition because you moved to block the sun, just gently move that plant or stem with your left hand to get it the way you want it. This is the nice thing about macro, much of it is in your control.

7. Remember that depth of field is your biggest enemy when it comes to macro images. To maximize your depth of field make sure that that stem runs parallel to your focal plane (your sensor). Often we let the stem angle away from us, only to ruin the focus. The more parallel everything is to your sensor the better your depth of field will be.

8. Compose a bit loosely. There needs to be some space around your subject. Because we are taking a number of images at different distances, the size of the subject is going to differ from image to image. The composition needs to allow for enough room around the subject to allow for a slightly larger subject towards the end of the stack of images, so as not to cut any part of the subject off.

Now that we have our stack of image, it is time to process them. I will share my processing workflow with you next week.

          Hold the camera with your right hand. Take ahold of the plant with the insect on it with your left hand. This will help to stabilize the plant from the wind. You also need to move the plant to get the composition and angle you desire. Once the insect is at the angle you want, slowly move the camera and plant closer to each other. Once your focus peaking lights up press and hold your shutter button as you very slowly continue to move the camera and plant closer to each other. Try to keep the insect in the same place in the viewfinder to make the stitching easier later on. Keep on shooting for two to four seconds. This is why we want to shoot at 10 frames per second. We want to shoot quickly to minimize how long we shoot. We want to shoot without the insect moving much. The quicker the better, but we cannot shoot more than 10 frames per second either because the flash cannot keep up. 10 Frames per second seems to be the sweet spot. If you get underexposed frames in the sequence then your flash did not keep up. Increase your ISO a bit and set your flash on less power.

          We now have twenty or more images. Because we kept on moving the subject and the camera closer to each other as we shot each image will now be focused at a different place. Image one will be focused on that which is closest to the lens. Image two will be focused on the next part of the insect. So each following image should be focused on the next part of the image. At the end of the day we have a sequence of images each focused from front to back of the insect. All we need to do now is to stack or stitch the images together (which we will explain in an upcoming blog).

          In the controlled environment of a studio or indoor setup things work a bit differently. Approach the shoot as you would a still life image. Once again, your background will be held in place by a clamp. Move your plant to how and where you want it. Place your camera on a tripod. Move it to the desired distance from the subject. Focus on the closest point of the subject and fire off your shot. Now turn your focus ring ever so slightly to focus on the next part of the insect. Take another image. Repeat this procedure until you have an image where every part of the insect is in focus.

          If you are using an auto focus lens and if your camera has a focus stacking or focus shift feature built in, then let the camera do the process for you. Either way, the idea is to end up with a number of images that cover the entire focus depth of the subject. With extreme macro images this may best be done with a focus rail that can move the camera at minute distances. All that is now left to do is to stack or stitch the images together.

1. Set the ISO to a value of around 400 - 640 and just leave it there. There is no need to change this.

2. Set the shutter speed to about 200th of a second. Just make sure that your camera can sync with your flash at this speed. If your camera cannot sync with your flash at this speed then set your shutter speed at the fastest shutter speed that your camera can sync with your flash. You do not need to use any High Sync Speed functions of the flash. We don't really care too much about which shutter speed we use because the short flash duration will freeze the subject. We just want a shutter speed that is fast enough to have the image vastly underexposed if it were not for the flash.

3. Set the aperture to F8 or F11. We want to maximize our depth of field without allowing diffraction to steal our sharpness. Between F8 and F11 seem to be a good balance between depth of field and diffraction. Besides, many lenses seem to perform at their peak at F8.

4. Once the ISO, shutter speed and aperture have been set we leave them alone. We do not tamper with them again as the exposure will be controlled by the flash going forward.

5. Set the flash on manual. Use 1/16th or 1/32nd power. Shoot a test image and review the exposure. Just adjust the flash's strength to get the exposure as you want it. This is the only variable you need to change. Typically, once you find the strength of the flash that works for you, it is almost a set and forget scenario. This makes shooting very easy, in terms of exposure.

6. Lastly, make sure that your camera's white balance is set on flash. You want a fixed value rather than a variable value as you will be stitching images together using focus stacking software. Having different images all shot at different white balance settings just creates extra work in post processing.

You are now ready to go. However, there are a few other things you may want to set as well.

• I shoot at 10 frames per second, which I will discuss when I talk about technique.

• If your subject is static or you are shooting using an indoor setup AND you are using an auto focus lens you may want to consider ignoring what I will tell you next week regarding technique and use the focus shift feature (some systems call it focus stacking) of your camera (if your camera has this feature). This is a feature where you set your focus to the closest point that you want in focus and then your camera will take an image set at that distance, change the focus distance a little and take another shot, and repeat the process multiple times. This will give you a number of images each focused at a different place which can then be stitched together with focus stacking software. If you use this feature, set the interval between the images at 0.1 to give your flash a chance to power up between images.

We are all set to start macro photography. Next week we will talk about technique.

          Shooting a subject close to the flash is a recipe for harsh light and perhaps for blown highlights. So you will need a diffuser. If your budget is tight, you can make one. If you want pro result spending a bit more may be worth it. I decided on the AK diffuser but there are a few reputable brands with good products to choose from. Don't skimp on the diffuser, this to a large extent will impact the quality of your imagery. Remember, in photography it is all about the light, and macro photography is no exception here. Your diffuser is what is going to control to quality of the light you work with.

          You have a number of choices regarding lenses. The cheap option is to get a Raynox lens element that connects to the front of the lens you already have, thus increasing its magnification and enabling you to focus at closer distances. The more expensive option is to get a dedicated macro lens. All you need is a manual focus lens. You will be focusing with distance anyway, as I will explain in an upcoming part of this series. I got the excellent Venus Optics Laowa 90mm lens. It is not that expensive, as far as lenses go. It also overs up to 2X life size magnification rather than the 1X offered by most autofocus alternatives (usually at more than double the price of the Laowa lens).

          You do not need an expensive camera since you will not be using the camera's autofocus system. However, for reasons which I will explain later, you may prefer a camera that can shoot at 10 frames per second.

          You may also want to consider a few cheap accessories. Firstly, some background cards work fantastically. I got the series offered by AK diffusers. I also use a cheap self standing monopod and a clamp to hold the background card in place for me. For macro studio setups I also use a camera remote trigger (which you can also do via an app on your phone).

          Speaking about apps, I am using a free app that displays the color wheel (harmony of color). I move it to match the predominant color of my subject and then look at what the complimentary color to that color is to help me to choose the best background color card to use. That is it. Next week we will talk about the technique necessary for successful macro photography.

          This "research" sent me to B&H Photo to purchase what was needed. I programed a "macro mode" into my camera's memory bank with the recommended settings. Ready for action, I started to explore a garden and a field. The macro world is small and thus not noticed easily. So one has to stand still and just look. Move in closer and just watch for movement. Soon I started to notice ladybugs, ants, and other insects.

I snapped away and my macro journey began. Let me warn you though, that I was greeter by frustration. Getting and keeping focus is difficult. The insects move and the wind makes the plants sway. But the biggest challenge is the small depth of field. I will talk about how to overcome this problem in a future part of this series. So what have I discovered so far?

1. Patience is key. I just kept on trying and trying. After a few hours I got the hang of it.

2. It is immensely rewarding to see the images come to life, to look at the fine details of insects I have never seen before .

3. Even though my first focus was on insects, I soon realized that you can look at anything through the macro lens.

4. So I decided to start with easier subjects, indoor flowers do not move. 

A mist sprayer makes the world of difference to add interest. In a few hours I already had some nice images. I am really enjoying this type of photography now that I have learnt a few things and have the right equipment. I highly recommend that you give it a try.

          So why the sudden interest in macro now? And why should you be interested in macro too? They say that necessity is the mother of invention, or in my case the mother of inspiration.  Nebraska is not renowned for its exotic landscape scenery. So I was forced to branch out into other genres of photography. That got me into bird photography. Yet, certain seasons are not the best for bird photography as many of them are migratory. What then was I to photograph now that landscapes have generally been ruled out and birds are not always present? This is where macro photography enters. This is what persuaded me to enter this genre and why perhaps you might want to as well:

1. Macro opportunities are everywhere. There is no place where you cannot shoot macro. In winter you can shoot snowflakes. There are always plants that can be explored with a macro lens. There are always bugs. Anything can be interesting when seen through a macro lens.

2. You don't have to travel. Macro possibilities abound anywhere and everywhere, right where you are.

3. Weather almost does not matter. The time of day does not matter. Yay, no more getting up hours before sunrise. Everything you shoot in macro is in the shade of your flash diffuser and lit by your flash.

4. It is reasonably cheap to get into, relative to some other genres of photography. You don't need a fancy flash, a cheap one is just fine. A manual focus macro lens is cheap compared to many other lenses. We will talk about equipment in the coming weeks.

Do you notice the heart just above this ladybug's head? Yes, I have come to love macro photography. this is one of my very first macro images. And yes, the narrow depth of field is still frustrating, but we will solve that puzzle in another part of this series. Macro allows you to enter another small world. It lets you see details that you have never seen before. Come follow me through this series as I share my macro journey with you and teach you what I have learned. Perhaps it will inspire you to try macro.

1. There is just something greatly rewarding about getting a great image. It gives a person a sense of achievement, a certain sense of satisfaction. That image is not just a picture, there is an emotional connection, precisely because of all of the adversity mentioned above which was overcome.

2. It opens up conversations about the photography which we so love. Don't you just love telling the stories behind your images? I cannot tell you how many times people come to my home, start talking about the images on my walls, and then go "wow" when they find out that I took them. It is immensely satisfying when visitors just stare at a large print on the wall and then move even closer to inspect it from close range for even longer. Then the conversation just flows. And who does not love to talk about their passion? This is not a selfish or self-centered conversation about just my passion. Soon inquiry is made of their passions and hobbies. If they are also very passionate about whatever they do it seems to form a bond. Even though our passions may be very different, we often share dedication, overcoming obstacles, and a level of expertise and effort. We just "get" each other's experience. It deepens our friendships or at the very least our understanding of each other.

3. Being out in nature and witnessing the wonderful scenes that make our images are good for one's soul. It refreshes me. It makes me happy and gives me joy. It melts stress away. I know of a few photographers who view photography as therapy. After a divorce or tragedy they feel that photography helps them to process their thinking and bring healing.

4. Photography can provide great shared experiences. I have had the privilege to be involved with many photographic workshops. It is awesome to share the experience with like-minded people, to talk shop, to help each other, to see the world as others see it by looking at their images from the same shoot.

What about you, why do you do photography?

Oak Tree Silhouette with Setting Sun

Images like this one is a prime candidate for people to over process. They select the subject, the bird in this case. Then they can brighten the bird without changing anything else in the image. The reasoning behind this idea is simple. They want their subject to stand out more from the background. That is precisely why this image illustrates this issue so well. The bird is basically the same color as the rest of the image, with the exception of the brighter wingtips. No wonder people want to brighten the bird to stand out more.

          However, we have to be careful with that approach. Making the subject stand out can also make it stand out like a sore thumb. Brightening the bird too much will make it stand out in a bad way. It will not look natural. The bird is part of this image and part of the same general light. It needs to look dark, just like the rest of its surroundings. If the bird is much lighter than its surroundings it will just look wrong.

          Therefore, be careful with your processing. Just because there are all these new easy tools to use does not mean that we should go overboard. Go ahead and brighten your subject a little but stop well short of making it look unnatural. Because we can, does not mean that we should. Moderation is best. When you are done processing your images. Walk away. Come back in an hour and look at it. Does it still look good? Can you easily tell that it has been "doctored?" Call and ask your spouse what s/he thinks about the image.

          When these new tools excite you, stay calm and process gently.

          If this is so difficult (and COLD), why bother doing it? I am glad you asked. We do it because we love challenging ourselves and to grow. But we also do it to chase the images that those very conditions may produce (if we overcome these challenges). In case you wonder if dim light can, in fact, produce nice images, here is an examples of what I am talking about:

Besides the obvious advice of dressing warmly, here are some best practices to help you get images in these conditions.

1. What would you prefer, an out of focus image or a noisy image? There is no saving an out of focus image, but there are tools to mitigate noise. So use the widest aperture your lens offers to get as much light to the sensor as possible, choose the shutter speed needed to freeze the action and then let the ISO fall where it may. If the ISO really gets too high then slow down the shutter speed just a bit. Blurry wingtips are acceptable and can even be pleasing as long as the face and eyes of your subject are sharp.

2. Use AI noise reduction software on your raw file. Personally I prefer DXO PhotoLab or DXO PureRaw. Adobe also recently updated their AI noise module and now produce amazing results too. You will be surprised how good noisy images can be cleaned up these days. Luminar Neo's noise reduction also works very well. You can also look at the offerings from Topaz.

3. A dark viewfinder is a serious issue. If you can't see you cannot compose your image, let alone following fast moving action. Most modern cameras allow you to set your viewfinder brighter in the menu settings. This can help a little, but usually not by much. Nikon cameras have a fantastic feature that you can turn on that ignores your camera settings for the viewfinder's purposes. It changes your settings just for the viewfinder to brighter it while not affecting your images. This feature is like magic. It lets you see in almost darkness. That was what allowed me to take these images.

4. Autofocus systems need contrast in order to be able to focus. There is very little contrast in dim light. One trick that you can use is to set yourself up to shoot into the light which creates contrast. Parts of these birds' wings are quite bright because of being backlit. This not only helps your camera to focus but can also make your images more impactful. You can try to lower your angle to shoot upishly. If your subject has a brighter sky behind it you have contrast and your camera can focus. So your position relative to that of your subject, the sky, and the sun, can make a huge difference in aiding your camera with acquiring focus.

5. Dressing warmly solves the cold problem but solving one problem often creates more problems, just different ones. One such problem is that warm clothing can, at times, be noisy. When a sleeve rubs against another part of a jacket it can create enough noise to scare your subjects. When they can't see that well they are more skittish for self preservation's sake. Any noise during dim lit times of the day can send your subjects to seek safety elsewhere. I don't know if it is just me who thinks this but to me it just seems as if noise travels further at night. So be cognisant of this problem and select clothing that does not make noise when it moves. I have yet to find gloves that work in Nebraska's cold. I have tried a number of pairs but the cold just laughs at them. Thicker gloves will impede my ability to control the camera. Please don't suggest "photographic" gloves where the fingers can be exposed to control the camera. Exposed fingers in Nebraska's winter make no sense to me. I have been in severe pain for forty or fifty minutes as my fingers thaw inside, and that was after having full gloves on, without any fingers being exposed. By the way, if your fingers are really cold, they should thaw slowly, don't put them in warm water, for example, as that may possibly injure you. I am not a medical provider, so please seek professional help. Either way, next winter I will experiment with electric gloves. I will let you know if they work both for heat (which I am sure will work wonderfully) AND for camera operability.

Be careful and safe. Have fun trying something new.

          However, that does not mean that this attempt was a total bust. There were some images to be had. This outing served the purpose of establishing the proof of concept. From that perspective it was a success. Before we discuss what I would consider that success to be, let's look at the image in question:

When attempting to shoot an image such as this one, the dynamic range (the range between bright white and very dark in which there is still detail) of your camera is very important. It is so easy to get either the sun and or the foreground blown out (having no detail). Things worked out well in this department. The color rendition also stayed true without fading. Unfortunately, my winged friends did not exhibit their usual aggressive behavior toward each other when they were between me and the sun (of course they continually displayed their behavior when they did not have the sun right behind them). So I never had the opportunity of shooting them as they jumped up and "into" the sun. For me to get this image a lot of things will have to work out. Ideally, the sun needs to be a bit lower and hover just above the trees in the background at the same time when the birds cooperate. They tended to stay toward the left most of the time, so my chances of getting the image I am after are slim. I cannot move my position to the left thereby positioning the birds in front of the sun from where they mostly do their thing because the terrain slopes downward in that direction and I will be too low. So why did this image prove the concept to me then if things did not quite work out?

          Well, let's look at what did work out and what showed promise:

1. Even though the chances are going to be low-ish, this image proves that I can get the birds between me and sun, even if just on a few and short occasions.

2. I am now convinced that the dynamic range will work out, it is possible to get detail in the birds and in the sun.

3. I was lucky enough to get a bird flying across the sun. That was not where I focused, but it shows me that it may possibly work out.

My season for photographing these Prairie Chickens are now over for this year. We will try this again next year. If you want to attempt this kind of photography, here are a few tips for you:

• Use a large aperture and a fast shutter speed. You have to get the action in focus and these birds can move fast.

• Use auto ISO to let the camera nail the exposure. Yes, I am aware that there are superhuman photographers who claim to shoot everything on full manual. That can certainly work in this situation. Just figure the exposure out with the sun included in the image and set the camera accordingly. However, then your viewfinder will be dark when the sun is not in the frame. When these birds jump up and fight you just don't have the time to change settings. I shot until the light got too intense and harsh and the auto ISO nailed every shot. So I don't understand the big deal of why some people refuse to use such a great tool. It works wonderfully, at least for me.

• Use a Gimbal head on your tripod. This type of photography takes time and unless you are Rambo's brother I cannot see how a person can hand hold the camera and a long lens for that long.

• IMPORTANT - stop shooting into the sun the minute when the sun gets much brighter than the sunrise glow (or should I say the minute before the sun gets too bright). You will damage the camera's sensor looking straight into the sun with a telephoto lens when the sun's strengths is too strong.

• IMPORTANT - NEVER look into the sun with your eyes or through the viewfinder of an SLR or a DSLR. You will permanently damage your eyes. In this case, I only looked using my mirrorless camera, that way I am not looking at the sun but at a TV monitor which cannot be bright enough to harm me.

Stay safe and enjoy making your dream images.

          So what is changing, what is new?

• Water Enhancer AI - helps you to quickly change muddy lifeless water into bluer water.

• Twilight Enhances AI - changes the look of an image to what if may have looked like if you took it during twilight.

• New Masking Tools - for the first time we will now have Luminosity Masking (selecting areas of an image based on brightness). there will also be AI object selection.

• The HDR module can now batch process up to 1000 images. Just drag and drop them into the module.

• There is also a new landscape category in Tools so that you can easily find your favorite landscape tools in one place.

• I may not say more now but there will also be a rebranding.

Feel welcome to explore the software here (affiliate link - which does not add any cost to you). In fact, you may get a discount if you order from this link.

          Personally, I don't use some of the AI features but many people like them. Other programs may be better at certain things, like DXO seems to be better at noise reduction. However, how much will you pay if the use the best software for this, and another best software for that, and that, and that? Luminar offers a great balance between what you get and what you pay for.

          Here is an example of a deeply cropped image shot at ISO 8000. Now I would normally not use such an image but I thought that this example will give you a good idea of what can be done with this software. Please note, that from Raw to final image, only Luminar Neo was used.

          So what will it take to get that dream shot?

1. I will have to get permission to erect my own blind. Check!

2. Since the blind has to be set up in total darkness one has to have a way to know where to pitch it. On a previous trip I waited for the birds to leave, picked my spot, and took measurements. So the next time I go, I will know to take so many steps from the permanent blind to the West and so many paces to the North. Check.

3. The image I dream of will have to have a cloudless sky. I am watching the weather reports.

4. The birds need to get used to my blind. Unfortunately, that means I will have to go multiple times.

5. The imagined image will require taking the shot at an exact moment. To increase my chances of getting it right I have to learn the birds' behavior to better predict that moment. Check.

6. Luck. A lot of luck will be needed. Why? Well, let me tell you about my dream, then it will make sense. First, please look at this image.

You might wonder what on earth this image has to do with my Prairie Chickens. My dream is to have two Prairie Chickens jump up into the air, fighting each other (as they often do). I want to be shooting right into the sun. I want to catch those Prairie Chickens inside the sun. For this to work out, they would have to be in the precise position between me and the sun. They would need to jump the exact height needed. Oh' and it needs to happen within just a few short minutes after sunrise before the sun gets too strong and harsh.

          So what do you think? Do I stand a chance? I can dream! Now, I just need to keep plugging away, trying over and over again, until I succeed. I sure hope that one of these days you will see this shot. I am already seeing it in my mind.

          The Lek which I visit has two permanent blinds set up. As usual, these blinds are set up for bird watchers and not photographers. Firstly, the blinds are set up facing each other on either side of the mound. This means that, at times, you have the other blind in your background depending on the bird movement. My biggest gripe, however, is that they are facing North and South. The birds are only at the Lek from before sunrise until about three or so hours later. This means that half the birds' bodies are always shaded. Furthermore, the dry grass shimmer with the side lighting, which makes exposure difficult.

          It is important to consider the direction of the light. Are you okay with where the shadows are? What if the bird's face is in shadow because a wing is lifted up or if another bird interacts with "your" bird and casts a shadow on the target bird? This has been a big problem for me to deal with. Here is an example:

I really want to love this image. The light is early and soft. the bird is coming right at me. it's beak is even open. BUT the face is in shadow (and this is after I have lightened it in post processing). To solve this problem I wanted to shoot with the sun behind me. I want the whole bird sunlit. So I received permission to set up my own blind. Here is the result.

I wish I had a different background, but I don't. The mound makes it difficult because you are always shooting upwards, hence the sky as a background. The permanent blinds are higher than my little blind which meant that I could get a different background. Photography is always about tradeoffs. Before deciding on where to take your position, you may want to consider the direction of the light. What kind of result do you want? Side lighting looks very different from full frontal light. If possible, take images from a number of angles from the sun and decide which is best for you. The direction of the light can impact your images greatly.

          Happy shooting.

1. I did not realize how attached I was to my Sony system. For reference, I am not a very sentimental person, but I was almost in tear when I shipped my Sony equipment off. It felt like I was saying good bye to be close friend. After all, my Sony gear traveled all over with me, to England, Israel, Botswana, Namibia, South Africa, to name a few places, and of course to many placed in the USA.

2. Learning the different vocabulary for familiar features has been a chore.

3. Setting up the Nikon has been a nightmare. Perhaps it is just me, but the implementation of their memory bank system seem ill advised. These memory banks (or custom settings - C1, C2, C3 on the Sony's mode dial) never save a certain set point. They remain live and stay changed according to any and all changes that you make when you shoot. They really should not be referred to as a bank because you cannot bank on them. Perhaps the better name for them is a bookmark, bookmarking where you were last at or how things were last set when you used it. So Nikon users have to save the reference point settings (to be able to bank on them) to memory cards. But then when you format your memory card your settings are gone. To add to the confusion, there are two different kinds of memory banks. I have no idea why this is the case. To change from one bank to another requires multiple menu steps. In Sony land, custom settings are true banks to which you can save all your settings in one bank versus the different types of banks with Nikon. Furthermore, to change from one bank or custom setting to another on the Sony takes all but one turn of a dial and you are set.

There were also some nice surprises in Nikon land. For years I wished that my Sony would allow me to record short audio files and attached it to the relevant image. For example, I would have loved to be able to record a note stating that this image is the start of a series of seven images which are part of a panorama image, or that the next five images are part of a focus stack. The Nikon Z8 has this feature, a dream come true. Other than the memory bank issue and having to learn different names for what features are called, I managed to drive the menu system well.

          Coming from my Sony A7R IV, I like blackout free shooting a lot. It means that one can adjust to birds' flight paths easier and follow them in the viewfinder better. It is just more pleasant to use. Because of the rolling shutter effect of my Sony I always used the mechanical shutter. Boy, do I like silent shoot with the Z8! A nice touch of Nikon is giving you a soft cloth "housing" for each lens, making them a bit more protected inside my backpack.

          It is still early days but for now I am satisfied with the switch. All in all, it was cheaper than buying the Sony A1. Next week we will leave all this gear talk behind us and get back to some actual photography.

          P.S. It really bothers me that Canon, Nikon, and Sony all do not use the Arca Swiss dove tail system for their lens feet. WHY???? This causes additional expense and hassle. Almost every reviewer under the sun complains about this, and have been for a number of years now, and yet, here we are having to waste money on buying something that can easily be incorporated into the product. After all, Sigma and Tamron's lens feet are Acra Swiss compatible.

Nikon

1. I really do not like the size of their Z8 and Z9 cameras. I know I am in the minority, but I am still the one that has to live with my decision. My hands are the size they are and I cannot change that. With bird photography one sits with the camera in hand for hours. Comfort matters. If Nikon did not have the Z8 and only the Z9 was available I would not even have looked at Nikon. Gear is expensive as it is, I don't have extra money laying around to hire a Sherpa to haul a Z9 around.

2. It would have been really nice if pre-capture could shoot in Raw. The Z9 does! Perhaps a future firmware update would make this option available on the Z8. Since the Z8 just had a massive firmware update without including this feature, I somehow doubt that it would come along in the future. Nikon has to keep some differentiation between the Z8 and the Z9. Nikon seems to be listening to their users and one can only hope that this will be fixed.

3. Nikon seems to always be taking their sweet time to manufacture their goods. There are stories of people waiting for ordered gear for faaaaaar toooooo long. A similar situation exists right now regarding the 180-600mm lens. You cannot get it anywhere. I have either been to or communicated with various camera stores and all of them seem to have waiting lists. I can't even find this lens used; which is understandable since it is a newly introduced lens. I know that my up coming trip is my problem but I am not going on that trip without gear. After all, part of the trip is a safari for photography. If I cannot get the 180-600mm lens then I cannot go with Nikon. They will loose not only the sale of this lens but of everything.

Sony

1. Pre-capture. The Sony A1 does not even offer this feature. For bird photography, this is a great feature. I will not be happy to pay over $4,400.00 for a used body without having this feature. Sony has officially promised a firmware update for the A1 but the promised feature list does not include pre-capture.

2. Price. The Sony A1 (which is the only option in the Sony camp over 33MP and capable of shooting at more than 12 frames per second) has been on the market since January of 2021. It is arguably getting to the end of it's run before an updated camera model takes over. Yet, the price has not dropped from the eye watering price of $6,500.00. I am really hesitant to buy a camera for this much, so close to it getting replaced. Once it gets replaced it will obviously still continue to work as well as before but it's value will take a significant hit. Even on the used market they tend to go for around a hefty $4,400.00 now. How much will I get back for it once a new model is released. Not that I will change right away but it is something to consider. Then I will still need to add CF-Express type A cards at double the price.

          So here is what I need to consider. Can I even get Nikon's 180-600mm before my trip, without which I cannot consider Nikon at this point? Will I be able to get a used and discounted enough Sony A1 to make financial sense? I am searching for both options, far and wide, on a daily basis. At this point it is all about availability and price. If I get the Nikon 180-600mm before I can get a reasonably priced Sony A1, then I am switching to Nikon. If I happen to get the Sony A1 first, then I will be staying with Sony. It is reasonable to argue that I should not be making such an important decision all based on the timing of an up coming trip. Yet, I feel that both brands are so good and offers what I need (mostly) that I cannot go wrong with either. Since the price that I am going to pay is very similar, between going to Nikon versus staying with Sony, I don't feel that I am making a mistake either way, regardless of the trip; the asterisks being depending on price and availability.

          Sony has been a good brand for me. People complain about their menu system. I simply placed the items I use regularly in "My Menu." I assigned one of the custom buttons accordingly and with the press of that one button I have instant access to all the items I use, no searching for anything. Problem solved. People complain about Sony's lack of weather sealing. I have used my gear in rain for years now without any issue. The equipment has held up very nicely and looks as good as new. I know my Sony well. I love the exposure comp dial where it is. It works well with how I shoot. I am amazed that Canon and Nikon don't have such a dedicated dial.

          If I migrate to Nikon I will have to climb a learning curve. Things may frustrate me, like not having Zebra lines when whites or blacks are blown. I fail to understand why Nikon does not have this. It is super useful. I read a comment in one forum stating that these Zebra lines can take up a large portion of your view, hindering you from watching what is going on, and preventing you from capturing the image at the right moment. My response: why would you want to take any image if large portions of the image is blown? Besides, features that bother you can be turned off. Missing features cannot be turned on. But, given Nikon's stellar reputation and major firmware updates I am excited to give Nikon a try too. It has been said that one should date your camera but marry your lenses. I do feel that in this department Nikon is the winner, for what I shoot (long reasonably priced good primes).

          It has boiled down to a wait and see game of watching availability with Nikon and price of used gear with Sony. But what will I do if both come true; I find a Nikon 180-600mm AND the Sony A1 at a more palatable price? If that happens I will probably move to Nikon. I make this decision based on the fact that Sony cameras are just very expensive (A9 III and the A1), and because the A1 is nearing the end of it's run. So not only am I asked to spend a lot now but I will take a second hit the day I sell it because of it's age (at least more so than a newer and still current model Nikon). I will also get a new warranty on everything for the same price. Lastly, a clear upgrade path to wonderful and reasonably priced long prime lenses are attractive, something Sony does not have at this stage. Ideally, I would love to stay with Sony, if only they would release a real top notch APS-C body for bird and wildlife photography and or release a full frame stacked sensor body at a price that competes with Canon and Nikon. As a bonus, it would be nice if Sony also develops such nice long primes without costing human body parts.

          Thank you for taking this journey of decision-making with me. I will let you know what happens.

          It is not all rosy news in the Nikon camp. Their APS-C offerings do not seem to me to attract much attention, and for good reason. Some may possibly argue that Nikon has neglected this market segment. Lastly, their lower tier cameras, in my opinion, are also behind the competition, especially as far as autofocus systems are concerned, so I hear. I am not sure if Nikon is choosing to position themselves at the higher end of the market, we will see.

          So why am I seriously looking into Nikon? For what I shoot, their offerings are very good, and at reasonable prices. The Z8 is a fantastic camera that received multiple camera of the year awards. It has a stacked sensor with fast readout speed, a feature lacking in Canon (other than the Canon R3 - but 24MP does not interest me). The major complaint against the camera is the lack of a mechanical shutter. This is a valid concern for those who shoot with flash, but that does not impact me. As of a few weeks ago the Z8 received a major firmware update which brought new features to the camera. To me, this was an important firmware update to watch. The Z8's autofocus system, according to many reviewers, was good but behind Sony and Canon's. This was particularly true, say the reviewers, when tracking birds with watery backgrounds and when birds flew from a blue sky background into a vegetation based background. The firmware update not only fixed these issues but may also have brought the autofocus system to parity with Sony and Canon's.

          I still have two niggles that are keeping me back from jumping to Nikon. Their pre-capture only shoots in JPEG. Now I don't know what on earth Nikon is thinking here because who buys a $3,800.00 camera to shoot JPEG? Nikon's real strength lies not only in the wonderful Z8 but also in the great bird and wildlife suited lenses. These pro/prosumer lenses cost more than cheaper consumer lenses would. Surely, Nikon must know that their users (of this camera) are avid enthusiasts and pro or prosumers not interested in JPEG for the most part. The second niggle is the bottleneck created by using asymmetrical card slots. One card slots uses the newer CF-Express type B cards while the other slot uses the older SD card type. CF-Express cards handsomely outperform SD cards. This means that, if a photographer sets the camera to use the second card slot as a backup to the first one, that the camera's speed, to clear the buffer, for example, will be limited to the speed of the slowest card. Other than these two issues the Z8 looks like a fantastic camera.

          Most people think that Sony's ergonomic are horrible and that their camera bodies are too small and therefore uncomfortable in their hands. Personally I love Sony's form factor and they fit my hand perfectly (I am a small person). I have handled the Z8 and it is quite a bit bigger than not only the Sony's but also Canon's R5. It is a bit big for my liking (And I am asking for the bigger CF-Express card slot in place of the smaller SD card slot). On everything else, I am very satisfied with what the Z8 offers. It's price of $3,800.00 compares very well with the price of $4,400.00 or so of a used Sony A1. One could rightly argue that $600 is not enough to warrant changing camera brands. However, shooting at faster frame rates means that the photographer will need bigger memory cards. The Sony's CF-Express type A cards cost roughly double that of the type B cards. This results in another expense which can be costly. I don't want to buy more SD cards because, they are being replaced by CF-Express cards. Nobody feels good buying VHS tapes when CD's are taking over. It is just not a judicious way to spend one's money (and my budget is tight). Then, of course, the Sony A1 is used. We have not talked about specific lenses yet but since we are talking about finances, Nikon's 180-600mm is priced very kindly, given the competition, at $1,700.00.

          Given that I will be satisfied with either the Z8 or the A1, perhaps I should concern myself with the lens offerings. From the reviewers point of view, it seems as though the Nikon 180-600 and the Sony 200-600 are equally sharp with the Nikon having the edge in terms of image stabilization. I am not sure if this is due to the IBIS (in body image stabilization - inside the camera versus that of the lens) system or of the lens' system. If it is due to the IBIS then I believe Sony has already improved that as is evidenced by the A7R V. Any new Sony release should have the improved IBIS also. Both Sony and Nikon's lenses are great. Where there is a difference is what is on offer by each company in terms of long prime lenses. Both companies' 600mm F4's are very good, with Nikon having the edge here because of a built in 1.4X teleconverter. However, these lenses do not interest me as my budget simply, and probably never will, accommodate the financial outlay that those lenses call for. So this will not affect my decision.

          Where Nikon shines and where no other manufacturer offers any lenses is in their 600mm F6.3 and 800mm F6.3's. They are light (for what they are). They are sharp. Their autofocus is fast. Compared to the 400mm F2.8 and 600mm F4 lenses these lenses are well priced. For now, they are still well beyond my budget but one can dream. If a very big and luxurious ship sails in bearing my name these lenses are available. If finances ever permit it, I could see myself getting one of these two lenses, whereas I cannot see myself paying for the 600mm F4 or other branded 800mm (and I am not referring to the F22 kind). The price gap between them is just too huge. There is a clear upgrade path that does not exist in the other brands. This is not a big factor for me since my budget is way too limited but what is of interest to me is that Nikon is positioning themselves in the space that caters to what I shoot and to the kind of equipment that I like (and at a tolerable price).

          So, my final choice then is between Nikon and Sony. Next week I decide what I am going to do. Please tune in.

          However, if I use a Canon camera I also need Canon lenses. NO, I am not a fan of adapting other lenses. Although adapted lenses' performance can be admirable they do not tend to match that of native glass. Because bird in flight photography is so difficult for autofocus systems to track (except whey they fly in front of a clear blue sky) it does not make sense to me to sacrifice any performance by adapting lenses. As much as I like the R5, it is Canon's lenses that do not suit my needs. In fact, for the life of me, I cannot understand Canon's lens strategy right now. They are bringing to market lenses that seem to either cater to the bottom of the market or the top of the market. They don't have lenses (telephoto lenses) that appeal to a person like me, who are seeking lenses catering to the middle or to the middle upper market where enthusiasts and semi-pros function. In the short term, this may be a wise strategy. The bottom of the market moves a lot of volume, and volume sales create good profit. The top end of the market has higher profit margins, also generating good profit. But I question this wisdom of this strategy from a long term perspective.

1. The bottom end of the market now has nowhere to go to upgrade their bottom end lenses when they grow into photography more and out of their current gear. Most of this market probably will not jump straight from cheaper bottom end gear to the very expensive top market gear. For perspective, the Canon 600mm F4 sells for $13,000.00. So when a beginner becomes an enthusiast, Canon may very well lose them to another brand.

2. Avid photographers may now not be drawn to Canon because they are not interested in the bottom end gear and they cannot afford the top market gear. Canon may thus not attract these photographers and may also loose their own avid photographers.

          I fall into this latter category. On the long end of the lens lineup there is not a single lens that attracts me, while there are many which repulses me. Yes, repulse is a strong word, and it may not even be strong enough given how I feel. I am just not smart enough to understand why someone would buy and what someone will do with Canon's F22 long lenses. Okay, I am exaggerating some. But seriously, a 600mm F11 and an 800mm f11. Yes, they are cheap, but so are doorstops. How about the 200-800mm F9? Many of the reviewers have turned into F9 or F11 apologists. They argue:

1. One can get great images with these lenses*. Yes, a photographer can, with a massive asterisks. IF you shoot in good light (No, "good light," for real photographers do not refer to bright, middle of the day light. We shoot at sunrise, sunset, lightly overcast days, and yes, even in rain). IF the subject is close to you (So that the background can be blurred. But then again, if the subject is close to me, why would I need an 800mm lens?). IF the background is far from the subject (To blur the background). These "IF's" eliminate probably 90+% of wildlife and bird shooting opportunities. I don't want to buy a lens that is only usable in a small number of cases and in light that is less flattering for photography.

2. The AI noise removal software is so good today that the aperture is no longer of any concern, just jack up the ISO to get enough light. While this is partly true, the problem of using a too high ISO is not just related to noise. High levels of ISO also negatively impact the vibrancy of colors and contrast not to mention harming the dynamic range. Furthermore, AI software can only go so far. When the ISO really gets up there the image file just deteriorates.

          Look, not only are we shooting in less than bright mid day sun, we are also shooting fast moving subjects. This means using a very fast shutter speeds. Sorry, but a very fast shutter speed and a small aperture does not work for bird photography (except when all the "IF's" are met, which is rare). Also, the maximum aperture on a lens (most lenses) is not always the sharpest. It is often best to stop down just one aperture to get the best out of the lens in terms of sharpness. This makes the F9 or F11 even worse. Apparently, I am just not smart enough to "get" the philosophy of these lenses.

          Which brings us to the 100-500mm 7.1. 600mm, for birds is often too short. Going down to 500mm is going in the wrong direction. That alone does not rule this lens out, as 500mm is reasonable. Many love this lens. It is small (for what it is). It is light. It is sharp. It is well built. It is an F7.1, which for me is getting to be a problem. People say, "but is it just beyond your current 200-600mm's F6.3." Yes, that is true, but 6.3 is already a compromise, now I am being asked to accept a compromise on top of a compromise. Those pesky "IF's" start to come into play. Okay, perhaps, just perhaps, I can live with F7.1. Let's say I accept F7.1, is the lens priced as an F7.1 lens? Wait, what? This lens sells for $2,900.00! Sorry, three strikes and you are out. Strike one, 500mm can be a bit short. Strike two, F7.1. Strike three, $2,900.00. The Sony 200-600mm and Nikon 180-600 F6.3 sells for under $2,000.00. And both of these lenses are great with a bit longer reach and a better aperture. Canon's lens, as great as it is, for what it is, just does not compete financially. I cannot see myself paying $2,900.00 for an F7.1 which is already a bit short for me.

          Here lies the problem. Canon has great bodies but their lens lineup does not favor avid bird and wildlife photographers who don't want to spend $13,000.00 on a lens. There is, for me, no other option with Canon. It is either, spend $13,000.00 or nothing. Oh well, I guess nothing wins. I badly wanted to like Canon again but they are just not offering what I want (and can get from Sony and Nikon). Now if they announce a new 200-600mm F6.3 at a reasonable price that would certainly change the landscape. But I have a trip coming up and have to have my gear in hand by June. Given that the R5 II is rumored to be released this year I was hoping that Canon would be my new photography friend.

          My search continues next week.

          I also have two other objections relating to OM systems.

1. Will OM Systems survive? They are a small company (the imaging division). Olympus sold the imaging division to JIP (the new parent company). Even though the OM-1 has been selling well, their market share is still very small compared to the three big players; Canon, Sony, and Nikon. I am not sure I want to risk a large investment which could loose all of it's value if the imaging division closes down. I recently corresponded with an OM Systems Ambassador who assured me that he sees people switching from the big three to OM Systems in large volumes. Then again, I also spend a lot of time reading in various photographic forums. Mind you, I am not reading what Canon, Sony, or Nikon users are saying, I am reading the OM Systems' forum (these are people who are shooting with OM Systems already). The sentiment in these forums also questions OM Systems' survivability. Furthermore, many of these photographers state that they are either leaving the system or not buying any new gear from OM Systems. The bottom line for me is that this does not inspire confidence in the brand.

2. Lens pricing. OM Systems have a wonderful birding and wildlife lens in the 150-400mm F4.5 x1.25. The build quality, optical performance, weather sealing, stabilization, and the built-in 1.25x teleconverter are awesome. This is the ideal lens for what I shoot, and it is quite small and light for what it is. But, ... please just be patient with me as I quickly grab a tissue, the price makes me cry. At $7,500.00 this is deal breaker number two. Now many faithful Olympus photographers argue that this lens is an absolute bargain because the full frame equivalent does not exist and the full frame lenses that come close to this cost double this price. To be clear, 2x (field of view as compared to full frame sensors) of 150-400 plus the 1.25x teleconverter gives you 300-1000mm of reach. My counter argument is simple. That field of view advantage comes from the camera's sensor and not from the lens. The lens, physically is no more than a 150-400mm and therefore should not cost more than what it is. The glass, focusing motors, etc. in the lens are no bigger or stronger than what is needed for the stated 400mm. Let's bring in some perspective. The Nikon 400mm F4.5, which is also a professional series lens retails for $3,000.00. Let's add $1,000.00 for the zoom from 150-400. Let's add another $1,000.00 for the built-in teleconverter. This lens should not cost more than $5,000.00. There is no way I will pay $7,500.00 for this lens, even if the camera had a 33MP sensor. What is of further concern is that OM Systems just released a 150-600mm lens and priced it at $2,700.00. The Nikon 200-600 costs $1,700.00 while the Sony 200-600 costs $1,900.00 and both of these lenses are great. To add insult to injury, this lens is a rebadged Sigma lens (I am not bashing Sigma here, they make some great lenses especially their ART line of lenses) which sells for $1,500.00 (once again, my issue is not with the lens but with the price OM Systems want for it). Now I can understand OM Systems adapting this lens to work better with their stabilization system. Let's add $500.00 for that. Why would anyone pay $2,700.00 for this lens?

          With all that said, as much as I really wanted to like the OM-1 II with its fantastic 150-400mm lens, the resolution of the camera's sensor and the price of the lens rules them out. The concern about whether OM Systems will still be around in ten years did not help their cause.

          Since we are talking about smaller than full frame camera sensors here let us look at two other brands in this space. Panasonic and Fujifilm stand out. Fujifilm especially is noteworthy since they too use a stacked sensor. Their frame rate is great. Unfortunately, both of these companies' offering seem to fall short in the autofocus department. Photographing birds (birds in flight) can be one of the most taxing genres on a camera's autofocus system. In my opinion, both these brands just don't cut it for birds in flight. Now if I was filming video, the Panasonic really shines there, but that is not my focus.

          As a result, OM Systems, Panasonic, and Fujifilm have been eliminated from my list. I don't mind smaller sensors. If Sony were to introduce an APS-C camera with top notch autofocus tracking, a stacked sensor, clean noise levels, and a fast frame rate, I would buy it in a heartbeat, provided the price is not so outrageous as the Sony A1's price is (in my view).

          My search for gear that better matches what I shoot now continues ... See you next week as I discuss the next contender.

          Since I know the Sony system well, and since I have all the Sony lenses that in need, and since it is expensive to switch brands, why don't I just buy another Sony camera better suited to bird photography? Well, that is just the problem. For some reason, I am not smart enough to understand, Sony is the ONLY mainstream camera brand, that I am aware of, that does not offer any camera that can shoot at more than 12 frames per second for under $4,500.00! And that $4,500.00 camera is a previous generation, but still on the market A9 II which has been replaced by the A9 III. Current generation Sony cameras capable of shoot at more than 12 frames per second amount to two offerings, the A9 III at $6,000.00 or the A1 at $6,500.00. When asked to spend that much money (and my money is scarce) it makes a person look around at other offerings. As much as I love my Sony gear, paying $6,000.00 or more for a camera makes me gasp for air. It makes other brands look much more appealing.

          I called Sony's customer service line to talk about this and was advised to look at the used market. But why would I buy a used Sony camera at the price of a competitor's new camera? The Sony A1 used is still $500 to $1,200 more expensive than competing cameras, depending on which one we are looking at. The A9 III is not even shipping yet, so it's used market does not exist now. The A9 II is not an option for me because I will not buy any camera with only 24 MP. Now I know, many will say that I am crazy and that many pro photographers prefer 24 MP. I am not getting into that debate here other than to make just three observations.

1. Please see a previous blog where I wrote about framing. To summarize, when shooting erratic flying birds with long lenses the photographer is forced to shoot a bit loosely framed so as not to clip the bird. One then crops for framing and placement purposes later. That means that although one starts off with 24 MP, the final image after cropping is no longer 24 MP. I can live with a file of 24 MP if that is the final output size, but in bird photography that rarely happens. Cropping is going to happen even if reach is not a problem due to shooting a bit loosely.

2. A 600mm lens is often just a bit too short for bird photography. So cropping is going to happen unless you only shoot at controlled setups. After cropping a 24 MP file one is not left with much.

3. When 4K TV's came out, most people said that we don't need to shoot in 4K video because there are no 4K displays out yet. Well, how long did that last? Yes, 4K displays took a while to be released but then the floodgates opened and now who does not have a 4K TV? The same thing is happening with 8K displays. For a still images to fill an 8K display one needs a 33 MP image. For me, who only buys a new camera body rarely, I need this purchase to last. It just does not make any sense to me to buy a camera that cannot fill an 8K display. So the minimum resolution I will accept in a camera is 45 MP. That is 33 MP to fill an 8K display and a bit of room for framing and cropping. Yes, I know that AI software can enlarge images, but I am not starting from behind. One needs to start out in front so that the camera can last a good long time. I am in effect buy the camera now, but for the next ten years. Will we see 12K displays by then?

That then only leaves me with the Sony A1 in the Sony camp. It is a fantastic camera and I would absolutely love to have one. My problem is not related to the camera but the price of it. The Canon R5 can be had for under $3,000 right now (with the current trade in bonus) or refurbished from Canon. The Nikon Z8 sells for $3,800.00 and there is a discount if one bundles it with the 24-120 on top of that. Yes, many will say that the Sony is a better camera but it is not as much better as the premium price suggests. I could be perfectly happy with either the R5 or the Z8.

          I have done the math. I can literally sell my gear (at MPB.COM), add the difference that a used A1 will cost me and replace all of my gear from other brands and come out even. That means that I have a brand new kit compared to a used Sony kit, without spending a cent more. That also gives me a new warranty. The price of the Sony is a pill too hard to swallow given the competition out there. Since the total price of switching versus the price of a used A1 (taking the sale of my other gear into account in both cases) is going to be even, and since the Sony A1 is magnificent I am leaving a used A1 in the running. But a new one has been ruled out. Furthermore, I can't just look at the camera here. Some of my Sony lenses are aging. Switching brands would replace them too, without costing me extra.

          But what if Sony releases a new camera that does shoot at more than 12 frames per second and has a 45 MP sensor or more for a reasonable price? While I cannot predict the future that does not seem likely. The Sony A7R V is fairly new and is probably not going to be replaced soon. I have a major trip planned and need to have my new camera in hand by June. The Sony A7 IV is also fairly new and I can't see it being replaced before June. In the APS-C sensor world, the A6700 is also too new for replacement.

          My journey to find what I need continues. Let's see what happens to the used prices of the Sony A1 in the next month. I will talk about the other brands in the next few weeks. Come follow my journey to a final decision.

          My photographic gear journey started off with a Ricoh screw mount camera. My father gave it to me. During that time Ricoh seemed to be dead-ish and just did not bring out anything new. I grew as a photographer but my gear did not. At a massive sale I bought a Canon T70 which I used for a number a years. During college I ran out of money and shooting film was expensive. So I sold everything and did not do much photography for a brief period of time. Right after college I started with photography again. There seemed to be a general consensus (at least from those I talked to) during that time that Canon made the best lenses, Nikon made the best bodies, and Minolta was in between with good bodies and good lenses. So I went with Minolta.

          My photography flourished and I was very happy with my kit. Then digital happened! I waited and waited for Minolta to go digital, but that day never came. Eventually, I had to make a decision to jump ship. In hindsight, that was obviously the correct decision. That taught me an important lesson that there is a delicate balance between waiting patiently and waiting too long. Waiting patiently may save you a lot of money and your brand may reward you with a great new release. Waiting too long may cost you a lot of money as a brand loses favor or goes out of business, making your gear almost valueless on the used gear market. I am glad that I sold off all my Minolta gear at the right time. This lesson learnt is busy playing a major role in my decision to consider jumping ship now, but more of that later.

          Canon seemed to have the best sensors at the time so I went with Canon. As before, my photography flourished and I was happy with my decision. One day, a number of years later, a client brought a new Sony mirrorless camera to a workshop where I was a co-instructor. I was very impressed with the files that that camera produced. I started looking in mirrorless gear, but more out of being intrigued. Famed photographer Don Smith (donsmithphotography.com), whom I was co-instructing for at some of his workshops, received one of these Sony mirrorless cameras to try out. I distinctly remember the moment when we sat in the hotel room opening one of the raw files after an early morning shoot. We were blown away at the file's ability to lift the shadows without much resulting noise. We were both sold. Naysayer rebuffed with "who shoots underexposed by four or five stops?" But they missed the point. The point was that one could expose for the highlights and save the shadows, effectively gaining dynamic range and getting beautiful shadow areas rather than black areas.

          Lesson number two was learnt. Technology advances seem to come in waves. Those very waves crush some companies, sweep others off of their feet, and births new companies which may lead the pack in the new era. The digital era was one of those waves. Minolta was crushed and Canon took the early lead. Mirrorless was one of those technological waves. Canon and Nikon was caught off guard, they were too cautious to move ahead. Sony took the market by storm. Nobody would have guessed a few years earlier that Sony would conquer a lot or market share from Canon and more specifically from Nikon. The auto industry is experiencing such a wave right now. These waves bring with them many questions. One such important question is whether to duck the wave or to ride the wave. Not all of these waves turn out rideable. Some of these technologies don't pan out and at times competing technologies fight it out leaving consumers uncertain. Remember, VHS and Betamax? We have had battles like that in the memory card space too. Both Don and I felt certain that mirrorless was the way to go. We sold our Canon gear and bought into Sony. We were going to ride this wave. In hindsight, we made the right decision. Mirrorless has taken over the market. I have been happily using Sony since almost the beginning of the mirrorless wave.

          So why am I considering switching brands now? Just over two years ago I moved from California to Nebraska, a move that I have been very happy with. But Nebraska is not particularly famous for their ocean views or mountain vistas. I don't have landscape photography opportunities here (at least not within reasonable driving distance). I was forced to adapt and found myself gravitating towards bird photography. My Sony A7R IV is a brilliant camera which I love. It excels at landscapes photography, at bird photography not so much. It's autofocus is just too slow and it frame rate likewise. It is not the camera's fault. It is simply not a birding camera, was never intended to be.

          Here we are. I have to buy a new camera. Naturally, Sony is the first brand I will look at. It just makes sense since I have the lenses I need and switching system, as we have already said, is very expensive. I have done a lot of research but am not quite at the point of making my final decision yet. Next week, I will share my hesitancy to continue with Sony. During the next weeks I will talk about every brand I am considering and in part five (perhaps six) I will make my final decision. I hope that you will join me on my journey towards that decision.

          Having learnt my lesson the hard way with the tripod drama, I started to research Gimbal heads for long lenses. As usual, the gear on offer ranged tremendously in terms of price. As usual, this price gap started to play games in my head. Is there really such a difference in the quality of the products? What if I bought a middle of the road Gimbal? Surely, all the YouTube reviews praising the cheaper ones cannot be wrong, are they? As usual, I did not have enough money for the Gimbal head that I wanted. I was facing the same decision that I faced with the tripods, so many years ago.

          However, I learnt my lesson with the tripods, and I was not about to make that mistake again. On the other hand, I only had the money I had. Since this purchase was for a mechanical piece of equipment without electronics I made the decision to buy the head I wanted, BUT to buy used to fit into my budget. It was still a lot of money but I was not about to get burnt twice. After a month with the new Gimbal from Wimberley I was disappointed. I don't know what the previous owner did to the head but it must have been something for the head with a great reputation to disappoint. The rotational friction was not consistent. At certain degrees of rotation it turn smoothly and at other degrees of rotation it was much harder to turn. This made it useless for photography involving panning. Secondly, although it was tightly fitted to the tripod, the head wobbled on it's base. It felt loose.

          From all the research that I did, it was clear that Wimberley is the father of these type of Gimbal heads and that they make a very good product. So I emailed the company asking how much they would charge to fix the issues. Now here is where the slogan, "you get what you pay for" comes in:

1. Wimberley replied quickly and responded to every email I sent promptly. This was great customer service.

2. Before quoting me a price for the repair they asked if the head was still under warranty. I replied with the serial number. They told me that the head has a ten year warranty. I had only one month of that ten year warranty left. They told me to send it in quickly to take advantage of the warranty. How many companies, knowing that time was short, would have dragged me along, wasting time to make the warranty run out? How many companies would have dealt with this with their best interest at heart versus what was best for me? This was very impressive.

3. They told me that if something was wrong with the head that was not covered by the warranty, that they did not consider parts as a source of revenue and hence did not charge much. Now compare that with what car manufacturers charge for parts. It is my opinion that if you bought all the parts of a car and built it yourself that $30,000.00 car would easily cost you over $100,000.00. No, not with Wimberley!

4. I shipped the head to Wimberley in late December. Yes, over the holiday season. They fixed it in a jiff and shipped it back quickly. It was covered by the TEN YEAR warranty and did not cost me a cent to fix.

5. It is evident that the head was not just fixed, but the part that attaches to the tripod was replaced with a new one.

Yes, you get what you pay for. Wimberley as a company stood by their very generous warranty. They acted in a way that cared more about me than about them. Their good name, in my mind, has become a great name. This Gimbal head is wonderful and I am sure will last me a long, long time. Well done Wimberley. I will recommend Wimberley to everyone. This was a fantastic experience from a company you can count on.

P.S. I am not sponsored by Wimberley nor was I asked to say anything about Wimberley.

          The same is true for airshows. We come specifically to photograph the Blue Angels or the F-35. We come for the fast action. But there are other stuff to shoot too. They may actually have nothing to do with planes. What about the concession stands? What about street photography, there are a lot of people? We need to always have an open mind and be on the lookout for anything of interest to photograph.

          At every airshow I have ever been at there has always been our faithful parachute jumpers.

While our eyes are fixed upon the sky other stuff are happening on the ground. Are they worthy of an image?

Sure, get the image you came for, but then expand your horizon. Let the creativity flow. Even if you don't get award winning images, you are still creating memories and recording life and experiences. So please, don't forget the other stuff.

This image would not have worked if it were not for the wingtip trails. The plane would be too small in the frame (if that is all there is). However, these trails play a vital part in the image's composition. They add interest. They lead the viewer's eyes to the plane. The whole idea of this image is impossible to capture if the plane fills the whole frame.

Once again, this image is made by the wingtip trails and the heat mirage. You cannot capture this kind of image while zooming in tightly on the plane. As photographers, we try to shoot a variety of images rather than to get one thousand of the same or very similar images. Frame some images wider to capture more of what is going on, provided something is going on.

We can also use the smoke the pilots so graciously provide to enable a wider framing of the plane. This smoke trail helps the image. If this was a tight shot of the plane, the smoke would just have been a distraction. We have to pick the situations to shoot tight and the scenes to frame wider.

Lastly, please remember that planes are moving. They need space to move into. We don't want them to be leaving the frame. If they do, they will take the viewer out of the frame with them. So always frame the plane in such a way that there is enough space in front of it to fly into. We want the plane to fly into the frame not out of the frame.

• Catch them turning sharply of climbing steeply.

• Capture the afterburner, that will get the viewer excited.

• Show heat mirages.

• Photograph their con-trails

• Snap clouds forming on their wings or cloud lines from their wingtips.

We have to get something different, something exciting. Here are a few examples:

It takes patience. Follow every plane. Shoot at a very fast shutter speed and at a high frame rate. I shoot in bursts when I anticipate the right moments. The settings are simple:

1. I use no image stabilization at these shutter speeds.

2. Use manual with auto ISO. I shoot between 1/2500 and 1/4000th of a second. The lens is set wide open, perhaps stopped down just one stop or two thirds of a stop. The camera chooses the ISO to balance the exposure.

3. Most cameras tend to underexpose the plane because of the brighter sky in the background. I use exposure comp to fix this. You can also set your exposure to measure off of your focus point to solve this problem. However, it is a small problem. Once my exposure comp is set, it usually stays the same for the whole shoot as most of these jets are the same or similar in brightness.

4. Focus is set on subject tracking. Most modern cameras may have a setting to track planes specifically. These settings typically work well.

These planes move fast. Do not be discouraged with the difficulty of tracking them in the viewfinder. You will get better with practice. You do not need every single shot to be perfect. You will probably shoot a few thousand images on the day. If just one or two percent of those image turn out well we can call it a success. Even if every image is well exposed, perfectly framed, and sharp as a scalpel, you are surely not going to use all of them. We cull them and only pick the best of the best.

          That means that the photographer needs to choose a shutter speed slow enough to allow the props to show movement. Those props need to be slightly blurred. With slow flying craft this works well. But what do we do with Mustang P51's or other prop planes that fly quite fast? The slower shutter speed beautifully blurs the props but may not be fast enough to freeze the plane. Choosing a faster shutter speed to freeze the plane may also freeze the props (or at least not show enough motion blur). There is no set formula that you can use to determine the optimal shutter speed to freeze the plane AND to blur the props. This depends on the speed of the plane, the engine speed and the length of the props. The longer the props the faster the outer edges move. You will just have to experiment using trial and error to get to the right shutter speed for each plane.

Not only are the planes moving. The camera and lens are also moving to track the moving plane. Movement of a long lens and a slower shutter speed do NOT go well together. Camera and lens shake or movement will render the planes out of focus. So even though I prefer to have the camera and or lens image stabilization system turned off when photographing fighter jets, I will turn this system on when dealing with prop-driven planes to help smooth out camera and lens shake. You might wonder why I don't leave the stabilization system on for fighter jets. Well, I use such a high shutter speed shooting those super fast beasts that it makes no difference. That is something you can't do with prop planes as it will freeze the props.

When shooting multiple planes in the same frame it is better to use a smaller aperture to enable both planes to be in focus. Some people prefer to see a bit of space between the planes to separate them. To them it look cleaner, and they are right. However, when planes fly very close to each other, nothing shows the drama of being that close together more than having one plane overlap the other. Yes, the planes look more confusing, but confusion is what we want to show. We want to viewer to start feeling uncomfortable for the planes' sake. We want the viewer to wonder how close the planes are to each other. We don't want the viewer to think that the planes are safe. It all depends on what you are trying to show, which feelings we want to evoke.

          Have you starting to look up when your nearest airshow will take place? Next week we talk about photographing fighter jets.

1. Go online and learn all you can learn from the airshow's website. Pay attention to any maps they may display. Typically, they sell VIP seats right on center stage. For the extra money you usually get shade from erected canopies. These seats are preferred by many as most of the action is going to take place adjacent to the VIP seating. When airplanes storm in from both sides of the runway they are going to do their tricks or pass close by each other right in front of the VIP seating area. Now I suggest that you do not sit there. For the most part the planes performing will only offer a side view of the plane from that position. I don't know about you, but I want to see the glow of the afterburners. I want to photography the heat mirage coming out of the plane. You don't get to see these from a side view. For now, just pay attention to where center stage is.

2. Use your favorite weather information source to find out in which direction the wind is blowing into. This is important as most performers will spew smoke into the air. This is part of airshows. Even fighter jets, like the Blue Angels, will blow smoke. We do not want to take up position with the wind blowing into our direction. Before long, there is a lot of smoke in the air. If the wind is blowing my way, that means that the smoke is going to be coming my way. The last thing you want is smoke between you and the performing planes. Ideally, we want to sit where the smoke is blowing away from us. That smoke needs to be behind the craft.

3. As a rule of thumb, I have found that the best position is about three quarters to the end of the standing area (as measured from the ViP seating position and the end of the general audience area). Use the wind direction to determine which side of the VIP seating area is going to be best. If the wind is blowing in the same direction as the runway is going, I want to be seated at the end where the wind is coming from, not where the wind is going to. There are two reasons for this. First, remember the smoke argument from point number two. Second, airplanes like to come in against the wind as it gives them more lift. So I want to position myself where they leave the runway, not where they enter the runway. When they approach the runway they are not typically doing anything other than coming in, in a strait-ish line. They fly over the runway and do their tricks or fly bye's in front of our VIPs and then leave the display area right about where I am seated. That is where I want to photograph them from! I want to catch them turning away from me to expose their afterburners and the heat mirages. I want side on views. I want them climbing. Due to safety concerns, they will typically make their turns away from the audience, which, once again, is what I want. I want to shoot them from behind or from behind-ish at a side angle.

4. Arrive early. The recent airshow in Lincoln, Nebraska had about 200,000 visitors. There were long lines waiting to get in when the gates opened. We have to be close to the front of the line to get the spot we need to shoot from. Here is where that static display comes in. The gates open well before the flying starts. During this time most people will visit the static display. Just skip that for now. Make a bee line and go park yourself where you planned it, while everyone else is distracted by the static display. You need to be right at the fence or line as close as you can get. The reason has nothing to do with focal length or anything photographic, but not to have people in front of you. They will limit your visibility and ruin your images.

5. Make sure that you can hear the announcer well. They can be very helpful, warning you which plane is coming next and from which direction.

6. Take care of yourself. It is easy to get sun burnt and dehydrated. Put sun screen lotion on. Wear is wide hat. Drink a lot of fluids. It also helps to have a friend with you as drinking a lot may make you run a lot. You don't want someone else to take your spot and getting into those small porta potties with all your gear is not fun. A friend can hold the fort and watch your gear in your absence.

7. Airshows last for hours. If you are not comfortable you will not stay long. The best part of the show is typically at the end of the day. You don't want to miss what you came for. I bring a small and light camping chair with me. I use a gimbal head on a tripod so that I don't have to hold heavy equipment all day. You know that things get heavier the longer you hold them, physics is awfully strange, isn't it?

8. Now that I have said everything that was said, let me undo all of it. Sometimes, the best vantage point for getting great photographs is not at the airshow itself. Sometimes that place is in a nearby field, or from a building's roof, or from a parking structure. Do your homework. When the Blue Angels come they usually come a few days before the airshow. They practice. They want to see the lay of the land. Use this time to scout for the best alternate locations. You will see them practice and that alerts you to their flight paths. Is there a better place out there to photograph them from?

Enjoy photographing your next airshow. Next week, I will talk about actually photographing the airshow.

          However, it was a long day. The sun was beating down in me, in fact, I got sun-burned. By the end of it all I packed up everything and headed home. The memory card was taken out at home and the images were processed. Fast forward some time and I find myself at a lake. There were many Pheasants at the lake. This was the first time I saw such Pheasants out in nature. It was very cold and the wind cut through me. I jumped out of the car excitedly and grabbed my camera. I stalked a Pheasant and was in the perfect position. The light was beautiful, warm, and soft as light clouds defused the the light. I pressed the shutter and the camera would not fire. The main memory card was still sleeping on my desk at home. No problem, I thought. I moved the backup memory card to slot one. (My other memory cards were in my bag in the car) I followed the Pheasant a bit, repositioned myself, and pressed the shutter to shoot. Nothing happened! After fiddling with the menu system dealing with the card slots it worked. But there was a problem. By now the Pheasant was gone. The opportunity was missed. Feeling dejected and wanting to kick myself, I got back into the car, begged for some pity from my awesome wife, and drove off.

          A few minutes later I saw another Pheasant in the distance. I watched it to see which way it was going and devised my plan of attack. I took a round about way, walking into the field quite a ways, in the hopes that the Pheasant would be coming my way. It paid off! The Pheasant come strait to me. It did not even notice me. It walked right up to me and came within two yards of me. I was so excited. I thought that I hit the jackpot. The award winning image was already teasing my imagination. Since the bird did not see me yet, I did not want to move and waited for the perfect moment. The light was not as nice as before since the clouds moved some, but I thought that it was still okay. To not scare the Pheasant off, I slowing got the camera into position and pressed the shutter. But the camera would not focus. I had no idea why not. I changed focus modes, but that did not help. I tried a few other focus modes, they did not help either. Within moments the Pheasant saw me, and hurried off. This is the image I got:

At first I thought that my Sony A7R IV's focusing system was useless. I was not happy. I looked at the image in the car and saw that it was back focused. After searching for the problem, I found it. The lens' focus limiter was still set on ten meters (yards) from the airshow. That was two opportunities missed because I never checked and reset my gear. It was a rookie mistake and a hard lesson to learn. So here is my advice:

1. Reset your gear (all of it, not just the camera) right after every shoot. Remember to reset the settings on your lenses too.

2. Program your custom shooting modes and use them. If you accidentally forgot to reset your gear, it is much easier to change just one dial to program everything you need for your shoot than to set each individual setting. On my camera, custom mode one is set to landscape settings and custom mode two is set to wildlife. This has saved me a few times in the past. (Yes, apparently it has taken me a long time to learn this lesson)

3. Load a fresh pair of memory cards right when you take the used ones out. Have at least four memory cards. I prefer that all four of them be the same card (make, model, and size). A camera should never be left without fresh, empty and formatted memory cards. You never know when an unplanned opportunity arises and of course, that opportunity will be short lived not leaving you any chance to check things or to load memory cards.

Luckily, this is not where my story ends. With everything finally set and working, another Pheasant showed up down the road. I wish that it had more direct sunlight on it, but oh well, that is the price you pay for not being prepared.

It is a pity that there is a flower behind the flower the bee is on because I find it distracting. So picking the right flower is important. Backgrounds need to be in the background, meaning that they should not intrude or compete for attention with the main attraction of the image.

It helps to pick a flower and a background that make for a pleasing image all by itself. The insect is just the cherry on top. Remember, we are not taking macro images here where it is all about the insect or a fraction of the flower. We are just taking close-up images. The better the image can stand on its own without the insect the better the image will be with the insect.

With close-ups we can go in quite closely, thus making the insect more important and central to the success of the image. This means that we will have to cut parts of the flower off. There is no problem in doing so but remember the rule of thumb. We cut, we never nick. Cuts are deliberate while nicks seem like mistakes, as if they should not have been made. So cut boldly, don't cut near the edge of something.

This beetle also appeared. In this case, the flower in the background does not bother me as much as the one if the first image because there is separation between the two flowers. The one in the back is not causing confusion leaving the viewer to wonder what is going on. As the beetle moves around, wait for that perfect pose, the perfect position.

          As with any movement or of something that lives, always leave more room in front of it than behind it. If your garden is not that nice, just drive around and find someone else's garden that is beautiful. Be respectful and kindly request permission before you start photographing in their garden. But someone mostly seem to have a great garden somewhere. We just need to find them and spend some time there to see what we can find to photograph. Give close-ups a try.

• Is the perch itself attractive?

• Is is too bright in contrast to the background?

• Is there glare?

• Is the background far enough to blur?

• Is the background pleasing?

• Since we are shooting at ponds we should also ask whether there is water in the background or not.

Having water in the background is generally speaking not a good idea as it can cause glare and highlights. Static ponds don't often have pristine clear and beautiful water. Most of the time the water itself in such ponds do not make for a good background. Right, we have spent some time to find out on which perches the dragonflies sit. We have selected the best ones based upon our criteria. Now we just set up and wait.

We often think that polarizing filters are meant for landscape photography. However, it was used to great effect in this image. The green leave that the dragonfly is sitting on had bright glare on the surface leading to the dragonfly. A quick turn of the polarizer removed it. By all means, polarizer filter are excellent for this kind of image.

The sun popped out from behind the clouds a bit for this image. So I changed my position to shoot the same perch from the other way, against the sun. In this way, the perch now became a bit back lit. Rather than a dead-ish looking perch, the back lighting gave it a hint of color.

These little details can make a positive difference to our images.

The sun is still out and a bit harsh in this image. Yet I show it because the introduction of some color is always nice.

I like the symmetry in this image. The dragonfly balances out with the leaf. The sun is behind the clouds again, and I much prefer this softer light over the harsher light of before. The same goes for the next image.

Most places have the odd pond here or there. Where there are ponds there are usually also some dragonflies. They are easy to photograph perched, interesting looking, and can often be colorful. Try taking some dragonfly images.

Find a pond where they live. Sit quietly and watch them. I find it easier to watch either a certain region of the pond or I choose one dragonfly and keep watching that one. Any dragonfly that enters that region is carefully watched. I pick that region for a number of reasons. First, there has to be a lot of dragonfly activity in that region. Second, I pick the region based on the background. Is the background far enough for me to blur? Is the background pleasing?

          I have my camera ready at all times. I find that generally they move too quickly to watch through the camera's viewfinder. So I hold the camera right beneath my eyes. Once a dragonfly slows down or hovers I just lift the camera and shoot. As mentioned in last week's blog about bees in flight, I keep my lens focused at the approximate distance of where I expect the dragonfly to hover. In this way the lens does not have to hunt for focus throughout the entire focus range. Instead, the lens can just fine tune the focus because it is already close. I also have the focus limiter of the lens set according to the distance I am working with to limit the lens's focus range, thereby speeding the auto focus up.

Once focus is locked on I track the dragonfly in the frame. Auto focus tracking is turned on. While I pan with the dragonfly as it flies I shoot at a high frame rate. Don't be disappointed, you will only get a few hits out of many shots. This is normal. As cameras' auto focus systems improve the hit rate will increase. Remember that I am shooting with a Sony A7R IV, which has slow-ish auto focus and tracking. Newer cameras will probably do better.

          Fast shutter speeds are required to freeze the action. That necessitates a good amount of light. So I choose slightly overcast days that are still bright. I prefer the softer light. It does take some practice to become quicker at locating the dragonfly in the viewfinder. This is especially true while using longer lenses. The longer the focal length the more difficult it becomes. There are no magic bullets or camera wizardry to help with this except image stabilization which makes the viewfinder less jittery. So just put the hours in, it all boils down to your skill level.

Luckily dragonflies are easy to find and you can go back and back again to photograph them. Enjoy this challenging subject.

It can get frustrating watching the bees tend to all the flowers except "my" flower. But patience pays off. I wish I had a lens that could focus closer so that I could follow the bees more nimbly rather than setup and wait for them with my 200-600mm. The almost two and a half meters (six to seven feet) minimum focusing distance is a real pain. I was trying to photograph some dragonflies too (a future blog on them will follow), but the minimum focusing distance meant that I had to crop a lot. Luckily, I do have 60mp of resolution to play with. But if there is one fault to that lens it would be exactly this (and perhaps faster focusing motors would be nice too - but hardly an issue). Then again, we should use the right tool for the right job and perhaps this lens was not created for this task. The new Sony 70-200mm F/4 is a semi-macro lens and can focus on subject very close to it. Perhaps I should exchange my 70-200mm F/4 for the newer one.

In a setting with lots of colorful flowers it also becomes easier to choose a nicer background.

Focusing is an issue. The bees can come from any direction making pre-focusing difficult. However, pre-focusing in the middle of "your" flower makes it easier for your camera and lens to focus because the focus is already almost there. It just needs fine tuning rather than hunting to focus. This helps to make focusing a bit faster. Also, most modern long lenses are equipped with focus limiters. By limiting the distance of focus to a shorter range (you know how far "your" flower is) it becomes easier for your gear to perform since it no longer has to search for focus throughout its entire focus range (2.4 meters to infinity for this particular lens).

          If I am honest, the autofocus performance of my Sony A7R IV was somewhat disappointing. The AI animal eye detection was totally useless for insects (at least those I was trying to photograph). I believe that Sony's newer cameras with the new AI focusing chip in them are brilliant and best in class at accurately recognizing and locking focus on their eyes. This greatly increases the accuracy of acquiring focus but does not necessarily help with the speed of tracking moving subjects.

          Overcast but bright days work best for this type of photography. You don't want harsh shadows or bright flowers in the background to overshadow your subject.

          Either way, no matter where you are there is always something to photograph. Go out there and shoot.

It is easy to be tempted to get an image of animals or birds when they are out in the open. To make this happen, we pick a clear spot to settle down and photograph from. But what if we did the reverse? Since the rabbits allowed me to move around (cautiously), I deliberately picked spots to lie down with vegetation right in front of me. Doing so, rather than choosing a clear spot, allows me to have some of the greenery right in front of the lens. Why would you want that? Having vegetation right in front of your lens enables you to blur it just like the background is blurred. With everything blurred, the rabbit stands out more. The image is more impactful.

Now I would have preferred that the plant in front of the rabbit's face not be there, but don't you like the blurry green from front to back of the image, contrasted with the sharp rabbit? Deliberately placing vegetation right in front of your lens is what is creating the foreground blur. The idea is not to have vegetation in front of your whole view. Rather, you just lower your camera until the vegetation is barely in frame at the bottom of the image.

This technique allows your subject to pop, to stand out prominently. Since everything else in the image is blurred, there is nowhere else for the viewer's eyes to go but to look at the rabbit. This is what we want to achieve. We want to isolate our subject so that it is the only place of interest in the shot.

          This same technique can also be used in landscape photography to give depth, to separate the point of interest from the foreground. Move right up to vegetation. Place it blurred at the bottom of your frame. Now your subject is in the distance and it stands out more. Be creative and try this easy way of making things really stand out.

My wife and I were nearing an exit gate of Yellowstone when I got a glimpse of this fox. I parked the car and got out quickly. Even though the fox did not seem to notice me, it disappeared within seconds into the vegetation. I managed to get just a hand full of shots. It may not be a great image, but this is the first fox that I have ever seen in the wild (in the USA).

          Had the camera not been right with me, within arm's reach, I would not have had this shot. Even if my camera was on the back seat of the car I would have missed this image. It all happened in mere seconds. We need to be ready when there is a likelihood that something might happen or show up.  Ready does not only mean that your gear is with you but that it is ready too. If, for example, you are driving on safari in Africa, change your battery for a fresh one when the current battery reaches 20 or 15%. You don't want lions to appear a while later when your battery is drained. The same goes for your memory card. Don't wait until it is full to replace. Replace it a good while before it is full so that you are never left in the lurch when something goes down. It is important that your spare batteries and memory cards are also with you in the car. In most places on safari you cannot get out of your car (unless you are inside a gated camp). When a kill goes down is not the time to run out of battery or memory card space with your replacements comfortable in the trunk you can't get to.

          When we are in an environment where we can expect things to happen, carry what you need (with spares) right with you in the car.

Secondly, we always need to see the eye of the bird. Therefore, eliminate any images where the wings obscure the eye. Wings make the bird fly. Wings are often where the action is. So show the action. Show wing movement. Show them stretched out, wide open. Wing positions work equally well above the bird or below the bird.

Wings parallel to the bird's body can work as long as they are clearly visible and defined.

In this case, the wing tips make the difference. Without the upward pointing wing tips the bird's right wing would have seem merged with the body and thus not be that visible.

          Lastly, make sure that the bird's head does not overlap with the furthest wing. There needs to be separation between the head and the wing. They should not merge. Now if the wing and the head are different colors (distinctly different) you may still get away with it. But it is still best to have a bit of space between the hand and the wing.

          I hope that these tips will help you successfully cull your bird images to leave you with only the best ones.

With the 60mp sensor of my Sony A7R IV I can crop into the image and still have enough resolution left for a decent sized print. There are many photographers that are against the mega pixel race. They claim that there is no need for so much resolution other than cropping. I disagree! The issue is not just about the ability to crop but rather also about the ability to frame. Let's say, for argument's sake, that the Eagles were closer to me and that I could fill the frame with the bird. These birds move fast. They move erratically. Furthermore, to precisely follow this unpredictable action with a long lens is rather difficult. The smallest movement of the camera and lens nicks a bird's wing. So even if I could fill the frame with the bird, I would still prefer to zoom a bit out and leave the bird a tad bit smaller in the frame. This prevents the bird from getting cut off of the frame. This helps me to create a perfect composition by framing in post using my resolution. This is one of the major reasons why I do not shoot with the OM-1. Its ProCapture feature is so fantastic that this camera has tempted me. But with only 20mp the photographer is left with no room to shoot action a bit smaller in the frame and to compose later in post using resolution. Do so will leave you with a file too small for larger prints.

          So while I agree that a 20mp file can be printed largely, especially with today's up-sizing software, the issue is that if you start with an image captured at 20mp and you framed loser to compose later you are left with perhaps only a 10mp file. I would not mind (at the very least I could stomach it) a final image of 20mp but you don't end up with that if your start with a 20mp file. Now you may be temped to say, "just compose right in camera." And I answer, "have you ever tried to follow an erratic fast moving subject with a 600mm lens?"

Call me crazy if you like but I will take more mega pixels any day of the week. And no, it is not just about print size, it is about keeping erratic fast moving subjects in frame by shooting a bit zoomed out to frame and compose later in post. Give me longer lenses (yes, small birds always seem to far) and more mega pixels for bird photography and I am happy. Oh, and by the way, I am no fan of the Canon F/22 (exaggerating to make the point) long lenses. Good light happens at sunrise and sunset when you have less light. Small apertures and little light does not work for action photography, period. Besides, you cannot blur the background well using small apertures unless the subject is really close to you and the background is far away. But in reality, this situation represents the vast minority of situations that bird photographers face. There is just no substitute for good long lenses and higher mega pixel files when shooting erratic fast moving small subjects.

          I was watching this gull, trying to identify the pattern of behaviors that lead up to it diving into the water after a fish. If we can identify such patterns than we can predict accurately what will happen next once the pattern is initiated. Soon I learned what to look for. Once I saw the diving pattern initiated I started shooting. Here are the two images I selected:

This moment tells a story and evokes questions. How did it go? Did it get the fish? The right moment creates interest and sometimes even drama. An image like this sure beats an image of the gull just flying around or sitting some place. Photography is about capturing a moment in time. A great photograph is often when that moment in time, captures the right moment rather than just any old moment.

          Photography gear can make a huge difference here. We often say that it is the photographer and not the gear, BUT from time to time in history, a genuine game changer technology becomes available that makes getting certain images much easier. Olympus (now OM Digital Systems) released a camera in 2022 that has a feature called ProCapture. If you pressed the shutter button half way down the camera starts shooting. However, these images are not written to the memory card, rather it just goes into the buffer of the camera. Then, when you fully press the shutter to fire it writes the images from the buffer and what you shoot by pressing the shutter fully to the memory card. You can literally "shoot" for a minute before pressing the shutter.

          How does this help? Well, it means that you have just captured images that took place before you pressed the shutter fully. You have images that go back further than when you pressed the shutter. You see our reaction time is just too slow. This week I did some experiments with birds. The aim was to point the camera at a bird on a perch, then fire once the bird flies off, thus capturing the bird in flight. I really did my best. I concentrated and pressed the shutter as soon as the bird started flying. Try it yourself and you will see how difficult it is. In most of the images the bird is already out of frame by the time you take the first image. Sometimes, the bird is still in the frame but either half out (cut off) or too close to the edge. Mind you, this happens even though my composition placed the perch on the edge of the frame leaving as much space as possible for the bird to fly into. My reaction time is just too slow. With this new feature, you will have all the shots from a number of seconds before you pressed the shutter. You are guaranteed to capture the right moment, period. The camera even captures these images in full raw mode.

          The newly released Nikon Z8 also has this feature, although it is haft baked. The Nikon only does this by capturing JPEG images rather than raw. Personally I do not know any serious photographers that shoot in JPEG. Now I just hope and pray that Sony's next camera will also have this feature because it really is revolutionary. Imagine that you will almost never miss that right moment again.

          Combining this new feature with your knowledge and ability to predict behavior will enable you to capture the right moment almost every time.

I slowly walked back and forth watching for birds on the plants around the accommodations. Once a bird flew off, I would look for the next one. Here are the results:

The lesson I learned was to use every opportunity. It may seem as though it is too much of a bother to get the gear out and to pack it up afterwards, if we only have a half hour available to shoot. Yes, you may not get anything, but then again, you may! For me, this half hour was very productive. Whenever an opportunity arises to photograph take it, even if it is a short opportunity.

          Just get out there and shoot.

• Start to track the bird with the camera's autofocus system long before they come near. The further away the bird is from the camera the slower the bird moves across the frame of the camera giving the camera more time to acquire focus. Once focus is acquired it is easier for the camera to keep focus. Once the camera tracks the bird you just have to follow the bird in the viewfinder. Then fire when the bird gets close enough.

• Since the key is to acquire focus and since this appears to be more difficult for the camera than tracking it once focus has been acquired (in most cases) why not start with a stationary bird? Lock focus on the bird sitting on the perch. Make sure that autofocus tracking is turned on. Then just wait for the bird to fly off and fire away.

• Pan with the bird as it flies. This give you more time with the bird in the viewfinder giving you more opportunity for in focus images.

• Shoot at a high frame rate. Even if a few images are out of focus as the camera seeks to gain focus you may still end up with a few images in focus because you shot many images.

Let's look at a sequence of a bird in flight. The bird was close to me, sitting on a perch.

Even though the bird is sitting still, the camera is setup for fast action. The moment the bird flies off, the camera is ready and focus is already locked onto the bird. Now we just wait. We watch the bird's behavior. The goal is to look for cues that the bird is going to take off. Then we fire away in a burst, hoping that we were right and that the bird indeed flies off. Without knowing what these clues are and finding them, your success rate will be greatly diminished. Our reaction time is just too slow. When we see the bird take off it takes us a second to realize it and another moment before we press the shutter. By then the bird is gone.

          Some signs that the bird is about to take off are:

• Another bird flying in fast. Bird hassle each other. When another bird comes storming in, our bird is probably going to take off.

• Poop. Birds often take off right after heading nature's call.

• Birds use their legs to jolt them upwards as the first step of catching flight. When you see them going down on their legs, shoot because they might take off.

• When they look around nervously.

When you see any of these actions shoot.

Most people under-estimate a bird's wingspan. Thus they zoom in too tightly on the bird. When the bird opens its wings and flies off the wings are often clipped. Rather allow a bit more space than you think you are going to need and crop later than clip a bird.

          Good luck while you go shoot some bird in flight sequences.

          Sometimes these expressions can be humorous. We tend to think of their expressions as human expressions. So these facial expressions mean to us what they would have meant had a human had the expression. This personifies the animal and creates a stronger connection with the viewer.

What does this facial expression tell you? Perhaps it says, "huh," or "what was that?"

Is there a hint of a smile? Is it friendly? Is it happy?

Deep in thought, or just vedging perhaps?

Content and satisfied?

          These expressions or little micro expressions happen quickly and they disappear equally quickly. If is very hard to shoot only to capture these expressions. So, once again, when you photograph wildlife the best bet to capture something interesting is to shoot in bursts when things happen and to use a high frame rate. The higher the better (within reason). This way you end of with ten or twenty images in a sequence and you can chose the perfect one later. This gives you a shot at capturing action, or interaction, or expressions.

          We often think that birds are constantly on the go and they move fast, therefore we need to be fast too. But this shoot taught me the opposite. Yes, my camera needs to be fast (fast aperture, fast shutter speed, fast autofocus). But I need to be slow, very slow. Moving in closer to the birds scares them off. We were most successful when we stood still, letting the birds get used to us. These little creatures are small, so we have to get close to them to get acceptable resolution (so that we don't have to crop in so deeply, throwing away resolution in the process). You will be surprised how close you need to get to them to have them a decent size in the viewfinder; even with a 600mm lens. So how do we successfully get closer to them without spooking them?

As mentioned already, we need to move slowly. We found that moving a little bit and then standing still for a good amount of time before taking the next step closer worked pretty well. This requires a lot of patience. Next, I also tested the old adage to approach the birds walking slowly in a zigzag pattern rather than directly towards the birds. I felt that this worked good too. We would not move when the bird was on a perch. We waited and allowed the birds to dictate our movements. Once they naturally flew off, we would get a bit closer and wait again.

          These scrubs were at or below waist height. I also found that the birds were much more at ease when I crouched down and sat waiting lower down. We needed to do this anyway to get to the eye level of the birds. Yet, birds are birds. They come and go. It just requires a lot a patience waiting for them to come sit on the bush where we were at.

          Watching the birds very closely also paid off. We learned that they would use certain perches more than others. We positioned ourselves near the perches that had the most action. It is so tempting to have the camera pointing at one particular perch and then to only watch that perch. Yet when doing so, we don't notice that a bird is posing nicely on a different perch nearby. We need to stay alert and scan all the perches around us. Besides, a hundred images of birds on the same perch gets boring.

Next week we will look at a sequence of images of a bird flying off.

          Yes! But just like in landscape photography it is not easy. We have to find the different vantage point. We have to get there and make things works. In the last two blogs I photographed a Prairie Dog colony. I am already shooting from flat on the ground. What other, more unique perspective can I possibly find? I can't go below ground, can I?

Perhaps not. But we can create the illusion that we are shooting from below ground. I noticed that the area in which the colony was, was generally flat. There was a gentle slope, but it was flat-ish. Yet, where they dug their tunnels were little mounds from the excavated sand and mud.  That little elevation helped me to create the illusion that I am shooting from below ground. I lay flat on the ground and watched an active mound. Since the mound was higher than what I was, I am shooting slightly upward here. Because I am shooting with a long lens it appears as if I am shooting from within one of their tunnels, or at least from the entrance of a tunnel. I am further away than it appears but telephoto lenses compress things and make it look as if I am right there. By implication, the viewer of this image experiences this images from that same vantage point and therefore also feels as if he or she is right there looking at the Prairie Dog from below.

          We have to think creatively and work to get a different more unique perspective. We have too make our images stand out. They have to be different, better different. So ask yourself, how can I achieve that?

          I photographed the Prairie Dogs in any and all positions just to get the shots. I was so excited because this was the first time I ever saw them. But once I had the standard images I was happy with, I began to change position. I waited and observed. I tried to capture better images than them being static. I looked for interaction and behavior that shows off their lives.

Barking. Not a fantastic image, but like a bird chirping with its open beak, it is better than having the bird just sit there.

Getting up as high as it can to scout.

A youngster hugging mom.

A mom preening Junior.

Mom tickling the toddler.

Family interaction.

          The point is that static images can be good but generally speaking, it is always better to display animal behavior and interaction. These images are just more engaging than static ones. They are cute. They make us smile. They evoke emotion. These things make such images connect with us more. We enjoy them more. They give us an experience rather than just looking at them.

          My wife and I were traveling in South Dakota when I spotted a colony (if that is what it is called) of Prairie Dogs. This was the first time in my life that I saw them. They are so cute. We stopped for a photography session with these little creatures. So here is a picture taken by my wife of a Prairie Dog. The image is taken from her eye level, standing as normal.

Look at the background, pleasing? Do you feel like you are part of it's environment? Are you sharing it's experience? Are you connecting with this animal? Rather than standing to take this image from my eye level, this is how I photographed them.

Yes, I got dirty. The ground was soft from previous rain. I had mud and sand on me. But I wanted to get at their eye level for all of the reasons that I mentioned in the introduction of this blog. Did it pay off? Was it worth the discomfort, the sand and the mud? Does it really make that much of a difference? Look at the next images and decide for yourself.

Because the background is now way in the distance, rather than right behind the dog, shooting down from our height, we can blur it easily. This makes the animal stand out from the background. It makes the animal "pop." You can also use foliage right in front of your lens to blur the foreground. Thus both the foreground and the background is blurred. By the way, my wife is a good photographer. I asked her to take the image from her eye level to illustrate this point.

Now we are on the same level as the animal. We are seeing and experiencing the world from his perspective. Besides, most people are not going to lay flat on their tummies to look at these little guys. So when they look at your images they are seeing a fresh angle, a perspective they would never see otherwise. This makes your images unique.

I hope that you are persuaded to get down low and to photograph them from their eye level. As always, put safety first. Make sure you are not putting yourself in danger. I would never go lie down in front of a poisonous snake for example, or an alligator. Also remember that you are now invading their private space. Make sure that they are comfortable. Do not distress them or interfere with their normal life and behavior. While I was there, a lady came with a dog on a leach. The dog went straight for the Prairie Dogs making them scatter. There were baby Prairie Dogs that panicked. When my wife asked her not to bring the dog into the area she was upset at my wife because there was no sign that said "no dogs allowed." I sometimes wonder how people's minds work. Is it okay to rob a bank because there was no sign at the bank that says "no bank robbing?" Can people not think logically for themselves? Do they really need everything to be told to them? Is it not obvious that you don't take a predator (that is what these Prairie Dogs think of this lady's dog) to the homes of their pray? Why scare them? Why disrupt them? Why chase all of them away? So please, get down low, get into their world, BUT only in as much as they are comfortable with.

Light changes fast

While it was overcast I got this image:

Just a few minutes later it started to rain. It was not pouring rain but more than a drizzle. This weather change changed the lighting, the mood of the image, and resulted in a totally different picture:

Notice that the atmosphere of this image is just darker, a bit more gloomy. Yet, the rain drops in the air adds to the image. The rain just lasted for a few minutes and the light changed again:

So when the conditions change quickly we need to be ready and work fast. My camera was out, even in the rain (check first to see if it is safe for your equipment, as some gear is more weather sealed than others). I kept walking, searching for images. While these images are not the best, I still had a good time and I like the images.

Perches matter

Look at the perch of the first and the third images. It is interesting. It does not distract from the bird. There are no twigs in front or behind the bird. This is a pleasing perch. Compare this to the perch of the second image which just is not that clean. You have a twig seemingly poking the bird from behind. Then there is the twig at the back of the bird that does not add to the image. Now with image editing tools those twigs can be removed. And sometimes I do remove distracting little twigs from my images. But if you can help it, pick perches that are photogenic.

          Now in nature we cannot control where the bird is going to sit but we can choose which shots we shoot. We can linger around an area that provides good perches rather than waste our time being in an area where the perches are too cluttered, too high (which leads to shooting the birds from below and having the sky as a background), or that does not offer a good background. Good backgrounds are further away from the bird. The further away from the bird the better so that the background can be blurred better.

Stay where the action is

I walked all over the property searching for birds in vain. It seemed as though, at least for the time that I was there, the bird activity were confined to a few areas. It would have been better for me to stay there rather than walk all over to find nothing. As long as there are birds in the area, stay there. Stay where the action is.

Just be alert

These little guys often do not stay long. They come and go. Be alert. Watch them. Be ready. We don't want to miss shots because we only saw the bird just as it flew off. Constantly look around, in all directions.

          I fixed my Gimbal head to my ground-pod. I laid flat on my stomach to try to get as close to eye level with the frogs as possible. They were skittish and did not allow me to get close to them. So I just lay there waiting for them to get used to me. Soon they did and I was in business.

While they were still a bit further away all I could do is shoot a more minimalistic image. There were these green floaties on the water that gave this image a greenish tint. Soon, however, they came a bit closer.

This time, there were plants in the image. I was disappointed that my polarizer was not with me. This image would have been better with some polarization. It would have removed some of the brighter water glare.

Here I changed my angle a bit by slowing crawling more to one side. I wanted to eliminate some of the clutter of the plants and see if I could also minimize the glare on the water with a different vantage point. It worked. I like this image a lot more.

And here is another angle.  These are just common frogs, yet look how colorful they are. Just look at those eyes. You may not have exotic animals in your part of the neighborhood. You may not be close to majestic mountains, strong rivers, or vast lakes. But there is always something to photograph. For these fellows, get as low as you possibly can. Yes in the mud. Move slowly. Stay still. And just enjoy watching and photographing them. There is a totally new world of photography waiting if you are willing to go for the smaller and more common animals. And they are beautiful too.

So how do we make such an image work? Is there not too much clutter and chaos in the scene? How do we make the subject stand out from its environment? Here are a few things that may be helpful:

• Even though there is chaos with branches, stems, leaves, and even another insect we still have to create some separation between all of that and the subject. So choose an aperture that shows some of the environment but still blurs it enough so that the viewer will focus on the sharp subject rather than the other stuff.

• Use brightness to draw attention to where your want the viewer to look. As you can see, some of the greenery in the background was very bright. But in post processing I darkened them down some in order for the subject to stand out more. Then I brightened the butterfly as it was in shade. By darkening the background and brightening the butterfly it turns the viewer's attention to the butterfly without turning the environment totally off (by making it to blurred or too dark).

• Use color. Tone down the background colors a bit and bring out the color of the butterfly. The butterfly's color was very muted as it was in the shade. By bringing out the colors of the butterfly it becomes more prominent in the image.

• Use size. The butterfly's size helps place our attention on it. For this kind of scene to work photographically, we have to move in closer to make sure that the butterfly takes up a good size of the image. If this is not possible, then crop into the image to create the same effect.

While this image will not win any awards I still enjoy it. It shows the butterfly's life. It shows where it lives, disorder and all. But it stands out enough to clearly be the subject of the image, and that is what makes it work. So remember the four things you can use to make such images better.

• Place another object closer to you on the opposite side of the other objects. Such objects do not have to be the same size as the other objects on the other side of the image to create balance. Objects closer to you visually weigh more than more distant objects. So even a small object close to you can bring balance to larger object on the opposite side of your image.

• You can use a person, such as a jogger to bring balance. Yes, a bird in the right position can do it too. You can use just about anything to bring about the balance you seek. Fellow photographers are often willing to be used in your images in this way to bring about balance.

• If you don't have access to anyone or anything to place on the empty side of you image and the bird do not obey your commands, you can always use light to try to create balance.

• You can always create sun-stars as your bright section of the image to bring about some balance.

The dark rocks on the left of the image are visually very heavy. Since no joggers came along and no bird cooperated with me, I attempted to draw attention to the opposite side of the image by placing a sun-star there. Here is another example of the same scene.

So how do you create a sun-star? You simply position yourself so that the sun is halfway behind a hard surface like a horizon, a tree, a person, or like in this case, the rock. Then you use a small aperture, and voila, you have a sun-star. Most people wait for the sun to reach the horizon before they take their shot. They think that they need the horizon to make the sun-star. But the problem with that is that you only have a few moments as the sun dips below the horizon and the opportunity is gone. Why take that change? What if a group of people walking into your shot just as the sun reaches the horizon? So remember, that any sharp surface will work to create sun-stars. Vertical surfaces works the same.

          In this scene, you can use the entire height of that rock to create your sun-star with. Thus you have ten or so minutes available to you, as the sun makes it way down the rock, rather than just a few fleeting moments once the sun hits the horizon.

          So remember to thing about the balance of the objects in your image. Create balance by positioning objects to cancel each other's weight out or if that does not work, use something that is brighter.

          This is not the kind of scene where HDR (taking multiple exposures at different levels of brightness and then merging them into one balanced image) would work well. We had to drive on the our next location and could not spend more time here. Even if we had more time, it would have taken a long time for the weather to change or for the sun to get low enough. Yes, we were there on the wrong time of day. However, we did not have a choice because of where our accommodations were for the night.

          So what do you do? How do you get a half decent image in impossible light?

The only viable option we had was to forget about the large water fall and focus instead only on the parts that were in shade. Go for more intimate, smaller scenes. Put the wide angle lens away and fit a longer lens. Find small areas of interest that are in shade and shoot them. Does any area have nice color? How about nice patterns, or texture? Does anything stand out? Is anything different? If nothing catches your attention just zoom in a bit and start panning (moving the camera from one side to the next) the scene slowly. Soon enough you should see something that perks your interest. Here is an example:

Here are a few tips to photograph waterfalls:

• Determine which shutter speed renders the water flow as you want it. Do you want milky smooth water, water movement but with some definition, or water drops frozen in mid-air? You can do all of that with your shutter speed. Slow shutter speeds show movement by blurring it while fast shutter speeds freeze movement.

• If you want to show water movement you will have to use a slow shutter speed. Slow shutter speeds will require you to use a tripod to get that which is not moving (the rock face and moss) sharply in focus.

• Use a polarizing filter. When things like rocks are wet they are shiny. Shiny stuff can be too bright and distracting. A polarizing filter can cut that shine out, giving you nice and dark rocks and colorful moss. You want to create that contract between the water and the rock.

• Continually wipe the front of your lens clean and dry, especially right before you fire. Drops on your lens will ruin your image. Mist on your lens will render your photo dull and slightly out of focus. So keep wiping your lens to keep it dry.

• If you are in sunlight make sure to shield your lens from the sun. Failure to do so may result in flare or an image with diminished contrast. You can use your lens-hood. If I need to constantly wipe my lens dry I prefer not to have a longer lens-hood on because I struggle to see in there and to get in there to thoroughly dry the lens. I just place my hand between the sun and my lens to cover my lens with my hand's shadow, then I shoot. If a wider lens is in use it will have a smaller lens-hood, in which case I will go ahead and use its lens-hood.

Even in harsh light, you can still get okay images if you just shoot that which is in the shade and go for smaller sections of the falls.

          No problem, I thought. We will just head out into the opposite direction towards location number two. After a drive up the mountain on the other side, the weather was still no good for photography. On to location number three ... bad photography weather. By the way, bad weather is often good photography weather and good tourist weather is mostly bad photography weather. This weather was just drab, overcast with almost no definition in the clouds. With the sun gone to rest, we too turned in with no success.

          The next morning we headed up the mountain again (the opposite one to Mt. Shasta). The lake we went to was also still in winter. It was socked in with fog. We waited and waited ... Well, all I could come up with was this:

With no end to the fog we drove down the mountain again. Another location was in our sights. The weather was still no good, but the weather seemed to be changing. There was a huge difference between the foggy weather at higher altitude and that of the valley below. It was still cloudy but they were on the move. Soon enough the weather did change, not completely but enough.

When the weather does not play ball change locations, wait, and wait some more. It is on the fringes of bad photography weather that good weather sometimes shows itself. When weather moves in or out you will find great opportunity for dramatic images. Weather do change. You just need to wait for it. As a result, this was my last image of Mt. Shasta.

I enjoyed the Mt. Shasta area. There is good potential for great shots. When the weather is dead for photography, use the time to scout and wait. Weather conditions do change.

The flowers are given prominence. Their size are larger than the main mountain peaks in the image. The closer we get to the flowers the larger they will appear in relation to the mountains. As is often the case, solving one problem creates another. By going in close to the flowers we solve the composition problem and we create a beautiful image. BUT, the closer we get to the flowers the more we shrink the depth of field. If we get the flowers in focus then the mountains are out of focus. If we get the mountains in focus then the flowers are blurred. How do we solve this problem?

          This is where focus stacking comes in. We photograph the same scene multiple times with the same settings, but we change the focus distance for each shot. So we focus on the flowers and take an image. Then we focus a little further into the scene and take another shot. So we continue to take more images, each focused a litter further into the image, until we reach infinity focus. Many modern cameras will calculate how many images you need from your closest point to infinity, and shoot them for you, changing focus automatically between exposures. This is great, because then you don't have to touch the camera to change focus, thereby accidentally moving the camera slightly. The wider your lens, the fewer images you will need. The longer your lens, the more images will be required. For this scene I took four images all focused on different spots.

          Now you have a series of images. When you process them, please make sure that your White Balance and Tint are set the same for each image, as you are going to blend them together and don't want different color casts. The idea is to take the in-focus parts of each image and stitch them together, to make a blended image that is sharp, front to back. To blend the images together, you are going to need software to do it for you, OR, if you are skilled, you can do it manually with layers and masks in Photoshop. Photoshop can do it automatically but I am not impressed with their results (for focus stacking). There are other alternatives to use. Helicon Focus is a good one. More recently, Luminar Neo released a focus stacking extension too.

          In Luminar Neo you just grab your series of image and drag them into the focus stacking extension and click on stack. It is literally that simple. In my testing, I compared Photoshop's auto focus stacking feature against the images stacked by Helicon Focus and Luminar. Photoshop came dead last. Helicon Focus and Luminar Neo came out on top, with a very, very similar result.

          Why don't you give focus stacking a try? It is easy and it solves a major focusing problem. If you click on Affiliate Links you can get Luminar Neo and the extensions for a discount.

          Disclaimer: I am an affiliate of Luminar and get a small commission if you buy software with my link. My commission comes at no cost to you, in fact, you get a discount. I will never sell you something I do not personally use and believe in.

Start by looking and searching for something that is different. Perhaps a tree is larger than the others, or we find a small tree amongst the large trees. If this fails, forget about grand landscapes in the forest, just for a moment. Is there just one tree, one fern, one something that is interesting that could make a great image by itself. We can eliminate the forest and get an image of just that one tree or one fern or that one something. Walk around until you find it. If you see nothing that strikes you as interesting, go even smaller, yes - eliminate even more. Does one fern leave curl nicely? Does a piece of hanging moss catch the light nicely? Can you shoot just one smaller thing?

          You will be amazed how aiming for the smaller things gets your creativity going. Before long, you will start seeing the larger things to photograph. Oh' and while you walk around be observant. Remember that you are on the hunt for things to photograph. Listen for and watch for birds, snails, mushrooms, and the likes. Stand still and just watch the birds. My brother and I were standing at this spot watching a Robin. We followed it's flights here and there, until we discovered something interesting.

Which brings me to my second point. Please do not limit your options by just bringing your "forest lens" along. Here I needed my 200-600mm, but the point is that I had it with me. We wanted to shoot forest scenes but found the nest in the forest. Keep an open mind. We can be too focused on getting a preconceived image that we don't see another opportunity.

          Back to the forest. Look for a place which are a bit more open. In forests, this is often where interesting scenes present themselves because with an opening in the forest things are less cluttered, less chaotic. It becomes easier to make sense of things, easier to eliminate things, to make a beautiful composition. Openings in forests also typically have more light which can be used creatively. Streams are one such opening that can present opportunities.

          Lighting in forests can be difficult to handle. There are both deep dark shadows and harsh light from the sun poking through. Your best bet is to go to forests when it is overcast (but still being bright to have enough light). If there are clouds rather than it being overcast you will have to wait. Use the time when the sun is out to scout and to decide on your composition. Then wait for a cloud to shield the sun before you take your image.

          Tripods can be essential in forest, especially on overcast days. It can be darkish in forests which will result in longer shutter speeds; too long to hand hold, hence the tripod. However, watch out for wind. If there is wind the foliage will move. Moving foliage combined with long shutter speeds produce out of focus images. These days I am no longer as scared as I was years ago for noise. So, I don't hesitate to up my ISO to get to a faster shutter speed if the wind calls for it. The software noise removal is fantastic now a days.

Have fun photographing the forest, but remember that great images have to make sense of the chaos.

          Today the embargo lifted on my Non-Disclosure Agreement with Luminar on a new extension. This extension has me very excited. Let me introduce you to Pano Stitching. Now you may ask why we need yet another pano stitching program? We need this one because it is unique and offers complex features that are easily done. You can stitch both RAW and JPEG files. Here are the new stuff I am smiling about:

• HDR Panorama. Yes, it can do HDR and Pano in one go! Previously, I used to first have to do the HDR processing for each file in my sequence and save them. Then I could use the HDR'ed files to make my Pano. No more, it is now one single step for both tasks.

• Perspective Adjustment. There is a unique and easy way to change the perspective (both horizontal and vertical) to get rid of distortion. It is fun to use.

• Pano from Video. You can create a Panorama image from a video file. The program will extract the frames from the video to create a Pano image.

• Object/Subject Composition Panorama. You can select a person, animal (subject) or object in the video to place in the Pano.

The extension will launch on July 20, 2023.

Here is the link to the software: Click Here. (Please note that I am an affiliate of Luminar and get a small commission if you purchase the software with my link. The commission comes a no cost to you). Then click on Extension packs.

I arrived in the area the night before. It is never a good idea to scout for the perfect spot early in the morning while it is still dark, especially when dealing with wet and slippery conditions. No image is worth your life and safety should always come first. So my brother and I went to this area right away, while we still had day light, to scout the location and look at the conditions. This was my first time to this magical spot. The scouting did not take long as this spot is right next to the road (basically).

          Researching your photography location before you go can also be vitally important. Reading up on this area, I was warned that if conditions were right for getting color in the clouds you need to be on location an hour and a half to one hour before sunrise. Due to the elevation, the clouds (if there are any) light up much earlier than it would at lower elevation and without the mountain range on the other side of the lake. Now, in this case it did not matter, as we never got the much wished for red clouds. But you have to ready for it, in case it happens. You don't want to get there hearing other photographers talk about how great that was after it is over.

          Okay, so you have your composition all sorted out. What techniques are best for this image? Which questions should a photographer in this situation be asking himself or herself to get the best results?

1. Start asking your questions and determine exactly what you are going to do and have it ready before the sun shows itself. Once the sun pops out you have a very short window of time before your sun star opportunities vanish. Even if you don't want to create a sun star, in some places the light turns harsh really quickly. The nice light only remains nice for so long. You don't want to be using "go time" to figure things out. Go time, is go time.

2. We have flowing water in the scene. So we need to ask ourselves if we want to show that water movement or if we want to freeze it. In this case, I decided to show the water flowing. The next question, related to this topic, is how much do I want the water to move in the shot. In other words, do I want milky smooth water (a more dreamy effect) or barely moving water, or anything in between? I wanted to show a good amount of water movement but still retain sharpness and texture.

3. Wanting to show movement but retain sharpness and texture in the water, (or whatever you want show related to the water movement) we now need to ask what shutter speed we need to use to get the effect we want. There are a few things to consider here that impact the correct shutter speed for the desired effect. The speed of the water movement itself impacts the correct shutter speed. So does your distance from the water. The closer you are to the water the more movement you will see for a given shutter speed. Lastly, your focal length (your lens) also effects the correct shutter speed. Wider lenses show less water movement over the frame than longer lenses. Taking these three elements into account we guesstimate the correct shutter speed. Once it is go time, we quickly shoot a few images using different shutter speeds at and around the speed we guesstimated. We do that just to make sure that we nailed it as guesstimating is only so good, right? For this image, I used 0.4 of a second. Typically, I would have used a slightly faster shutter speed than this but this image was taken with a 16mm lens which shows the water moving slower than longer lenses hence a longer shutter speed to compensate. Either way, as long as you took a few exposures at different shutter speeds you can choose the best one later.

4. The next question concerns depth of field. How much of this image do I want in focus, front to back? Since it is a landscape image, I like everything sharp. That means a small aperture needs to be used. How small? The focal length of the lens AND how far you are from the closest thing in the image impact that. The wider the lens the more depth of field you naturally have at a given aperture as compared to a longer lens. The closer you are to what is included in the frame the smaller aperture you need. At 16mm and at the distance I was from what is included in this image, you can get away with F11. For safety's sake I used f16. Now many will cry hearing that I sometimes use F16 because it creates diffraction which makes the image less sharp. However, I was very close to the water, and since I wanted the water movement with sharp texture I did what I needed to do.

5. Now we need to look at our ISO. Do we have a reasonable ISO given our preferred shutter speed and aperture? Or is the scene too bright for our settings? If the image is too bright, use a neutral density filter to darken it. If the scene is too dark then increase the ISO. With today's noise reduction software I no longer fear ISO noise upto ISO 3200. This will be different from sensor to sensor and is therefore camera dependent.

6. At such low shutter speeds you will be better served using a sturdy tripod to prevent camera shake. I use a tripod regardless of shutter speed because, for me, it helps with composition. I also use a remote release to fire the camera so that the camera is not touched (it causes vibrations which negatively impacts sharpness, especially if you print at large sizes).

7. I focused a little ways into the image.

Now we are ready. All of this is done before the sun peaks out. Obviously the light levels are going to change the second the sun shows itself. But our setting are close-ish. If you shoot in manual you will make the final adjustment as the sun comes out and take your image. Personally, I love aperture priority. Once the sun shows itself I simply use my exposure compensation dial (Sony has a dedicated dial for this which I use for almost all my images) to fine tune the exposure (in conjunction with neutral density filters - for this scene since getting the water movement as I wanted it was important to me).

          There you go. With experience, your mind will automatically run through the process that works for you. Develop a workflow that you use for all your shooting. But always ask the right questions and set things up before go time.

          I visited the photographically famous Emerald Bay at Lake Tahoe in California recently. So I decided to do a test. I took a picture of the same scene in basically (a few minutes difference) the same light using my cell phone (version 12 from a fruit company) and using my Sony A7R IV. Now before the experienced photographers get upset at me, let me just agree with them that better gear will not make you a better photography per se. You are still the photographer and the gear does not change you. Furthermore, good technique and great light are even more important than gear. That being said, let's look at the two images. I will not identify the images at first. Can you pick which one is the cell phone image and which one is my Sony's image?

What do you think, which camera took this image? Here is the next one.

So what do you think? Is there a difference and is that difference significant enough to justify spending a lot of money on expensive gear? The first image is from my Sony A7R IV. Now there are apps to better control the camera on the cell phone and I certainly could have gotten a slightly better image. But as you can see, it just does not compare to what can be done with good gear and good technique. I will talk about this image again next week and run down what technique I used to get it.

          Yes, cell phones can take great images. For many people it may be all they need. They don't shoot right into the sun. They don't go out when there are deep dark shadows AND a bright sun in the same shot. They don't care about blurring the water. And they don't want to spend time editing images in complicated software later. I say this in all sincerity without a hint of belittling such photographers. It all depends on what you photograph, when you shoot, and the conditions you shoot in.

          The difference between these two images show one area in which cell phone sensors cannot match those of full frame cameras and that is dynamic range. The large sensor of the full frame camera can handle a bigger difference between the lightest and the darkest areas of your images without losing detail in the extremes than can a cell phone camera sensor. Please note that the image from my Sony is not an HDR, that image comes from one raw file (without using pseudo-HDR - developing the same file twice). In a different scenario in which I am not shooting into the sun, the cell phone would have fared much better.

          As for me, I will continue to use my cell phone camera for some photography BUT for serious work in difficult light I love my Sony gear.

Jenny lake. To not have the water fill 90% of the image you can shoot from a low perspective. The lower you go the more the water will shrink in size. The higher you shoot from the more you will expand the water in the image. Knowing this can be really helpful to minimize boring sections of the image. Besides, foreground interest creates depth.

Not a great shot, so how can we improve on it? We know that the mountain is not going anywhere, so why don't we forget about the mountain for now and look for a better foreground, or something that will go with the mountain? After searching and driving around a bit we improve on this image by getting closer to the flowers at a different spot. Look how it improves the image.

The flowers play a more important role in this image. I am closer to them, making them bigger in relation to the mountain. But what if we go even closer, change the angle, and chose a better location?

You see, moving a few steps this way or that way, getting closer or further, higher or lower hugely impact our images. So don't just get out of the car, pull out your phone or camera and start shooting. Take your time and look around. Let's not take images but rather make images. We are intentional about what we frame in our shot and the image we want. Regardless of the conditions or equipment we can still do our best to get a better image. All of these images were taken with my cell phone.

          Here is another scene from Oxbow Bend. Again, the light is not good as it is the wrong time of day. I looked around and did not find anything better to photograph the mountain with, but some flowers. Going close to them to maximize them in the shot relative to the mountain, I got this image.

Even when we are not photographers and only tourists shooting with our cell phones in conditions and times not suited to yield great photographs we can still be intentional, work the scene, and do our best to get at least a better image that we would have had, had we just snapped away without thinking.

But we are still photographers. Even when we are not doing any serious photography we can still be creative. Here I shot from an angle so that there was no glare on the water (I did not have a polarizer filter with me).

In this image I tried to use the lines to lead the viewer into the image.

Yes, I know, these are not great images. They are just cell phone shots taken at the wrong time of day. However, as photographers we are always mindful of the light. Most of the time the light was horribly bright. So what do you do to solve the harsh light issue. Well, as you can see, there were many clouds. So rather than just shooting shots left and right without paying attention to the light I waited until one of the clouds moved in front of the sun. While the scene was in shadow for a few moments I snapped the shot. These are little things we can do to help us get better images, even when just taking the day off.

          Always be checking your angles. Should you shoot from low down? Is the image balanced compositionally? Can I create depth? Watch people's shadows to make sure they are not intruding into the image. Make sure that your spouse shields the lens from direct sunlight since the cell phone does not have a lens hood. Oh' and please wipe your lens with a microfiber cloth regularly as dirt and fingerprints can make your images soft. Learn the basics of how the phone's camera works (tap to focus, tap and hold then slide up or down to adjust the exposure, etc.)

          So the point is to still pay attention to photography basics even when you are just having a good time. And by the way, cell phones are capable of taking some decent images.

OR

I like the color of the first image more. It was taken closer to sunrise on a different day. The second image was taken later in the morning on a different day with different light, so the colors are not that pleasing. But look at the subject matter only. The single bird is okay but to me the interaction and action of the second image are much more engaging. While more static images are okay, they are not often great (there is always exceptions).

          Try to get action images when photographing wildlife, or try to get something different, unique. To do this it is helpful to get to know the subject's behavior so that you can anticipate when the action is going to happen. In this case, this was the first time in my life that I saw these birds in real life. However, I prepared by watching videos on them. Furthermore, they start their action just before sunrise. I took about 20 minutes to have enough light to start shooting. That 20 minutes was valuable because I intently watched them to learn how they behave. The more you know about your subject the better photographer it will make you. It will increase your chances of getting action or something unique because you will be ready.

          The action happens far to fast to be able to get the unique shot or that perfect action shot by waiting for that right moment. Rather, we shoot in short bursts when things happen. We use the highest frame rate the camera will allow. We take hundreds of images in that one shoot. Then when we get home we select the winners and discard the rest. Another reason to shoot at a high frame rate is not just linked to getting that look, the action, or that unique moment but focus. The best image becomes a bad image if it is not sharp. Sometimes a camera can take a fraction of a second to acquire focus. The images taken before nailing focus are useless. Shooting at a high frame rate highly increases the chance that you will get a sharp image as the auto focus system catches up to the action.

The semi-permanent blinds were probably not designed with photographers in mind. They were too narrow. The fixed (unmoveable) bench did not leave enough room for a tripod between it and the window. With some maneuvering and allowing the back tripod leg to be at less of an angle worked. That meant that the long lens protruded out of the blind. Animals react to movement. With the lens moving from side to side as I shoot it could scare the birds off (hence my first suggestion below). Canon and Sony's long lenses are white and flashy!

Equipment suggestion #1

          Use a lens hood. Sometimes they can make a huge difference in picture quality. They help to prevent flare and a loss of contrast. They also help to protect the lens.

Equipment suggestion #2

          Use a gimbal head. Now I know that a bean bag on the window sill works for some people. This way there is no need to carry a tripod and head, and it also solves the space issue inside of the blind. But sometimes the action happens really quickly. There is no way you can move the camera as fast on the bean bag as you can on a gimbal head. Nor can you point the camera up (when the birds jump and or fly) as quickly from a bean bag as you can with a gimbal. Moving heavy gear constantly for two to three hours can be hard to do if you are not a weight lifting champion. Moving the gear quickly and tracking the action with a gimbal is effortless without tiring you out.

Equipment suggestion #3

          Use fast lenses. I use the Sony 200-600 F6.3. If I had the money I would get the 600 F4. To freeze the action requires a fast shutter speed which shoots up the ISO which results in noise (grainy color dots). The faster the lens the lower the ISO which leaves you with less noise. I see people shooting with F7.1 or even F11 lenses and wonder how their images come out. Use the fastest lens you can afford. By the way, I love the Sony 200-600!

Software suggestion #4

          DXO PureRaw 3. This software is great at dealing with the noise. If you regularly shoot at high ISO this program is worth every penny.

Settings suggestion #5

          Shoot the lens wide open (for blurred backgrounds and to allow for a lower ISO). Use a high shutter speed to freeze the action. Use auto ISO. So I set my aperture as open as the lens can go (in my case 6.3), and the shutter speed at around 1600 or higher (depending on the light levels), and then with auto ISO I let the camera worry about the ISO and exposure. I have my "Zebras" enabled (to show when whites clip). If any Zebras show up I use exposure compensation to banish them.

Shooting suggestion #6

          Be relentless and follow the action all the time but shoot at the highest frame rate in short bursts when something interesting happens. Stop pixel peeping or reviewing your images (unless nothing is happening). You don't want to miss shots because you were not ready. Things can heat up quickly and you may only have one chance. Focus on shooting now and look at the results when you get home. Having said this, there is also the danger that some setting is off and it may ruin the entire shoot. So by all means review the odd image here and there but do so quickly without wasting much time on it.

But it was not this easy as I experienced a failure before getting this image. The journey took me on a four hour drive to get to where the lek is. I booked the blind and was set. You have to be in the blind and quiet with lights out at least an hour to an hour and a half before sunrise. The blind had plexiglass to look through. You can understand why. This is early Spring in Nebraska, so you have to keep the freezing wind out. However, we cannot photograph through a scratched and dirty plexiglass window and get good images.

          I received permission to erect my own blind, which I set up right next to the place's blind. Often in life, solving one problem creates another. On the morning of the shoot it was 16 degrees Fahrenheit with a healthy freezing wind to boot, making it feel like 6 degrees with the wind chill. I waited for about three hours and not a single bird showed up. I did not even hear them. When present, they make what is described as a booming sound but now I was "booming" from the cold. Getting up very early to drive from the hotel to the lek and freezing for hours without success was a little disheartening. So we had to drive the four hours back without even seeing a Prairie Chicken.

          Back to the research! I was not going to drive all that way for nothing again (even though this lek had the Chickens there on both mornings before I was there). This time I found a lek much closer to my home. I visited the place twice and got lucky both times. This is what my Prairie Chicken journey taught me:

1. Do thorough research and planning to maximize your chances of getting good images

2. Keep on trying until you are successful

3. Endure the cold (or whatever)(as long as it is safe) because you have to be out there to get the image

4. Be patient as these images took just less than nine hours of being out there to get

          In the next blog I will talk a little about what equipment was used to get these images.

The last two examples clearly pays no attention to the overlay guides as I just wanted you to see some of the overlay options. Look at the first example again. What if your subject is in the top right corner instead of the bottom left corner. Cycle through the options by pressing the "o" key until you find the overlay that you desire. Now press Shift and "o" to rotate the overlay. Once again, you can repeatedly press Shift and "o" to cycle through all the rotation options. With the overlay in place you can now crop as usual.

          But how tightly or loosely should we crop? In this image I am as close as the bird will allow my without flying off. My lens is maxed out at 600mm. But the bird is still too small in the frame. This image needs to be cropped. Let's start with the uncropped image and experiment with various crop options. We will stay with horizontal crops at first.

So this is the full frame. We want to crop the image because of multiple reasons. The out of focus tree in the bottom right bothers me, so I want to eliminate it. The bright windows of my neighbor's home in the top right of the image also needs to go. Lastly, the size of the bird in the frame needs to increase. Let's crop in a bit and see how it looks:

It looks a bit better. Some of the distracting out of focus tree in the foreground in the bottom right has been removed and the bright window in the top right corner is also gone. But this crop is lousy as we still have part of the out of focus tree on the bottom right as well as the window on the top. Let's crop even more to see if that resolved the issue:

All objectionable parts of the image have now been pruned. But is this the best crop we can get from this image? Let's zoom in a bit more to see how that looks:

Although the eye contact the bird is making with the viewer is now nicely visible and we can see the beautiful detail of the feathers the crop seems a bit too tight. The bird seems cramped and has no room to breathe or to live. How is this poor bird ever going to open it's wings? Personally, I like to see a bit more room. I am not a big fan of animal portraits (unless something special is going on or the image is really tight on the face). There is something to be said to see the surroundings, how and where the bird lives.

          Some images also lend themselves to vertical crops. Let's start, once again, with the tight crop and move out. Which of the following images do you find more pleasing as you consider how they are cropped?

What does your selection teach you about cropping? How can cropping be used from a composition stand point? Yes, we should always crop in camera. That is the best way to photograph and it gives you the highest resolution in a single shot. In landscape photography we typically do. But life does not always agree to let us work with what is ideal. Sometimes we just cannot get into the right position to crop the way we would like to. Cliffs may prevent us from moving forward. Thorn bushes may poke us. Slippery rocks may threaten us. And in the case of wildlife photography, cropping is just part of life. I just don't have a longer than 600mm lens. I don't own a 1.4 or 2x converter (and there are downsides to them). Even if we can get closer, sometimes we should not as that can disturb breeding animals or it may be dangerous. The only option is to crop.

          Cropping does offer compositional advantages too. It is not possible to hand hold a long lens, to focus on the bird, AND watch and control the foliage on the edges of the frame. Even small camera movements make a huge difference as to what is included or excluded in the image. Having space around the bird allows us to place our crop strategically and carefully to include or exclude things on the edges of our frame. This may sound trivial, but it makes a difference. Look, for example, at the last three images. Look at the foliage in the top right corner. Does that top right corner not look the best, neat and clean in the last image compared to the other images? You cannot shoot this precisely with a long lens, hand held. But cropping helps and it certainly improved the composition in the last crop's case.

          Even though the bird is smaller in the last image, to me, I like this crop the best. The bird still stands out while it has a bit of room to breathe and live. Review all these images in today's blog to see what a massive difference cropping makes to an image. What is your style when it comes to cropping? Do you crop tightly or do you also, like me, prefer to see a bit more space around wildlife?

Many times we are not this lucky. Perhaps the background in not blurred as nicely and the bird blends in with the background more. At other times, even with a very nicely blurred background, the colors of the background and that of the bird are so similar that the bird does not stand out as we would like it to. The following image was such an image. Now please bear in mind that the version shown here has already gone through some editing to create separation between the bird and the background. My raw files are taken through DXO PhotoLabs 6 or DXO PureRaw 3, so by the time I take the new "raw" file into Photoshop it is already much improved. Yet, even with this improvement the bird still does not pop out of the background as I would like it to.

So how can we separate the subject from the background more? How can we give it pop? We cannot use luminosity (brightness) values because the bird shares the same brightness as the background (especially in the original raw file). We cannot use color selection because, once again, the bird is the same color as the background. Let's take the image into Adobe Camera Raw (in Photoshop) and show you how I process the image to separate the subject from the background.

If you click on masking (top right red arrow) and then on the blue "+" to add a mask a new dialogue box will appear with a few options. I clicked on "select background." The red area in the image shows what has now been selected. If the selection is not accurate then you can paint it in or out or fix it with color selection. Now you can make adjustments to only the background. I like to darken it just a bit and bring down highlights. Then I repeat the process but this time I select the subject.

I like to brighten my subject a bit. Since this is a bird I may also add a bit of texture to bring out the feather detail. Yet detail is something I do NOT want to add to the whole image as I want to maintain a smooth blurred background. By making edits to the background separately from what I do to the subject allows me make the subject stand out better.

Breaking News! Luminar Neo is having a mother's day sale. Luminar Neo is image editing software that is easy to use and can yield great results fast.

Here are the details:

Luminar Neo Explore Plan now costs $79 instead of $99 + Collection for free.

The Pro plan now costs $99 versus $119 + Collection for free

The Lifetime License (no subscription) is $119 rather than $149 + Collection for free

This special is valid from May 12, 2023 through May 16, 2023.

You can also get the Clouds in Paradise Skies Pack by Team for $29 versus $58 > Click HERE

To get the offers mentioned above click HERE

See what this software can do:

Remove backgrounds

Enlarge images

Remove noise

Combine images into HDR

Make lights sparkle

So here is my original image. As you can see, the image just does not work because the bird is flying out of the image, there is not enough space for the bird to fly into. Rather than trash the image we are going to fix it. Click on the crop tool on the left. Make sure that you place a check mark in "content aware." Now change the "original ratio" setting to just "ratio." Click and hold the right middle crop mark and drag it too the right.

Click the "okay" check mark in the middle top of the screen and watch the magic happen.

We can repeat the process and get the following result.

In the area where the red circle is was a repetitive pattern that did not seem as though it would occur in nature. This can easily been cleaned up using the clone tool. We can then crop the image to get a final picture.

What do you think? Look at all the space we created in front of the bird; magical. This is really easy and only take few seconds. Most people think that the cropping tool in Photoshop is just for cropping in but it can also be used to crop out, for stretching the edge and creating space that once did not exist. This is a powerful tool that can improve many images and even save some that would otherwise have been trashed.

          I hope that you found this tip useful. Try it.

One you have your skills honed try birds that may be more exciting (and difficult to photograph). A common mistake people make when taking images of flying birds, as I mentioned recently in a previous blog, is under-estimating the wing span. We zoom in too close then when the wings open they get clipped because they are wider than we anticipate. So shoot a bit wider, we can always crop a bit later, but there is no fixing a clipped wing.

          Obviously, using a camera with good fast auto focus is what is needed here. You will also need a long lens. The wider aperture the lens has the better because you are going to need to use fast shutter speeds to freeze the birds and to get them sharp. However, please note that we do not have to get the entire bird sharp in order to have pleasing images. Look at this image above. The bird is sharp. Most importantly, the eye is sharp. But notice the wing tips, they are out of focus. This is totally okay because it conveys movement. So focus on the eye. Most modern cameras have eye tracking for this purpose. Shoot at the fastest frame rate your camera offers. Then pick the best ones to keep later. You will be surprise what a difference this can make to getting that right moment.

As usual, good light and composition are important. Typically, you will want to shoot with the sun behind you or behind you at an angle. The birds need space to fly into, so more space in front of the bird than behind it is necessary.

Now I will be honest with you. At times, I am too slow and then I get an image where the bird is too close to the edge. Perhaps a wingtip is too close to the edge or the bird does not have enough space to fly into. As long as you have a reasonably blurred background which is not too busy, it is very easy to "create" more space. Join me for next week's blog where I teach you how.

They are amazing. They can run incredibly fast. They run so fast that you can hardly see their little legs. This makes them hard to photograph since most cameras' autofocus systems are just too slow to catch up with these little guys. You have to pan (move the camera with the bird as it runs) so fast to get them in frame. Doing so with a long lens can also be difficult. Because these are common little birds does not mean that they are not challenging to photograph.

          Once again, try to catch them doing something. Here I got it with both feet off of the ground, as also the one below:

Catch them with something in the beak.

Here is another bird trying to eat a feast too big for its mouth. And here it is when it is struggling to get the meal down:

These are just common birds but they are still interesting. We often think that we need to travel here or there to be able to get good images but you can get images like these wherever you are. Even common Gulls will do:

Just keep watching them with your finger on the shutter release.

          Birds have a larger wingspan than we think. We often compose our images too tightly. Then when the wings start flapping or when they jump or fight we are disappointed because a wing or beak or something is clipped. Frame them a bit looser in the image so that when action happens there is enough space in the frame for it to happen in without amputating some part of the bird. Here are a few action or action-ish images of birds:

Action can be anything the birds do such as preening, shaking off water, etc. It does not have to be much. Any movement or action is better than a bird just sitting on a stick (which is also beautiful, just not as interesting). Use fast shutter speeds to freeze the action. Action does not happen every second, so we just need to be patient but ready.

Scenes such as this can be tricky as much of the image is brighter than the bird. If the bird is small in the frame one can let the bird become a silhouette. If the bird is larger in the frame it is usually advisable to see some detail on the bird. The camera will typically want to darken to bird too much due to the brighter other parts of the image. Don't let it, shoot in manual or use exposure compensation to control the camera.

Here are some tricks to help you get low light bird images.

• Larger birds are easier to shoot in low light (usually). They tend to move slower.

• Pick the moment you depress the shutter carefully to coincide with the bird being even slower (eating, burrowing, etc.)

• Shoot in bursts at a high frame rate. Even if some of the burst is out of focus, a few may be in focus.

• Getting a sharp image is more important than avoiding noise; so use whatever ISO you need to use.

• DXO PhotoLab or DXO PureRaw is fantastic at hunting down and banishing noise without sacrificing detail (to the extent that that is possible).

• Try to stabilize the camera as much as possible (see my next blog about achieving this).

• As we have said before, if the bird is larger in the frame, make sure that you can see some detail in the bird.

This means that I am mostly lying on the ground shooting, or should I say in the water and or mud or dirt. Equipment will NOT make you a better photographer yet it helps you to get better images as it makes photography easier and you more comfortable. Here are a few of my favorite non-camera or lens gear for bird photography:

• A ground-pod. A tripod can often not get low enough on the ground and even if it can, how do you move it inconspicuously while you crawl on the ground? How do you prevent the spread out legs from getting stuck in the ground, or on plants? Movement chase the birds away. I like to be able to just slide the ground-pod on the ground. They are fantastic. You can even make one yourself from a used cheap pan. The model I use was bought from Huga Nature in Poland. (I am not affiliated with them or get any benefit from promoting them)

• Wimberley Gimbal. Ball heads don't work well for bird photography as you constantly have to keep the gear up. Some will say that you can just increase the friction setting on a ball head to prevent having to constantly keep up the camera and lens but that comes at a cost of free and easy movement. Birds move fast so we need to be able to also move our gear fast, uninhibited. A Wimberley Gimbal carries the weight of the gear, it keeps it in the right position even when untouched. It re-balances the camera and lens automatically if correctly installed to prevent the front of the lens to drop into the sand when you let the camera go. You can move freely and they just work perfectly. I highly recommend this. There are many brands that sell these gimbals heads. I prefer the Wimberley brand. The one I use is the WH-200 Wimberley Head Version II (which I bought used). The ProMediaGear Katana Pro also consistently gets good reviews. (I am not affiliated with Wimberley or ProMediaGear)

• Blind. Blinds helps the birds to not see you allowing you closer. It also puts them at ease so that they slow down and act naturally. Besides, blinds make for good sunscreen. I use a blind that drapes over me so that I can crawl and move. Mine is from LensCoat. LensCoat also sells lens covers that are highly rated. (I am not affiliated with LensCoat)

• Lens cover. With an expensive lens crawling along the ground in and near brush, sand, and mud, necessitates me to protect my gear. Lens covers also cover the white lens so that it is not so flashy to disturb the birds or alert thieves. The one I use is from Huga Nature in Poland but LensCoat is also an esteemed brand for lens covers.

• The right clothing. Photographers often overlook the importance of what you are wearing. Being too cold or too warm will send you packing and end your photography. The other day I was sitting out in 16 degree F or -8.88 degree C weather for three hours to photograph Prairie Chickens (which never showed up). You will freeze without the right clothing. View clothing as you do your photography gear.

You may be tempted to think that I just walked up to the scene and took this image. I wish this was what happened but it was not. The entire scene was explored. Sometimes images just don't jump out at me. I have to work the scene. I walk this way, that way, and this way again. I look at the foreground. I tried this and tried that and sometimes nothing seems to work. Luckily it was overcast and I had the time to explore without loosing the light, in fact, I am glad that it took me time to get to this composition since the light changed and warmed up the scene.

          Forest streams often make the best photographs when it is overcast, when the sun is trying to break through. Fog also goes well with forest streams. In this scene I tried to create a lead-in line with the flowing water. A slow shutter speed was used to emphasize the water flow. A 16-35 mm lens was used and the camera is close to the water. The goal was to get the viewer drawn into the image, front to back.

          I like this image a lot which teaches me to be patient and not to give up. My son was with me on this occasion and I remember telling him how frustrated I was that I just could not get the composition right and that I was struggling to "see" the image. Just be out photographing when the light works with what you are trying to shoot and keep on working the scene until the composition clicks.

My wife and I visited the lake but due to the vegetation we had no access to the shoreline. Literally the only two places where I could get to the water was of the image with the fishing pier and this location. But even this location did not offer much of a view. Instead of not getting an image this is the time to get creative.

          First, look at what you have to work with. Can you zoom in and isolate something? Can you do something with the sun? How about a sun-star? (see previous blogs on how to create a sun-star. Does going low down offer a more interesting view? Play around with your options. I find a cell phone helpful for this process. I use my phone's camera to look at all the angles and possibilities before making a decision and photographing it with my "good" camera. It is just easier to walk around and try things out this way since my camera is on the tripod, and moving the whole rig around requires more motivation.

          This image will certainly not win any awards but it is a pleasing image given that I had almost nothing to work with. You will be surprised what you can get if you start playing around with what you have in front of you.

The majority of this image looks cold, but that suits the scene with a lake and clouds. The cold look is taken advantage of rather than being a problem. Yet, I wanted to create some color tension which I introduced by waiting until the sky (or part of it) showed some warmth. During post processing I also brightened and warmed up the walkway and deck in the distance. It is important not to overdo it to remain looking natural.

          There are a few things to look out for when taken images such as this.

• Make sure that structures and water are level.

• Make sure that there is good separation between objects. In this case, it is easy not to pay attention to the right railing of the deck. If that railing makes contact with the reflection of the tree in the distance they will look merged. This ruins any depth that you may have in the image. So make sure that you leave gaps between objects to separate them and to create depth.

• Smooth out the water to better suit the scene. In this case there was no wind leaving the water like a mirror. If, however, there was some wind causing ripples you can smooth that out beautifully by using neutral density filters to get a shutter speed between 10 and 30 seconds. There is no need to have your shutter speed longer than this for the purpose of smoothing the water. This creates a bit of an ethereal look but pleasingly so.

As I have said before. Different weather or kinds of light does not rule out photographing as long as you carefully chose what to shoot that suits the weather conditions or the kind of light. Even harsh, middle of the day, light can be used effectively to show heat and drought if pairs with the right scene that calls for that kind of light. So don't put the camera away, find what works with the conditions or light.

Go out and photograph.

Each participant has a swivel chair that can turn 360 degrees. There is no one in front of you or behind you when you shoot because the boat is always positioned in such a way that you have a clear, unobstructed view of the wildlife. We are on the boat for three hours at sunrise and again for another three hours before sunset. During the rest of the day we teach wildlife photography, image editing, and hold image reviews.

If wildlife is your photographic passion and you seek to learn this craft, please join us. We offer a six to one, participant to instructor ratio. Send me an email to discuss this workshop scheduled for June or July 2023.

Wildlife

During our workshops we visit a "game park" for wildlife photography. There is something very special about photographing wildlife in the wild.

Spitzkoppe

This unique place offers photogenic scenes around every corner, including the famous arch.

Sossusvlei and Deadvlei

This place offers some of the highest sand dunes in the world.

This is an amazing place. To get here you have to walk on sand and cross over a small sand dune. But once you get here, you get to photograph some iconic images.

Kopmanskop

This is where a diamond town battled the desert and lost. This ghost-town offers great images.

Quiver Tree Forest

I am planning another Namibia workshop featuring both wildlife and landscape locations. The workshop will be in June or July 2023. If you are interested in joining me, please send me an email. We offer a six to one ratio of participants to instructors, with a maximum of twelve participants. Both my fellow instructor and I have photographed Namibia a number of times and we have hosted workshops here before.

          My go-to app for processing HDR was Aurora HDR from Skylum. Before I continue, it needs to be disclosed that I am an affiliate of Skylum software. You can interpret that in two ways:

1. Since I make a few sents when someone buys Skylum software from my link, I must be biased. Hence, for self gain, I promote this software and showcase it as being better than what it really is. Therefore, what I have to say about it must be taken with a bag full of salt.

2. Since I have access to lots of software from different companies and still choose to use this software from Skylum it must be pretty good. You can get a discount for buying the software from the link in this blog or on the affiliate links page of my website.

By the way, some weeks ago I wrote about other software (DXO PureRaw 2) from which I gain nothing. In all seriousness, I write these blogs simply to share my passion for photography, hoping that it helps someone. Skylum has been in the HDR software space for a long time. Their HDR technology is very mature and very good. In my opinion, their HDR process produces images much nicer than PhotoShop does.

          In the past, you had to use one of Skylum's image editing software offerings for general editing purposes AND buy Eurora HDR for you HDR work. Now, the HDR function is built right into their Luminar Neo product. Two software packages in one! All my HDR work is done using the Skylum software. Here is an example, provided by Skylum:

Here is the link to earn yourself a discount or to learn more about the product:

Discount Link

This software is really top notch and I use it for every image I process (HDR for my HDR work but Luminar Neo for non-HDR images). Please take advantage of the discount.

You will find them where there is water. Before becoming dragonflies they actually live and hunt underwater. Dragonflies can sit still for long periods of time and are generally really forgiving of your presence. You can get quite close to them. This makes them easy to photograph. They also prefer the same perches. So if they fly away, just wait patiently as they will return shortly and sit on the same (or very close to it) perch.

Overcast conditions work best but you will still need a good amount of light, especially if you want to photograph them in flight, which I am still working on. Certain species hover which will make photographing them in flight easier. These guys did not cooperate with my request. For in flight images you will obviously need a really fast shutter speed. Regardless of posed of in flight images use the largest aperture (smallest number on the lens). We want to blur the background. Speaking of backgrounds, they make a big difference. Since these guys sit still, more around and change your angle to line them up with water lilies or better backgrounds. A polarizer is also advisable to remove sheen from the background.

          I shot these at 600mm. That creates two challenges. Firstly, the depth of field (that which is in focus) is small. This is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, this makes for nicely blurred backgrounds. On the other hand, we don't want the dragonfly, or part of it, out of focus. The second challenge, at least with my Sony 200-600mm, is the minimum focusing distance. This actually left me quite frustrated. These guys allowed me much closer to them as I was photographing from but I could not focus any closer. Now with the Sony A7Riv this was not a big problem as I could crop and still have between 24 and 32 mega pixels left. However, if I could focus from a closer distance I could have had much more resolution. To solve this issue there are a few solutions.

          Firstly, some lenses can focus from a closer distance than others can. Perhaps the 100-400mm is a better choice here for that reason. I don't have that lens so it is not an option for me. I do not regret my choice as when photographing wildlife you always wish for more reach. So for most applications I would take the 600mm reach over the 400mm close focusing any day of the week. The second solution is a 1.4 extender or teleconverter. This makes the dragonfly (or what you are photographing) larger in the frame while basically maintaining the same minimum focusing distance. The tradeoff is that it steals light and it is quite expensive. Do NOT buy cheap ones as that will degrade your image quality. The last solution is to get an extension tube. They are cheap/er and greatly decrease your minimum focusing distance. Their tradeoff is that you will lose the ability to focus at infinity or close to it. But for this kind of photography that is not an issue. Since this is a hollow tube, image quality is not effected.

          I plan to spend much more time with these beauties. I want to try photographing them with back-lighting, in flight, and different compositions. Why don't you go try photograph some of them?

          In the absence of mountains and rivers and storms this is what I have done. I started looking for the small world. The small world is always present. You just need to look for it but once you start focusing on the small world you will start seeing how many options there are. I went to the garden and started following bees around. Before you do this, please stay safe. If you are allergic to bees stay away and find something else to photography.

This image was taken at 105mm. Set the aperture wide open to blur the background. Go to a bed a flowers where there is a lot of bee activity. This takes patience. Just try to get images, over and over. Follow the bees around. Overcast weather is the best for this kind of photography as we want diffused light. However, it should not be dreary. We still need a good amount of light because these guys are always on the move. To get sharp images we have to use a fast-ish shutter speed. A polarizer is generally a good idea to remove reflections and sheen from leaves. Try to shoot at 90 degrees from the sun which is where a polarizer works best.

          Try different angles. Shoot from different heights. Just play around.

We often think that the insect has to fill the frame to make a good image. This just is not true. We are not doing macro here. It is perfectly fine to leave some room for the insect to move around in. In fact, frame the image a bit looser. Show the habitat, the habits, and tell a story.

Have some fun. Hydrate and wear a hat. Just because it is overcast does not mean that the sun cannot burn you. We can get so involved taking these kinds of images that we lose sight of time, heat, and hydration. So take of yourself.

There was quite a bit of cloud cover, so I did not expect a great sunset. My conscience wanted to go home to be with my son. Yet, as a photographer, I always keep my eyes out on the western horizon. I am looking to see if the clouds make contact with that horizon or if there is a gap with no clouds. This is imperative to make a prediction as to what is going to happen at sunset. If the clouds are think there and low down I go home as nothing is probably going to happen. The time passed by as I fought with the wish to go home. This is what the horizon line was telling me.

There was indeed a gap in the clouds. That is what a photographer prays for. When the sun drops into and below that gap as it sets it is likely to light up the clouds in the sky. I unpacked my gear and set up for a good sunset, or so I hoped. Well, you can decide.

This is what it was like after sunset.

So if it is cloudy and you decide to go, always scan the western horizon first. Look to see if there is a gap for the sun to shine through. If so, don't go! You may very well be in luck. Only leave if there is no gap in the clouds or if there is a cloud bank right on the horizon. When it is cloudy that western horizon is your friend. It can send you home early or promise a fiery sky. Always watch that western horizon before you make a decision to go or to stay.

Yes, lightning is unpredictable, but not fully so. We do know where most of the strikes are going to hit for a scene such as this. Lightning tends to strike mostly in or near where the rain "band" is. When you see the rain "band," frame your image close to it, knowing that that is most probably where the strike is going to be.

          Look at this image. The rain band is clearly visible just to the right of center. The rain band stops just to the left of the lowest dark clouds on the right. Now we can frame the image loosely based on where that band is. Keep in mind that that band of rain will constantly move. So keep reframing your composition to adjust to this band's movement.

          Many people aim the camera too high. Most of the strikes are going to come from the approximate same height as the cell the rain band is from. So there is no need to frame too high. What is said here only applies to storms moving in or moving out. If you are in the thick of things it could strike anywhere. But for these kind of scenarios pictured above your best chance for success is to aim around the rain band, placing the top of your image just above where the rain band starts.

          Always follow governmental guidelines for your safety.

I started to notice that as the storms start to roll in they tend to generally come from the same direction. I also noticed that God-rays also appeared frequently. I never captured them because I was not in the right place to shoot them (too much going on in the foregrounds facing that direction). But this is the advantage of getting to know your surroundings. You start to notice patterns such as weather patterns, which direction the God-rays appear, and where suitable foregrounds are for different kinds of scenarios.

          For this image, I was photographing a mile or so east, at first. I noted that the cloud buildup was suitable for God-rays. So, I forgot about lighting and moved to this location for the God-rays. This image would never have been captured if I did not know my surroundings.

          So here is the challenge for each of us. Explore your surrounding area well. Make notes as to which locations are best for which scenarios. Get to know the weather patterns. Armed with this information, you can quickly make better decisions about where to be for which kind of scene. If things change you will be ready because you would know where to go for that. I am now ready and know where all the open fields are (those without homes, power poles and cables, etc.).

          It was the famous South African golfer, Gary Player, who once sunk the ball from an almost impossible position in the sand. A reporter called him "lucky." Little did the reporter know that Gary spent hours and days practicing those very shorts from those very positions. Gary responded to the reported by saying, "the more I practice the luckier I get."

          Create your luck with preparation. Get to know your surroundings. It will increase the odds of getting the shots you want.

I love the way the perch is shown here. It adds to the image. This images shows more than just a portrait of a bird. Yes, the bird is smaller in the image, but the perch is now part of the image. I could have cropped the image more but then I would have lost some of the perch.

Show more than just the bird in flight. Now we know where the bird comes from. The perch acts as a barrier to prevent the viewer's eyes from leaving the image on the right. Make sure to leave enough space for the bird to fly into. Once again, the bird is smaller in the frame but it tells more of a story than it would have if it was cropped to only show the bird.

          So don't be afraid of zooming out a bit, or cropping less deeply, or shooting from further away. Show a bit more.

I watched them at two different locations and realized that they seem habitual. They frequent certain perches. I watched them for a long time and identified where I want to attempt to take up my position. I moved slowly and cautiously and then waited, and waited, and waited some more. The birds got used to me and started their previous routines. It was a wonderful experience being out in nature and photographing these birds. Here are a few suggestions to get your started:

• Be patient. It just takes time and practice.

• Start with stationary birds.

• Get to know your camera well. Specifically, learn to control and set your focus modes and preferences.

• Auto ISO is your friend, use it. Set your shutter speed and aperture as you want them and trust your camera to set the exposure right using the ISO.

• Use a shutter speed of at least double your focal length. Use your largest aperture. If you are using a very long lens such as 600mm or longer you may need to stop down just a bit to get enough depth of field if you are really close to the birds.

• Find a location where the background if far away from where your birds are. This will help to adequately blur the background.

• Watch your background to make sure it is pleasing. Moving to the left or right a little can make a big difference.

• Once you are more experienced, try some bird in flight images

If you use a fast enough shutter speed, turn off image stabilization. For birds in flight you need to increase your shutter speed even higher. Did I mention the need of lots of patience before? Just keep on trying.

First of all, I become acquainted with all the safety and survival information provided by governmental agencies and I obey their guidelines. Secondly, I listen to and closely follow weather reports, warnings and alerts. In addition to this I also practice the following tips:

• I only photograph on the edges of storms. That means that I shoot as the storm moves in, but before it becomes severe. I make sure that I am home before the severity of the storm picks up. Similarly, I shoot when the storm is just about over and clearing out.

• I use numerous weather cell phone apps that provide life radar data. It is important to know where the storm is, and how it is moving.

• I listen in on my ham radio (I am licensed) by tuning in to the repeater frequency. In our area we have active weather spotters during weather events. By listening in on their reporting I know what is happening where. I change my position based on this live information.

• I stay a safe distance away (consult your governmental guidelines). As an extra precaution, I stay in the car with the windows rolled up (for lightning). My camera is set up on a tripod with a lightning trigger outside and does not need me to supervise.

• I thoroughly scout the area where I plan to shoot weather from long in advance. I need to know alternate routes. I check that all the roads are open before the weather comes by leaving on the shoot early and running routes.

• I chose locations situated on or very near to cross-roads. I want to be able to drive off in any of four directions in the unlikely event of a distant tornado. Once again, I greatly minimize the likelihood of such encounters by not being out in the midst of storms and only shooting during the edges of storms before they are strong or severe.

• I make sure that my cell phone is signed up to receive weather alerts and take immediate action on receiving them.

Safety should always be our first priority, NOT the image. No image is worth your life. I share only my experience and what I do with this blog. I am NOT telling you to do what I do. Do what the governmental agencies say.

1. MotionX-GPS. This is not a free app, but how much is your life worth to you. This app tracks your every step so that you can find your way back to the car. Now you may say that you have never gotten lost, but what will you do once it happens? It only takes once to possibily kill you. Have you ever wondered in sand dunes, they can all look the same. It is just safe to have a GPS guide to get you to your car. The app works even without cell phone reception.
2. LeeProGlass. This is a free app that helps you to calculate the proper exposure when using a neutral density filter. It is super easy and simple to operate and it work well.
3. Tides Near Me. This is useful to plan seascape shoots.
4. Star Walk 2. This app tells you were the milky way and other constellations are for night photography.
5. Weather apps with weather radar. This is perhaps the most important app of all. It shows you how the rain is moving so that you can plan accordingly.
6. Lightning detector.
7. Focalware. This app shows you where the sun or moon is going to be at a given time. It also tells you the sunrise and sunset times and moonrise and moonset times.

Let's get talking about image editing software. Please note that everybody have their own preferences and these are just mine. I am not saying that my choices are the best, their are what is working for me and what I know best. I use four different image editing programs:

1. PureRaw 2 or PhotoLab 5 from DXO. I realize that these programs are expensive but their "Deep Prime" noise reduction is wonderful. They also fix lens distortion very well (in my opinion, much better than Adobe Camera Raw). Sometimes I also like "Clearview" to remove haze and mist. I run my images through DXO's offering before I go to the next program. This software exports a DNG file which Adobe Camera Raw will treat as a raw file. My only two complaints about the software are the cost and the output file size.
2. Photoshop and Adobe Camera Raw. Yes, yes, I know that most photographers love Lightroom. Most people love Lightroom for their image catalogue feature. I have HATED that feature from day one and have never gone back. I know that it is now more refined and all the initial issues have been solved but I just know and love Photoshop. After running my files through DXO I bring them into Photoshop.
3. Luminar*. After processing my file in Adobe Camera Raw I quickly do a few small things in Photoshop and then I call up Luminar (from Skylum)(as a plug-in). Luminar does a few things quickly and well. The software is easy to learn and makes quite a different. Once this is done I go back into Adobe Camera Raw to reset the image's black and white points and make a few other local adjustments.
4. Eurora*. When I do HDR work, my go to program is Eurora (from Skylum). My workflow changes here. I still start with DXO and follow that up with Adobe Camera Raw. Here I make sure that the white balance for the sequence of image are all the same. Now I export the files as Tiff files. These are the files that I take into Eurora. Once done with Eurora, I go to Photoshop and then Luminar.

Photo editing is very important and can make a huge difference.

* Disclosure: I am an affiliate of Skylum. Click on affiliate links to get a discount code if you choose to buy the software. I get a small commission without costing you anything extra (in fact, you get a discount). I use Skylum's software on every single one of my images.

1. Comfort when fully loaded. Some packs just do not have the support needed to haul a heavy load. The shoulder straps need to be well padded and the same goes for the waist belt. I don't even look at backpacks that do not have a waist belt. A good waist belt will take much of the weight off of my shoulders and better distribute the weight. Part of that comfort equation is a ventilated back. Air needs to be able to flow between your back and the backpack or you will get warm and sweat. When you put the backpack down it is not fun to have a wet back on a breezy afternoon.
2. Water resistant/proof. Landscape photographers do much of their photography in inclimate weather and often encounter rain. I can't risk my equipment getting wet. Not only should be bag be able to withstand some rain but so do the zippers. They need to be able to seal.
3. Durability. I belief in buying once if possible. My bag needs to last. It is going to endure weather. It is going to be placed on snow and mud and rocks. I can't have a bag break on a trip.
4. Back opening. The part of the backpack that touches my back is the part that needs to open. My current bag opens from the side that is away from my back. But that means that when I lay the bag down in snow or mud that part that is getting wet and dirty is going to go against my back when I leave. That is a big no-no. My next bag will open on the other side. Now having said that, the reason why I have not replaced my bag yet is because, well I bought it to last and it is still lasting. Another reason is that I really want a bag that can open from the front and back, and I just can't find one. Too often I lean over and ask my wife or a fellow photographer to open my bag and get something, saving me from having to offload the pack, get what I need and put it back on. I want a bag that still affords me this possibility AND open on the other side when I do put the bag down.
5. Size. The backpack needs to be large enough to fit my gear, and perhaps an item I still need to get. This is typically not a problem because most manufacturers have different sized bags. Just make sure that your gear will fit in.
6. Weight. My gear is heavy enough to carry, I don't still want to add a heavy bag to the mix. However, durability and light weight have never been married. For a bag to do its job of keeping your gear safe and protected it has to have padding. Its outer walls have to be strong enough to last AND offer said protection. But that comes at the cost of extra weight. So find a bag that offers a balance between protection and weight.

Here is what else I carry in my bag:

1. Allen wrenches. I cannot tell you how often I have helped people with tripod or L-bracket issues.
2. Lens cleaning cloths, a number of them. When shooting in the rain, you have to keep the front of your lens element dry or your images are ruined. Filters fall, waves splash, and a number of things happen which necessitates having a microfiber cleaning cloth.
3. Cleaning brush to brush away dust from my lenses or filters.
4. Hand warmers. I hate being cold which makes me want to stop doing my photography.
5. A whistle and pepper/bear spray. A whistle is handy if you ever get lost. Pepper spray is handy for when criminals find you with your expensive gear. Bear spray because my gear prevents me from running fast enough.
6. Toilet paper and a few emergency supplies because falls happen. I also carry mole-skin for blisters. They have saved me and a few whom I were able to help. Being far from your car with major blisters is no joke.
7. Head flashlight. We oftentimes walk in the dark to go shoot a sunrise or to come back after a sunset.
8. A Rocket blower. To clean my camera sensor.
9. Two remote triggers to fire my camera. I don't want to touch my camera when I shoot to prevent camera shake. I carry two with me because I have had them break on me. My current two have actually lasted a long time. One is wired (more reliable) and one is wireless. Both are genuine Sony triggers.
10. Lightning trigger. Please see one of my previous blogs on shooting lightning where I provide details on the model I use. My friends Don Smith and Gary Hart have been teaching lightning workshops for many years and have seen just about every lightning trigger on the market. All of the photographers shoot under the exact same conditions with different triggers. Yet my friends have found, comparing the results from all the photographers that some of them are just better than others. The model I use is what they recommend and I have been very happy with it.
11. A waterproof and floatable memory card holder. You cannot be risking all your precious images.
12. Extra memory cards and camera batteries.
13. Water bottle.

When I am going on a long hike I may leave some of my gear behind in my car to save on weight. That is what is in my bag.

1. Camera sensors are becoming so good at high ISO that photographers are not scared to use higher ISO to get shutter speeds high enough to shoot handheld.

2. Noise reduction software have also become so good that we can can boost ISO even higher.

3. Photographers don't like the hassle of carrying and dealing with tripods. Oh' and did I mention the weight of tripods?

4. Some photographers feel more creative and free without being kept back and or slowed down by a tripod.

However, I still use a tripod faithfully. Here is why:

1. No matter how good camera sensor performance is at high ISO they will always be better at lower ISO.

2. The same argument goes for noise reduction software. Image quality is everything to me.

3. Having a camera mounted allows me to scan the boarders of my image to prevent nicking things. It help to compose more precisely.

4. It slows me down, enabling me to concentrate better. I get my freedom to roam, and play with possible composition without dealing with a tripod by using my cell phone. Once I find what I want then I get serious with my real camera and my tripod.

5. I don't want to touch my camera when it fires because even the slightest camera shake becomes an issue when you print large. And I print large - 40X60. More about triggering the camera in the next blog.

6. Many times I have my camera setup and then need to wait for the sun to reach the horizon or for that wave to come in. You just cannot do that handheld.

7. Please don't laugh at me but my tripod is also very hand when I try to walk from rock to rock in a river. I spread its legs, plonk it down, make sure it is stable and then use it as a crutch to get to the next rock. I cannot tell you how many times it has saved me from falling into the water. My tripod is my friend.

So which tripods are better? There is no doubt that carbon fiber tripods are the best. They are also light. Another benefit is that they do not conduct the cold like aluminum tripods do. Believe me, you will thank me when you deal with your tripod in the cold. Personally I use a Really Right Stuff tripod - a beefy one. I know that they are expensive but they last. I have had mine for many years now and it just keeps working perfectly. Your selection of which tripod head to use will depend on what you shoot. For heavy and long lenses that need to track moving subjects a Gimbal head is the way to go. Since I shoot more landscapes I prefer a ball head. The one I use is an Arca Swiss Z1 Monoball. Like the tripod it has lasted me for many years and it is still as rock solid as the day I bought it. Please buy good support equipment. unstable support is worse than shooting handheld. Things need to be locked down tightly to get pin sharp images, especially as higher and higher mega pixel cameras come to market. Your tripod and tripod head are items that can last you a lifetime if you buy right.

          The only issue I have with my tripod head is the knob to open and close the clamp. Don't get me wrong, it still works perfectly. I have just come to detest using the knob, especially when it is cold and I have gloves on. I much prefer a lever system to the knob system. So recently I got one of these:

This image is from Adorama.com

          The bottom of this panning clamp fits to my normal Arca Swiss dove tail on my tripod head. Now I no longer have to deal with the knob on my tripod head and use this lever instead. As an added bonus I can level my camera using the ball head. This can be done in seconds. Trying to level your tripod using the tripod's legs is a nightmare. Then I can use this gadget to pan for panoramic images. I bought mine used for half price. Once again, Really Right Stuff's gear is some of the very best there is. If I were to start over I would get a ball head with this kind of panning base and lever clamp built in from the get go. This will save on cost and weight. Both Really Right Stuff and Arca Swiss have them now. By the way, the reasons why I went with the Arca Swiss rather than the Really Right Stuff ball head was because of price and maximum load weight allowance (which convinced me of its stability). After many years of use I have not regretted my choice.

          Another thing that will greatly enhance the stability and sturdiness of your tripod is to fit it with spikes. I press my tripod into the ground with the spikes. It makes the tripod as solid as a rock. It may help prevent your tripod from being blown over by strong wind. This really does make a difference to the sharpness of you images.

This image is from Amazon.com

          These are cheap and I highly recommend them. Just don't use them indoors as they can damage your flooring. I realize that a good tripod and head are expensive, but remember, in all likelihood, if you buy right, you only have to buy once and never again (baring some unforeseen circumstance). A tripod and good head are indispensable for my style of shooting. That may not be true for you, depending on what and where you shoot and how far you have to walk to get there.

          In part I we will talk about cameras, lenses, and filters. In part II I will talk about tripods and tripod heads. Part III will talk about other accessories. Part IV will cover photo editing software.

          All the top camera manufacturers have excellent gear. So I will not go into which brand is this or that. One thing that seems quite clear is that mirrorless cameras are the future while DSLRs are dying out, fast. Choose the model that fits what you shoot. Certain models are better for sports/action/wildlife while others are better for landscape/portraits and so forth. If you can afford them, some manufacturers have a model that is great at everything, but be prepared to cash out your pension fund. Before you buy a camera look into which lenses are available. You are not just buying a camera, you are buying into a system and the system as a whole is important.

          For landscape photography I primarily use a 16-35mm, a 24-105mm, and a 70-200mm. Some purists may scoff at me because I use zoom lenses rather than primes. My rebuttal is simple:

1. The top zoom lenses today are extremely good. Yes, I know that people have been saying this for a long time, but this time it is really true. There are manufacturing techniques that can produce extreme aspherical lenses from high quality glass that was just not possible before. Just look at MFT charts and you will see that the top zooms are so close to primes that one is spitting hairs to determine the difference.

2. Zooming with your feet (moving closer or further away) is not the answer. Changing positions are simply not always possible, lest you want to fall off a cliff, for example. Secondly, changing positions alters the composition. Moving always seems to introduce an unwanted element into the image. Something always seems to be in the way.

3. I don't want to be changing lenses all the time. During safaris there is always dust that gets onto your sensor. Near water spray the risk is the same. Landscape photographers shoot when the weather is not playing nice with your gear. Zooms promise me more versatility and and less lens changes.

          For wildlife photography I use two bodies. One is fitted with the 70-200mm while the other has the 200-600mm on. Personally I shoot with Sony and I just love my 200-600mm.

          Please do not use UV or other so called protective filters. Use your lens cap for protection, it works better. There is also no need for graduated neutral density filters. Just bracket and blend in your editing software. So which filters do I use? I only use two kinds of filters, a polarizer and neutral density filters (which I use rarely).

          That is it. That is all I use as far as cameras, lenses, and filters are concerned.

          If you are serious about day-time lightning photography, get yourself a lightning trigger. The one that I believe to be the best is the one from Stepping Stones (https://lightningtrigger.com/). I am not sponsored or affiliated with them in any way, in fact, they don't even know who I am (other than buying mine from them). Let's get into the best camera settings:

          Pre-focus and then set your camera/lens on manual focus. Shoot in manual mode with a shutter speed at between 1/4 and 1/20th of a second. Keep your ISO as low as possible. Pick an aperture to balance your exposure. Feel welcome to play with either your ISO or your aperture to get the right exposure because your shutter speed is the most important setting. If you are at the lowest ISO and a small aperture and your image is still over exposed then use a mild Neutral Density Filter (as mild as possible to get the exposure right).

A photo of lightning in the sky will rarely be as interesting as one with something in the foreground. A foreground will add scale and interest.

This image was taken around sunset or just thereafter. Is this not a much better image than one with just a bolt in the clouds? Make sure the know the weather patterns of your location. You need to know where the storms come from and how they move. Then go scouting long before the storms come. Find location that will work. The best locations are often the one with an open view to lots of sky.

          Place your camera and trigger on a sturdy tripod. Anchor it into the ground so that the wind cannot blow it over. Protect your camera and trigger from the rain. Get everything ready and started before the storm is close or dangerous. Then go and wait in a safe place and retrieve your gear later. Be ready to be amazed with possible nice images.

As you can see, the light levels are very low. My Sony 200-600mm lens is already set to F.6.3; the largest aperture at 600mm which allows the most possible light to enter the camera (for this lens). Image stabilization helps to prevent camera shake but does nothing regarding the moving birds. A high shutter speed with low light and lens already wide open only leaves the photographer with one last option. Jack the ISO high. If you don't do this your image will be too dark.

          High ISO leads to noise. Oh' I hate noise! But what can we do about it? Firstly, rather get the shot with noise than bringing down the ISO as that will bring down your shutter speed which in turn will lead to out of focus images. Noise will always be preferred above out of focus images. Lucky, there has been great progress made by image editing software using AI technology to get rid of noise. Of late I tried out the offering from DXO called "Deep Prime." The program was very impressive at dealing with noise.

          In the past, I have hated the result gained by noise reduction software almost as much as the noise itself. They used to wipe out all detail (okay, almost all) and leave you with a mushy, paintery mess devoid of the detail that should be there. Deep Prime still leaves detail where detail should be. I am definitely adding this software to my toolkit. There are other options too, such as the offerings from Topaz Labs and On1. Now we can be less afraid of high ISO images and focus on getting the images we want to get. This is a good day.

The light is not good and hence this image is not that great. Nevertheless, what lessons can we learn about composition? When we get to this scene the first thing that drew my attention was the mountain peak and the color of the trees beneath it. So that is our starting point. We now start walking around looking for something in the foreground to put with it, to create interest, depth, and balance. The Virgin river is obviously a strong candidate to be my foreground interest but it could also be something else.

          So I went with the river. Now that we have our foreground we walk around a bit more to place the objects where we want them. By walk around we can change the placement of objects in relation to each other. The mountain peak is placed where the top third line and left third line intersect because this is a strong compositional place. If you don't know what these third lines refer to, please search my blogs for the "rule of thirds."

          I now walk, watching how the river in relation to the mountain peak changes position until the curve in the river points to the mountain peak. We also move further away or closer to the river so that everything harmoniously work together. Notice the curved line in the bottom right corner as it too curves towards the mountain peak. This creates balance. The river is a lead-in line that creates depth and interest.

          Make sure that everything in your images work together to create interest, depth, and balance.

Here we have a wet rock-race. The reflection from the sky killed this image. In addition to the rock-face we also have water reflecting the sky. So you might say, well the water looks really good and the rock-face is not that bad. Well, that is because I used a polarizer. Without a polarizer you would have thrown this image away. The polarizer did a fantastic job at minimizing the reflections.

          Polarizers also help to minimize the sheen on leaves. Thus in turn helps to saturate the color of the leaves. Polarizers work wonders in forests and in scenes like this. Just remember not to include the sky in the image if you are combing a polarizer with a wide or ultra-wide angle lens.

          Please do yourself a favor and buy a very good polarizer. It makes no sense to use an expensive lens with a cheap filter in front. Your lens can never be any better than the filter you attach to it as that filter determines the quality of light that your lens sees. Personally I prefer Scotts Glass filters in brass rings. Please do yourself an even bigger favor and never buy any screw-on filter of any kind that is not in a brass ring. Other rings will stick to your lenses and they can be a nightmare to get off. This is true especially of polarizer filters as the front element rotates thereby minimizing the grip you can get on it to remove it from your lens. You just don't have this problem with brass filters. Struggling out in the field to get a filter off of the lens when wearing gloves is a recipe to drop a lens.

          Be out in nature more and enjoy your photography.

My camera was mounted to a tripod. I waited for the birds to get close to where I wanted them in the frame and then fired away. The camera was set on high frame rate shooting (in my case 10 frames per second). You take a burst of images and then wait for the next flurry of birds to come flying by. With some luck and many repeated tries I got this bird nicely positioned within the moon's outline.

          Since my camera is stationary I have the optical stabilization turned off. The shutter speed is above 1/1000th of a second to get sharp, in-focus birds. As with all movement, leave more space in front of the birds than behind them. They need space to fly into or else they will make the viewer's eyes want to exit the photo with the first bird.

          Light levels were already low, but I like the atmosphere created by the last rays of the sun on the birds, as weak as it is. The low light levels did cause me problems as I was perched on a viewing deck. There were many people out coming to see these birds. Much foot-traffic on a viewing deck is a nightmare for photographers. The viewing deck vibrates as people move around. To eliminate camera blur with a 600mm lens attached requires a fast shutter speed. Low light levels combined with fast shutter speeds only means one thing, high ISO. As a photographer you need to do what you need to do to get the shot, even if you have to deal with noise afterwards.

          Go out there and enjoy nature while you take a few images.

It was a wonderful experience spending two days with these birds. The noise is something to experience when they all come in to land or when they get ready to take off. During the day they spend their time feeding in the fields around the Platt river. At sunset they come land in the shallow river to overnight there. At sunrise they take off again.

          They are tricky to photograph as they don't allow you close and it is illegal to approach them. The weather did not cooperate either. There just was not enough light. A long lens is your friend here. That means using a fast shutter speed to prevent motion blur caused by camera movement. You also want to turn on your image stabilization. Choose mode 2, the mode that cancels out movement other than panning; you want to be able to pan with the birds for some images. To get enough light in, you will want to use your largest aperture. This image was taken from my tripod.

          I did not have much time to prepare for this shoot (with my move and all). In preparation for next year I am now tasked with learning the behavior patterns of these birds. The better you know your subject the better you are able to anticipate their next move which will make you a better photographer. With approximately 600,000 birds clustered together there is chaos. Isolating birds are near impossible. I plan to book space in a blind for next year.

          Good photography usually is a result of good planning and preparation.

In winter and spring the water is very cold. In the summer the water level can be higher and the current stronger. In the fall the river is the friendliest, but the number of people is still high for photography. The river plays an important role as much of the time you are hiking in the river.

The second challenge is presented by the round, lose river rocks you walk on. Where there are little rapids in the water you can't see the river bed. So walking in water and stepping on lose, round river rocks makes one prone to fall. Falling into the water with expensive photography gear is no laughing matter. I almost fell while my camera was out and unprotected. My wife did fall.

The third problem is that it can be windy and cold. Walking upstream can be a workout but then there are sections were you are out of the water. Then you get cold and then you get too hot. Dealing with layers is not so easy given the gear you wear. As with any hike you need to hydrate yourself. But that presents another problem. Were do you relieve yourself? Did I mention that there are people all over the place?

Wearing the right gear is important so as not to be miserable. The right shoes give you grip and keep your warm. The right dry suite pants keeps you dry and warm. A waterproof backpack protects your gear. Walking sticks prevent you from falling (hopefully). Always check the weather as flash floods can come out of nowhere and kill you. Be safe.

Enjoy your hike.

Please note that we have already roughly set the black point and white point of this image in Adobe Camera Raw (Raw developer software). Here is what I want you to notice about this image, the cliff face on the far left is brighter than the center of the image. The viewer's eyes will always be pulled to this brighter part. The cliff face at the center of the image is darkish compared to the rest of the image. The viewer's eyes will not naturally want to spend much time there. This can typically not be fixed with global adjustments. Now let's look at the finished file:

The lighter part of the far left cliff face has been darkened down. The center of the image has been lightened. Quickly alternate looking at the raw file then the finished file a few times. You should notice that the raw files has you looking at the edges of the image while the finished file has your view pulled into the center. So how do we edit an image to darken one part while lightening another part?

          Once I have completed my global adjustments I go back into the raw developer (Adobe Camera Raw). I select the brush tool. Now simply set your exposure lower, pull back your highlights and set your shadows a bit darker. Paint over the left part of the bright cliff face. Also paint over the right side. Now create a new brush with the exposure and shadows up. Also add some contrast. When you increase exposure it comes at the cost of contrast, so we need to restore that loss by adding more contrast. Paint over the center parts. This is the secret source that directs the viewer to where you want them to look. All we are doing is changing the exposure and dodging and burning the highlights and shadows. This is exactly what would have happened in a darkroom in the age of film. No funny stuff. Even the purist should approve. Lastly, set your black point and white point again because those values have changed with your adjustments.

          What do you think?

          Either way, this is not my topic today. Rather, I want to address the topic of how to get people-free images when the landscape is littered with people everywhere. What are we as photographers to do? Getting upset and feeling frustrated are normal responses but when we think about it, what makes us so special to want the place to ourselves? Why would these people not have the same right to enjoy the views? With that settled, let's get back to how to get people-free images.

Firstly, I simply asked people behind me to please kindly wait for 20 seconds while I am exposing the image. This worked very well and all the people complied with my request. However effective this may be it does not solve the problem of people further away, those already out there in the image. This image had no less than seven people in the image. Just to the left of this frame was the group that would stay in place for 30+ minutes. At times we may have to reframe our composition if there is no other way to eliminate the people from the scene. If people are ruining an image and just staying there, there is nothing much we can do other than recomposing and kissing that wonderful composition good buy. Waiting for them to leave is not always an option as, by the time they move the sun has set, the light is gone, the cloud has moved, etc. If people are on the move there is a great technique that works wonderfully to eliminate people from the scene.

          Take two images 10 to 20 seconds after each other. Make sure that your expose values are kept the same between the two images (shoot in manual). Now bring the two images into your editing software as two layers, one image on top of the other one. Highlight both layers, click on edit, then on auto-align (I am using photoshop here, other software may be different). Now simply add a layer mask and paint over any person on the top layer. Voila, your image is perfect, without people.

          The reason why this works so great and is so quick to edit is that the people in the scene are moving. In the second image shot 10 or 20 seconds later the person has walked to a different position. So when we paint over the person we are simply seeing the first image from the layer below. When that image was taken the person being erased was at a different place, hence the real imagery from the layer below replaces the person.

          This is a fantastic method and takes but a few seconds to edit. Using the healing brush to get rid of people in our image works great when they are small in the image, but does not work well when the people consume a larger part of your image. This technique works regardless of the size of the person in our image as long as he or she is moving between the two images. If you want to be really safe consider taking three images to guarantee that one of the three images will be person-free at the spot where you need it to be.

          So don't sweat about moving people, just use this method to solve the problem.

At ground level, the middle-ground boulders pierced into the sky making them the background. They would mesh with the mountain in the back and the mountain would lose any prominence. The sky did not have anything to offer the image so there was no point shooting up into it. So I decided to gain some elevation. I climbed up onto the boulders behind this image. The additional height created a scene with a clear foreground, middle-ground, and left the mountains with enough prominence to be the background.

          Having a foreground, middle-ground, and background that is clearly distinct from each other helps to separate them from each other and creates depth. These elements almost act like stepping stones poking out of the water. They invite you to step into the scene. Without them, the water prevents the viewer from crossing it. So a foreground, middle-ground, and background act like stepping stones for our eyes, inviting us to step (visually) from one to the next and into the scene.

          Yes, the light is not great which means that the image is not great. But it is not a terrible image either. What made it possible to get an "okay" image in poor light? The trusted formula did its work.

I got up just after 4 am and drove an hour to get here. The plan was to catch a sunrise and photograph backlit Chollas. A cloud bank decided that today was not going to be the day of the big one. Luckily for me, I was coming back here a week later so another opportunity was on offer. This is the nature of landscape photography. You don't always win. By the time the sun finally showed itself the light was harsh.

          When fisher-people go out to fish unsuccessfully they may sit there and get no bites at all, not even a nibble (fish biting or nibbling). At other times, the fish mess with the fisher-folk by biting excitingly and nibbling often but without offering a catch. Nature messed with me on this day too. The sky offered something but I just was not able to catch a fish large enough to be proud of. The land part of the image just does not have enough in it to feed the family. Well, I would rather be teased by the sky than getting nothing at all.

          You cannot stop going fishing just because you caught nothing this time as the promise of the big one lures you back. You cannot possibly expect to win every time. Just keep going back, being out there. One day may just be your lucky day but you will never see that lucky day if you are not out there when it happens. Don't give up, don't lose heart. Just keep trying, learning, and improving on the way.

Perhaps this image is not a good example as the middle-ground and background are not fully blurred. They are just softly out of focus. And so the line between genres becomes blurred (pun intended). I hope that you agree with me that this is still a landscape image. So why did I chose to focus it the way I did? Would you have wanted the middle-ground and background sharply focussed or does this work for you?

          This is an ironic image in the sense I chose an image with sharp thorns to be soft (from the middle towards the back of the image). Yet, because of the sharp focus of the foreground, there is no doubt that these thorns are sharp. By the way, these Cholla thorns stick to everything. I left the middle to the background soft to create a more dreamy scene. I wanted the focus of the viewer to kind of stay with the thorns in the foreground yet I did not want to leave then stuck there. I still wanted to show the expanse and the number of Chollas. I still wanted the viewer to be drawn to the sun and the mountain in the background to a lesser degree. This tension creates a dreamy effect where the viewer's eyes move backwards and forwards all the time. I felt that the sun and the sky suited this kind of image.

          So how do you create this effect? You can use a larger aperture but that would render the sun without the sun star. The best way to get this effect is to use a longer lens and to move closer to the foreground. Wide lenses by default have a deeper depth of field at the same aperture as what longer lenses have. Adjusting the distance between the foreground and the camera would change the depth of field. The closer we are to the foreground the more blurred the background would be and vice versa.

          Therefore, use this to your advantage to create just the right amount of blur to suit the scene. I wanted to create a more dreamy image but I still wanted it to show the landscape. Hence the amount of blur in the image.

          The vegetation and direction of the little path worked together perfectly for the sun to more brightly illuminate the path which helped to really make it stand out. This path formed a very nice lead-in line in this otherwise chaotic scene.

My goal was to have the path take the viewer to the sun. I balanced the sun with the Cholla in the right foreground. You will notice that all my Cholla images were taken shooting straight into the sun. For a topic such as Chollas, this is important because backlighting suits these thorny friends very well and produces rim lights around them. This rim light is not only interesting but makes these plants pop out from the background. They just come to life in low angled backlight.

          Once again, watch the edge of the frame to exclude any bright objects which can be difficult in a garden like this one. I liked the harsh-ish sun too as it helps to convey what a tough landscape this is, hot and dry. Our photographs tell stories. The better that story is portrayed the better the photograph, most of the time.

          I would never have gotten this image if I did not explore the area. Part of landscape photography should be to walk around. Explore the landscape. Search for something different, something colorful, some pattern, some line, some interesting thing. I say this all the time, the difference between a good landscape image and a great one of the same location, in the same light, and taken at around the same time is what was gained by exploring. Exploration helps you to adds that something special. It helps you to nail the composition. Never be satisfied with what you have. Get your shot then explore the area for a better one, and repeat the process. Just explore.

A higher elevation also helps to minimize a boring sky. The lower down we shoot from the more sky is included unless cut off by high rising mountains. Images taken from a high elevation shooting downwards minimizes the importance of the sky. Such images enable the viewer to see far into the distance. It shows the vast scale of the landscape.

          Many times such images do not require a strong foreground (that which is close, almost in reach). In fact, they often don't have what would traditionally be considered a foreground. People like such views so much that they are willing to hike up mountains just to see the view. A house built high up always makes visitors stare at the view. The same is true of images taken from a high elevation.

          The image above was not taken from a high elevation, I was just elevated above tree level. However, it still has that elevated look that many like to stare at. So let's talk about what I tried to create here.

          Even though I had the option to move to the rocks in front of me thus having no foreground, I opted to stay back to include them. I like for such images to have a base. A base provides a foreground which in turn provides even more depth. Foregrounds help to give a sense of scale. It looks more like a photographer's image than a drone-captured image. I also used the foreground rocks on the right to balance the sun, visually.

          Regardless of having a foreground or not, I highly recommend shooting from higher elevations. Go out there and climb a few rocks and please stay safe. Remember, if you are carrying heavy gear on your back it changes your center point of gravity and can throw you off balance when you lean forwards or to the side.

          So we face a trade-off. Either we have a nice sky with a dark land or the reverse. Graduated neutral density filters are not always the answer unless the horizon is reasonably flat. The brightest part of the sky in this image is rather low down and close to the rocky mount. There is no way a filter can darken that part of the sky without also darkening the mount, which never looks natural or pleasing.

The best solution is to shoot two images and blend them later. It is really important to expose the sky properly. But what is a proper exposure for a sky such as this? I prefer to under-expose such scenes a bit, yes deliberately. It boosts the color and when I set the white point it pumps the contrast making the clouds pop and stand out from the background.

          Even with a nice sky, still, pay attention to the composition of the land. I am using the footpath to lead to the brightest part of the sky. One is always tempted to boost the darks when blending multiple exposures. Don't fall into that trap. The sun is gone, so the foreground should stay darkish. For an image like this two exposures is typically enough. Now, you might look at this image and say, "the dynamic range in this image is not a problem for one image to handle, why blend two exposures." When someone says that your blending is believable. You have done a good job. The idea is never to create something that looks impossible (at least not for my style of landscape photography). If you are new to photography (welcome), please bear in mind that this scene in reality did not look like this to the camera (the human eye sees this scene as it is shown here but not the camera). Given how the sky looks in this image, reality would have had the foreground much darker. Or looking at the foreground, reality would have had the sky much brighter. It is the blending that makes it look as if it is one exposure. That is what we want to achieve.

          The next time you face a scene such as this. Try shooting two exposures and leave the sky's exposure just a little under-exposed.

There are just too many of these Chollas in this Cholla garden to play with. They extend for some distance in any direction. How do we deal with a scene such as this when there are just too many Chollas? This is really a problem and it is not easy to deal with the chaos of a sea full of plants. It took a long time to nail my compositions down. Here is how I approached the scene:

1. I spent quite some time just walking around (pre-dawn). I looked for places where the density of the plants is less. I tried to find natural paths that can be used as a lead-in line or even plants that can form a chain leading to the sun.

2. I gravitated towards taller Chollas to either photograph the sun through one of them or as in the picture above I tried to find two taller ones that can act as a frame on either end of the frame.

3. Placing two anchor points on either end of the frame acts as a border and helps the viewer not to stray further to the left or right.

4. I deliberately framed the image in such a way as to do my best not to have a brightly lit Cholla cut on the edge of the frame.

5. I did manage to find some sort of "path" due to the shadows and sun-lit parts on the ground.

6. I arrived early, quite sometime before sunrise because finding a composition at a scene where there is just too much of something takes time.

          Part of advancing our photography skills is to go against the grain, against expectation, and to break the rules. BUT please only break the rules like a pro! Rules are there because they work. Don't go breaking something that works, unless breaking the rule works even better. Learn when to break the rules and when not to. Break them with a purpose and deliberately. We can almost look at this topic from the perspective of nicking something on the edge of the frame versus cutting it deliberately and more purposefully lower down.

Here is an example. Most photographers would have stepped to the right and gone with the footpath as the main actor. After all, the footpath is strong compositionally and leads beautifully into the image. It also makes some turns which is more dynamic than a straight line. However, I chose to break the rules. I introduced the plants as the main foreground element and downgraded the footpath to the second fiddle.

          What do you think? Are the plants a distraction or do they enhance the composition? To me, the image is much better taken this way than going only with the footpath. Here is why?

1. The plants create even more depth by showcasing the distance between the plants and the background.

2. They hold the viewer's attention for longer. The viewer looks at the plants and then later follows the footpath into the image. Without the plants, the viewer would have taken off into the picture straight away.

3. The plants create balance with the sun.

4. Moving to the right to eliminate the plants also changes the perspective of the footpath in relation to the sun. The path would then lead to the left of the sun even more, possibly even away from the sun.

So here is another picture take a little while later. I included the plants yet again rather than stepping a few steps forward to eliminate them.

This image still works well, but the strong sun is no longer there. The direction in which the footpath points is no longer that critical. Even so, without the plants on the left, this image will have a huge section on the bottom left as negative space. The plants play a vital role to eliminate the negative space. They add some visual weight to balance the image. One could argue that the photographer could have stepped to the right even more and had the footpath start on the left side of the image. However, in so doing we further separate where the path is leading from the brighter section of where the sun was, which still pulls the viewer.

          Depending on the scene and if it makes sense after some analysis, go ahead, break the rules.

Let's hypothetically say that the brighter and nicer sky is found on the left side. The clouds to the right are nice but not as bright so the viewers' eyes will be drawn to the left continuously. What if I could not include more on the left of the image because the clouds on that side kind of stopped? I tried to bring some balance into the image by placing the tree on the right where it is. I shot from a low angle into the sky to include more of it but also to make the tree reach higher into the sky. That tree visually balances the brighter part of the sky.

          We must always think about composition and balance. I can get so excited about the scene in front of me that I get too invested in a certain composition even if it is not the greatest composition because I have spent so much time on it. So I ask my wife what she thinks about the image and I change accordingly. If you are alone, just close your eyes, clear your mind and then look at the image in your viewfinder/screen. Does it still move you? Is it balanced? If not fix it or move on to another composition.

          A strong sky that is one-sided has to be balanced with something at the other end of the frame. Since you cannot control what is where in the sky you will have to do it with the foreground. To give that foreground element more prominence and to make it stand out more, make it reach up onto the sky. Shoot from a low angle so as to stretch or enlarge it compared to the background.

So, which path did your eyes take when looking at this image? Were your eyes tempted to move to the total left or total right edge of the frame? Did your eyes circle back anywhere in the image? When I look at this image the sun draws my eyes since it is the brightest object to look at. Then my eyes stay between the highest peak on the left to the highest peak on the right, horizontally speaking. My eyes are not tempted to move to the left or the right beyond those two points. But why not?

          Many landscape photographers use vignetting to move the viewers' eyes to the middle of the image and away from the edges of the frame. A vignette is where a photographer darkens the outside edge around the image thereby leaving the center of the image brighter. Our eyes always go to where it is brighter away from where it is darker. Just about all image editing software offers this feather. I never ever use it, never. Why not, you may ask?

          Firstly, a round or oval vignette is a dead giveaway. Secondly, many photographers overdo it. If someone can see that you used a vignette, it is probably overdone. Thirdly, I believe that just slapping on a darker edge is not the best way of achieving the same effect. Lastly, I don't want to apply the effect equally everywhere around the edge. What if you already have a section on the edge with dark shadows? Making that section even darker can leave you with no detail. So here is what I do and advocate you do.

          When we "developed" the raw image we set the black and white point (if you don't know what this is, just search my blog posts as I did write about that in the past). But then when we edit the image using our editing software and plugins these editing changes impact and move the black and white points. So before I am done with any image I take it back into the raw developer to reset the black and white points. While in the raw developer I select the brush tool. Rather than just lowering the exposure and painting in my vignette I deliberately fine-tune the brush settings to create a vignette that I believe is better than one simply created by lowering the exposure.

          Yes, I do lower the exposure just a bit, but really just a bit. What I lower more are the highlight and white point sliders. We don't just want to darken everything, we want to lower primarily the lighter colors. Then with the brush set, I only paint the section that I want darker. I do not follow a round or oval pattern. I darken where the most brights are on the edge. Where it is already darker I leave untouched. Using this technique gives you more control and leaves your image with a more polished, natural effect.

1. Look for secondary compositions. I always try to find two or three additional compositions. When the sun dips below the horizon there is still enough light to shoot for some time. That light fades fast, which does not leave enough time to find new compositions. With two or three more compositions already lined up (during the waiting time), I can move quickly and take those images thus converting a one image shoot into three or four images.

2. Look for future images. I spend some time looking long into the future. What if I could get the sun at this or that angle, months later? What if I could place the moon here or there. I start working on future possibilities because you have heard me say (often) that I go back to the same location over and over. Once I get home, I will open the Photographer's Ephemeris and work out when the sun and the moon will be where I need them to be in the scene (if at all).

3. I shoot. Yes, even in not-so-good light. Why? A number of years ago most cameras could only "see" 8 or 9 stops of dynamic range. But today's cameras can see 14 to 15 stops of dynamic range. Furthermore, today's HDR software is great. What this means is that we can get images that were just not possible (or nice) in the past. You can sometimes even shoot directly into the sun and include the sun in the frame in less than good light.

This is not a great image but it is not terribly bad either. I would much rather have this image than sit in the car and wait, doing nothing. You will be surprised to find out which images sell and which do not. I have given up predicting image sales. I have sold images like this and I have also not sold images that I thought were great and would sell well. Therefore, I don't want to lose any shooting opportunity by idly sitting waiting for time to go by and the light to change.

          Now, this does not mean that I am willing to shoot horrible images due to mid-day harsh light. What I am referring to here is shooting starting perhaps an hour before that perfect moment. The light is already beginning to turn. The sun is already less harsh. The shadows are no longer pitch black. Just shoot and see what you get. I have found that in the process of so doing the creative juices start to flow. I start getting into my shooting mode. I start to see more images. On quite a few occasions I discovered better compositions that I had originally decided to use for "the" sunset image, thus changing my final grand attempt for the better.

          In short, I very seldom just sit and wait. Get out there and practice our art.

This seems rather simple because a few steps to the left move the tree to the right in relation to the sun and a few steps to the right move the tree to the left. By changing my position I could literally move the sun exactly where I wanted it to be in relation to the tree, or should I say that I can move the tree in relation to the sun?

          The problem is that we do this sort of scouting and planning when the sun is still higher in the sky. We line the tree up to where the sun is at that point in time (still higher in the sky). We draw a straight imaginary line down from the sun to the bottom of the bowing tree and set up our tripods at the right spot and we are set. Now all we need to do is to wait for the sun to set and we will get our shot, right? Wrong!

          It is important to note that the sun does not drop down in a straight line, it drops in the shape of an arch instead. In the northern hemisphere that arch curves to the right when looking at the sun. In other words, the sun will end up to the right of its current position at sunset and not straight down from where it currently sits. The higher up the sun is the more to the right it is still going to travel before sunset. "Not a problem," you say, "I can obviously see where the sun is going and I can adjust my position during the last few seconds just before I take the shot."

          First, please do not look straight into the sun with your naked, unprotected eyes. Looking at the sun through your DSLR is no better. You will damage your eyes. If you are using a mirrorless camera you can look into the viewfinder since it is a small TV screen and not reflected light from the sun. Either way, second, the sun will be blown out, the entire area surrounding the sun will be too bright to see any definition in or to pinpoint the sun's position in relation to the tree. So we close the aperture to darken the sun, but in so doing, everything else becomes so dark that you cannot see other things properly making composition difficult. The solution is to bracket. Shoot multiple images at different exposure levels. Then review them and pick one with the best balance between bright and dark areas. Then use that image as a reference to change your position. You might ask, "why take the shot, just look at the image in the viewfinder after you get the best balance between brightness and darkness?" I take the shot each time because if I first spend time to look if the sun is in the right place, realize that it is in the right place, and then decide to take the shot, the sun has already moved to a new place. I capture the shots because then I have them. If the sun was in the right position I have it. If not, I move the tripod and repeat. You will be surprised how much of a difference it makes to an image such as this if the sun is just a little to the left or to the right - it ruins the image. The second reason why I take the shots is that I am going to need a sequence of bracketed shots (most of the time when we are shooting directly into the sun). That "balanced" exposure still has clipped areas. If you need to change exposure to expose for the sun it is too late.

          Here is how I bracket for sunsets. I always start my bracketing sequence exposed dark so that the sun is exposed right. Then I shoot the lighter ones. The reason I do it in this sequence is that the sun is moving and its position is critical to the composition. Therefore, my first shot is for the sun. Once I have that exposure I have a bit more time to get the lighter exposures because the trees and mountains are not moving and the lighter exposures are for the trees and mountains.

          You will have to work quickly because you will be surprised by how fast the sun moves both to the right and down. You will also be surprised how much of a difference moving your tripod just a small bit will make to the relative position of the tree and the sun. This process needs to be repeated until you have nailed the composition at the right time and taken your images.

          The moral of the story is that it is not that easy to predict the final position of the sun as it sets. Be ready and work quickly. Change your tripod position very slightly every time and repeat the process over and over until you get it right, hopefully at the right moment. May I challenge you to go and try positioning the sun at an exact point in your composition? You may just get a nice image out of it to boot.

          I went back to the same spot multiple times to photograph a tree. The idea was not to duplicate the same image during different conditions or seasons but rather to just capture different images of the same tree. All of the images were taken around sunset. By and large, the only object tying this series of images together is the lone tree.

Oak tree silhouette with red sky Why not try a fun project like this?

Ocean Arch, Great Ocean Road, Australia Here are a few tips to help you make the best of these opportunities:

• Timing can be everything. Wait for that big splash moment or for the water to start running back into the ocean. In this scene, I waited for a wave to run over the rock floor on the left.

• Shutter speed is important. Watch your shutter speed as this is what you use to freeze the water splash in mid-air (fast shutter speed) or show the motion of the water running back (slow shutter speed). Play with your shutter speed until you get the effect you like. When you want water streaks you want a shutter speed that is slow enough to show the streaking but fast enough so that the water does not turn into silky milk without any definition.

• Other than beach images or images that include more sky, the foreground is important. Make sure you find something of interest to place in the foreground.

• If there are rocks that are exposed when the waves pull back but covered when the waves come in you can shoot with a very long shutter speed to create a cloudy, mysterious image, like this one below.

Do be careful of higher than usual waves. Watch your equipment. Constantly dry the front element of the lens. Put a filter on to protect your lens as it does not like saltwater.

Visit the ocean more and take some great images.

          There is just something magical about a LARGE print. They tend to draw people in. They have impact and punch. They command attention. As such I have always enjoyed large prints but never printed them myself due to the cost. However, this time around I decided to print a 30X45 (without a frame). When people saw this print they were very impressed. Multiple people wanted to buy it, without me even offering it for sale. This size print works very well above a couch in my office. I was in love with this print. This love did not last long because I decided to print a 40x60 and now anything smaller seems too small. Wow!

(Please forgive me, these images were quickly snapped with my cell phone.) Everybody who comes to my house stands in front of this print and just stares at it. This print gives me so much joy.

          After I fell out of love with printing on paper, mounting, matting, and framing it, I just did not print for years. Then metal prints came out. The colors popped and they looked fabulous. However, they suffer from major reflection issues, so much so that it ruined the viewing experience. Their pricing is also expensive once you print large. I just printed four metal prints and quit printing. I never liked canvas prints because of the grain of the fabric. Their colors just seemed a bit muted to me. So on what is this print printed and what is it?

          This print is from Xpozer. I am in love with printing! Here is why I love their technology and why I highly recommend these prints:

• Print quality - This image looks great, even close up. There is no visible grain. The colors are true.

• Zero reflections - Even when I tried to see reflections there are none to be found. I deliberately held it up to lights and large windows, yet there are no reflections. It is as if it is not a print and you are really standing in front of an open window looking at this scene.

• Viewing angle - The print a viewable from almost 180 degrees with just about no degradation.

• Shipping and transportation - This print comes in a triangular box. Gone are the days of expensive, heavy, and costly shipping crates. When I need to transport this print to my office or to an exhibition, it just rolls up in seconds.

• Innovative frame - The framing system (behind the print) is ingenious. You assemble this print from unpacking it to ready to hang in one minute. Disassembly for transportation is just as quick and easy.

• Service - One print had a few spots on it. Xpozer replaced it, done. When I ordered this large print my file size was too large. I emailed them and they sent me an upload link. I dealt with real people.

• Lightweight - The printing material (it is thin, kind of a hybrid between paper and fabric without grain) and the framing system behind it are super light. You can hang it on just about anything.

If you want great-looking prints that are easy to deal with Xpozer is your answer. I highly recommend them.

P.S. This post is not sponsored in any way. I paid for my prints and receive no reward for posting this blog.

So how do we decide to go black and white? What makes for a good black and white image? The biggest lesson I can share with you is that black and white images only work well if you photograph what the name (black and white) suggests. In other words, there needs to be a lot of contrast that will make deep blacks and bright whites. Having just a gray image in the black and white medium is as dull as having a color image with no real color.

Castle Window, Ghana Post-processing is very important in black and white photography. We want to stretch the histogram so that both the bright side (right) and the dark side (left) are near the edges of the histogram. In fact, I have just a little of the black as true black. However, I leave no true white on any image. Rather, I pull pure white back a little so that there is detail in the white. This will make for nice prints.

Castle Stairs, Ghana

So look out for contrasty scenes. I still shoot these scenes in full color. I prefer to convert the image to black and white in post-processing. Remember that composition is driven by contrast in black and white images. It takes a bit of practice but the photographer needs to start seeing the image in black and white. The visualization is important, for you need it in order to decide on your composition.

          Oftentimes, high ISO images work well in black and white. For some reason, grain is not so offensive in black and white images as it is in color images. In color images, high ISO introduces noise which impacts color and introduces color artifacts. To me, noise is ugly (it may enhance certain kinds of images, but they are rare for me personally). When noisy color images are converted to black and white the color in the noise disappears and leave leaves only grain rather than color noise.

          Take the challenge and experiment with some black and white images.

          Luminar started including portrait editing features in their software. The good news is that Luminar just released for sale their latest update - update 4. This update includes Bokeh AI, which instantly (almost) makes a 3d depth map, masks the person (automatically), and gives you the ability to change the bokeh in the background. The background can also be darkened or lightened. I have been on a webinar with Luminar where this was demonstrated, and it looks really good.

          Combining all the portrait features now make for a compelling suite of tools. Luminar is also celebrating this new release with the best discount they have ever offered. With 40% off you can now get Luminar AI for just $47 (until August 4, 2021). Aurora HDR is also down to $59. In addition, you will get two bonus packs included for free.

          To get these deals click here: Luminar You can buy the update 3 version now and get the update 4 update within the next few weeks.

P.S. I am an affiliate member of Luminar and get a small commission from sales. I personally use this software for every image I edit.
 

These images work well in good light, in soft light, or in fog.

Patched rural road into fogPatched rural road into fog

Here are a few tips to help get the most from these scenes:

• Use a longer lens. The first image's trees are not right next to each other. There are large gaps between them. Stepping back and using a longer lens gets rid of these gaps and makes the trees appear right next to each other.

• Go back and reshoot the scene in different types of light. Look at the difference in mood between these two images.

• Try to have the furthest part of the road as the brightest part of the road. This will help pull the viewer into the image.

• Use a small aperture so that everything is in focus.

• Watch out for wind and set the shutter speed to freeze the leaves and branches.

Enjoy tree-lined roads.

Which image do you prefer? One image was taken with a long shutter speed while the other was taken with a short-ish shutter speed. Because of the rotation of the earth, a long shutter speed shows the motion, hence the star trails of the first image. The short-ish shutter speeds leave the stars sharply in focus. So let's start there.

          The wider field of view your lens has the faster shutter speed is needed to get the stars sharp. I am talking about getting your shot in one image rather than using stacking techniques. Try to keep your shutter speed at 30 seconds or below. Use your lens' fastest aperture. Jack up your ISO to get your exposure right.

          For the long exposure (star trails) you can leave your shutter open for a long time. I mean a really long time, like half an hour or longer. If I recall correctly, this image was exposed for 50 minutes. But there is a problem. The camera's light meter does not work beyond 30 seconds. So how do you know that this image needed 50 minutes versus 20 minutes, for example?

          Set the camera's shutter on 30 seconds. Now play with your ISO until you have the correct exposure. Since it is dark your ISO will be very high. Once you know what the correct exposure is we can now change how we get that exposure. Half your ISO but double your shutter speed. Keep doing that until you have a low ISO. You will have to double the shutter speed in your head because your camera does not have a measured setting beyond 30 seconds. Place your shutter speed in bulb mode. Use a remote shutter release so that you can lock it in the depressed position. Now use your watch or your phone's countdown to measure out the calculated time. See that was easy.

Red Cactus FlowerRed Cactus Flower

This image was taken outside in natural light during overcast conditions. I just held a black blanket behind the flower since the background was distracting. Even though we like to photograph flowers in this kind of light that does not mean that we can't shoot flowers and plant in other kinds of light. What about shooting when the sun is not diffused?

Leaf with Dew Dropsleave with dew drops This image was taken just after sunrise. Once again, this image was taken outside with only natural light. When the sun is out make sure you shoot while the light is still good before it gets harsh. The low angle of the sun helps to make the leaves 3D rather than flat. Side lighting is always better to shoot in for this kind of image than frontal light. But what about shooting when the sun is already harsh?

Banana Leafback lit banana leaf

This image was taken in the brutally harsh sun. However, rather than allowing the sun to wash out the fine details, this image was taken from underneath with the sun on the other side of the leave. I am shooting right into the sun - through the leaf. This brings out the veins and color. So the point of today's blog is that you can get reasonable images in almost any light. Just think about how to best use the light. Change your angle or position. Be creative.

          The city where I live now is in a flat valley. There is nothing to photograph (for a landscape photographer). Many nights I look at the brilliantly lit sky in frustration because there is nothing in the foreground to photograph with it. So the question begs, what do you shoot when there is nothing to shoot? You will remember from previous blogs that I advocate shrinking your world when you find yourself in such situations. Photograph smaller things.

Locked Chain, Hollister, California Stuff like this is everywhere. Go to antique stores or stores that have old things on display. Shoot only parts of what you see. When you isolate things the background area is much smaller so you can hold a blanket or something behind what you are photographing. Drive through the neighborhood and look for beautiful gardens. Remember to ask for permission before you photograph.

Cactus Flower

Visit the cemetary.

Dying Roses in cemeteryFading Life It does not matter where you live, find small things to photograph. Develop a list of go-to places so that you are ready. Note which places need what kind of light. For example, gardens photograph best on overcast days, especially just after rain. You may not be the world's best landscape photographer if you only shoot at a photographically boring city, but you can get great imagery no matter where you live. You could even photograph still life images indoors. Just be creative.

With being out there I mean regularly and going to the same places, over and over again. I have been on this beach more times than I can remember. The reason I go there is not because of the beach. As you can see, it is just a beach. There is normally nothing about this beach that would get a photographer excited. There are no rock formations or logs, or anything of interest. In fact, of all the times I have visited this beach, this was the only time it was like you see it here. But that is the point. Other than this time I have never seen water on this beach. Going over and over resulted in this image and this experience.

          So you might ask me why I frequent this beach when it has nothing to offer the photographer? I go purely because of the experience, to visit friends who live here. But, my camera is always with me.

          The point of all of this is to show you that even the most ordinary beach (any place) can serve up something different and beautiful once in a blue moon when conditions work out. Now, of course, don't waste your time going back forever if the place has nothing to offer unless it is for other reasons like visiting friends. Go back to places that have something to offer. Just put yourself out there. Go when conditions are predicted to produce something special. If conditions can turn a totally boring beach into this then imagine what it can do at a more promising destination.

          Do more photography and have more experiences.

Since I have written a previous blog on the slot canyons I am not going to talk about managing the experience and the photography here. When the crowds overwhelm the area it seems as though the only safe direction to shoot into is straight up. Try to avoid including the sky as the dynamic range will most certainly exceed what your camera can handle. You will either blow out the sky or have black sandstone formations.

This is a place to capture shapes, texture, and color. When shooting up into layers of rock it is difficult to create depth. The layers seem to be right on top of each other. We don't want our viewers wondering what on earth they are looking at. Another issue is not having any central focus of attention. We don't want the viewer's gaze to have to keep on searching unsuccessfully for an anchor point to come to rest at. So how do we create a bit of depth? How do we find a central focus point when it is just all rock? How do we capture the best shapes and textures?

          We use light and darkness. You will remember from previous blogs that our eyes always go to lighter parts of the image and do not spend much time in the dark areas of the image. We can use that to lead the viewer. What we need is contrast, lots of it. We need dark areas and light areas. Ideally, we want the dark areas around the edges and bottom of the image and the lighter areas in the middle areas of the image. This draws the viewer into the image (depth). This keeps the viewer from wandering to the edges and out of the frame.

          Also, understand that texture disappears with diffused light and lessens with light shining directly head-on. The best light for texture is light from a low angle or sidelight. Shapes also pop out nicely with directional light and diminish with diffusion and direct head-on light. Therefore, pick the angle you shoot at carefully to maximize texture and shapes.

          Combining light and darkness with directional sidelight we can now pick out our compositions to create images that keep the viewer looking into the image for as long as possible.

In this Yosemite scene, El Capitan has a lot of visual weight. To bring balance to this image we need to have something strong in the foreground. I deliberately walked around looking at options and ultimately decided on the river grasses. In this case, the mountain is mostly in the center of the image from left to right. So I place the tufts of river grasses there too. The rule of thirds (vertical lines) is ignored. I just want to balance the scene.

          Here are a few tips to help you deal with foreground-background balance:

• You can regulate the visual weight of the foreground object by moving closer to it or further away from it. The closer you are to the foreground element the more it weighs.

• You can also regulate the visual weight of the foreground object by using brightness to give more or to lessen its prominence. In this case, the foreground was in deep shade which rendered the tufts of river grasses very dark which lessened their prominence which lessens their visual weight. I brightened them considerably in post-processing. Yet, they need to look natural; people should generally not be able to notice what we did in post-processing without seeing the file we started out with.

• Ultra-wide-angle lenses distort objects. The closer an ultra-wide-angle lens is to something the more it distorts the object by enlarging it in relation to the background. By using an ultra-wide-angle lens and going really close to foreground objects you can make small objects look big in relation to the background. You can use this technique to "enlarge" your foreground object in relation to the background and thereby balancing the foreground with the background at will.

• Arrive well before go time. It is too late to search for and find foreground interest when the light is at its most beautiful and disappearing in a minute or two. Use your early arrival to scout for foreground elements to use. Plan and get a few compositions ready so that when go time comes you are ready.

          As photographers, we can get overwhelmed by the beautiful scene and light in front of us that we just want to capture it quickly. Stop and think about your composition and the balance of the image.

The sun was getting ready to set. The light was still strong and lighting up the haze. In this particular image, I worked on the haze a bit. Firstly, I removed the haze from the bottom front section of the image. I want contrast and clarity there. Secondly, I added even a bit more haze to the top back section to enhance the haze already there. Creating areas of no haze and combining it with another area of haze can be very pleasing. Forget about all or nothing approaches. Part clear and part hazy images work well.

          When conditions do not look favorable don't give up. Start by asking yourself, what can be made of this image in post? Is the haze stronger in some areas and weaker in others? Can I weaken or totally remove the weaker haze while strengthening the stronger haze?

          Here are some tips for working with haze in post-processing:

• Remember that the dehaze slider can also go the other way to add haze.

• Play with the color temperature of the haze section only. If the sun is warm, then make the added haze warm. You may even want to warm up all the haze (natural occurring and added haze). When a colder mood is called for by the image then cool the haze down.

• Haze typically gets stronger further away from us. So, remove the haze closer to you.

• Give the haze a bit of a glow.

• If the light is strong behind the haze you may want to add a bit of Orton effect (see one of my previous blogs).

          Now, don't allow haze to scare you off. Work with it and see if you can use it to create a nice image.

          This was my first ever visit to North Lake which was made famous by the desktop image on Apple computers. What was I to do? How was I going to get an image without all the other photographers in them? How do you get rid of people in your view? After all, I literally had people's tripod legs intertwined with mine. Even though I got there early to reserve my spot, what are you going to do when another photographer comes and asks nicely for a spot?

Here are a few tips to deal with photographic crowds:

• Arrive early, before everyone else. Arrive early even if you have to stand in the cold and dark for an hour or two waiting for the sun to appear.

• Pick your spot carefully, anticipating crowds. Make sure others cannot get into your view, if possible. You can see in the images above that I positioned myself at the farthest point possible. The reeds to the left prevent others from getting into my field of view.

• The best spot in crowded situations may not always be the best spot for the best composition. You may have to compromise here. The best spot is the one that gives you a chance to get an image without the crowds. What would you chose, the best-composed image with forty other photographers in it or the fourth-best composition free of other people? If you want the best composition without the people ... (read the third point down)

• Stay at your spot. They say possession is nine-tenths of the law. Don't wander off as someone else will be sure to take your spot or encroach too much into your space.

• You may have to use a longer lens to narrow your field of view down to eliminate people from your view.

• If there are just too many people and the landscape does not make it possible to place yourself in the right spot you may want to consider going back when the weather is harsh or cold. That usually rules out the most photographers leaving you with more manageable crowds, if any.

• You may want to consider avoiding the iconic shots. Oftentimes, there are great images to be had just a hundred yards this way or that way. Spend the harsh light hours of the day scouting around to find other compositions.

• Be alert. Watch out for people walking into your image while you are making an exposure. Most people don't mind being asked to wait for 20 seconds, but you have to stop them before they walk into your image because once they reach their spot it becomes much more difficult to get them to move.

Dealing with these crowds not only poses photographic problems but relational ones too. There will always be the jerk who does not care about anybody else and ruins other people's shots and experience. Expect them. At times you have to mix a bit of firmness with your kindness. Most photographers though are nice people. Work together. Take turns. Remember, all of you have the same goal; to get that winning image. Use that common goal to negotiate the situation. Be nice and respectful. Share nature.

          Enjoy your photography.

It just works this way. Placing it elsewhere would have created an imbalance. I could not have moved to the left for fear of falling to death down a cliff. There was no point in moving to the right as the cloud action in the background dictated my framing. Yet, I am not advocating that we break the rules simply because we had no other viable choice. The image still needs to stand strong on its own merit. Nobody is going to pay attention to a poor image simply because an attached note says, "sorry, I had no other options but to shoot it from here."

          So what makes this image work in the face of breaking the rules? The clouds dictate this image. That is where the action is in terms of both color and light. I placed the top of the tree trunk right in the middle of the break in the clouds. This is a case where the sum of the parts is more than the parts alone. It just works when used together like this.

          Don't be afraid of breaking the rules. Sometimes these can be striking images.

Okay, please stop looking at this image. Yes, I am asking you to do what I just told you we never want to do. Close your eyes. Now before opening your eyes please pay attention to where your eyes go when you look at this image. Ready? Okay, open your eyes, paying attention to where your eyes go.

          If you are normal you will find that this image draws your eyes deep into the image. Your eyes hardly looked at the sides of the image. If you glanced at the darker areas of the image your eyes did not stay there for long and quickly returned to the lighter parts of the image. This is what I am talking about. Light can be used to draw the eyes into the image.

          Photographers have for years slightly darkened the edges around the image to create the phenomenon of drawing the viewer into the image. Be careful not to overdo it. If someone can quickly tell that you used a vignette (darker edges) it is too strong. In this image above, the light was naturally this way due to a clearing in the forest beyond the image.

          Control the light and you control the viewer's eyes. Use that power to draw your viewers into your images.

          Focus on the closest thing to the lens and take an image. Then focus just a bit further into the image and take another image. Repeat the process a few times. But how many times should you repeat the process? Macro photography may require a large number of images as the depth of field can be razor-thin in this genre of photography. For landscape photography, the number of images needed to produce a pin-sharp image from back to front depends on the focal length of the lens in use. Wide-angle lenses naturally have more depth of field at the same aperture than a telephoto lens. Therefore, wide-angle lenses require less images than telephoto images. With my 16mm to 35mm lens, used at the short end, I find that three or four images are enough. Just remember that you will need more images with longer lenses.

          Shoot in manual and in raw. We want to shoot in manual mode so that the exposure does not change between the images. We shoot in raw so that we can make the ISO uniform during post-processing. In post, we will want to ensure that chromatic aberrations are removed and that lens profiles are applied. Now just merge the images. There are many tutorials out on how to do this so I will not cover that here. Once merged I take the image back into Camera Raw to start working on it.

You can see that my lens is right up against these rocks. Yet, they are sharp, so is the background. I used three or four focus stacked images to produce this final image. It is the only way to make sure that everything in the image is in focus.

          Watch out for moving objects, especially close to the lens. Blending images where movement took place is a nightmare. If there is moving such as water flowing, make sure, if possible, that all the movement is sharp in one shot to make blending easier. With a wide-angle lens movement in the scene beyond a certain distance is not a problem provided your shutter speed is fast enough to freeze the action. Focus stacking with wide-angle lenses really only concerns itself with the first third of the distance into the image. The rest can easily be captured sharply with one exposure if a small aperture is used.

          Use a tripod. Merging images where the camera moved in between shots is a problem you don't want to face. I also take the images in manual focus mode. The less fiddling you need to do in between images to adjust the focus the better. Happy focus stacking. Get those images sharp front to back.

Some parts of this image are in shadow while light falls on other parts of the image. At times the photographer just needs to wait for the sun or the clouds to move so that the right parts of the image are in shadow or lit up. Patience is your friend. Sometimes, as the time when I took this image, nature plays along but not fully. The light fell naturally where there is light and the shadows were darker than where there is light. However, the light value difference or dynamic range between the lit-up areas and the darker areas was not as much as you can see in this final image.

          Typically, when we have an image with lit-up areas and shadow areas we rejoice because then we have a dynamic image. They are interesting. In the case of this image, I did a bit of work in post-editing to increase the dynamic range. In Adobe Camera Raw I used a brush to paint in more light here and darken parts there. I did not create anything fake as the image was naturally that way. I simply lightened the already lit-up parts more and darkened the already darker parts more.

          Amateurs mostly do global adjustments to their images (adjustments that affect the entire image). Pros do local adjustments to affect different areas differently in addition to some global adjustments (such as setting the black point and white point). This livens up the image and directs the viewer's eyes to where the photographer wants the viewer to go.

          As we saw a few weeks ago, balance is important. I tried to create some balance in this image by off-setting the mountains on the left with the three tall trees on the right. Putting it all together gives us a nice image.

The log on the right is pointing out into the image. Close to the end of the log, there is a branch that goes up. If that branch meets or goes into the treeline on the other side of the lake it will be difficult to judge distance or to see where that branch belongs on the other side. It is very important to always watch that two separate items don't merge. Images with such mergers seem busy and confusing.

          Leaving a bit of distance between such elements in the scene creates space, separation, and distance. You can see that I also left a gap between the tall tree on the left and its shadow which gets close to the rock on the left of the line of rocks. These are small things but they make a big difference. They make an image look clean and neat.

          So how do we control these gaps? We can't move the log or change the size of the lake. You may remember from last week that I mentioned that we can control the relative position between elements in the scene by changing our position. These gaps are controlled by moving up or down. The lower angle we shoot from the smaller the distance between the line of rocks and the waterline at the base of the mountain. The higher we go the more we increase this distance/space. By moving up or down we can fully control whether these elements touch each other or not.

          Before you trigger your shutter have another look to make sure that each element meant to be separate is in fact separate and not touching.

The conditions were horrible. This image was taken amidst some of the worst wildfires in California's history. The air quality reached dangerous levels. Smoke filled the air. Rather than giving up and deeming the conditions not suitable for photography we simply look for opportunities to use the smoke to add atmosphere.

          Atmosphere adds mood to an image. In landscape photography photographers often use the "dehaze" slider to get rid of haze. In this image, I actually moved that slider in the opposite direction and painted the effect to emphasize the atmosphere. Use it sparingly. The mountains in the distance now have just a bit of mystery and atmosphere. I think it adds to the image.

          Composition will always stay important. Look for lead in lines or strong foreground elements. Thank about where you place what and remember that you can move things in relation to other things in your images simply by changing your position. The next time conditions do not meet your facny don't give up, work with what you have.

That lone tree on the left is very important to the balance of this image. The flying birds also help. Without them, this image is not balanced as too much weight is on the right of the image. Not only does size and distance impact the visual weight of an element in our images but so does darkness and brightness. Black weighs more visually than white. Therefore smaller dark areas can bring balance to larger white areas. Similarly, bright colors weigh more than dull colors.

          Keeping all of this in mind we can place elements in our photographs to bring about a balanced scene. At times we need to move objects to the right position to create the needed balance. No, I am not talking about moving objects around in Photoshop. The photographer can move his or her position which in turn rearranges the elements in the scene. When we move around, closer elements' position change much more relative to elements far away. Do an experiment right now. Look at your computer screen and notice the position of an object on the other side of the room, such as a light switch or a door, or a piece of furniture. Now, move your head left and then right while noticing how much your computer screen's position move in relation to the other object you are also keeping an eye on.

          By walking to the left or the to the right the photographer can literally move the position of that tree in the foreground relative to the mountain. So don't just plonk down your tripod and shoot right where you are at. Think where in the image you would like that tree to be to bring balance to the image. Then move the tree by taking up a position that has the tree where you want it to be. The closer you are to the tree the more it will move relative to your walking around. We don't only have the ability to move the tree to the left or to the right but we can also change the perspective of the tree vertically. The closer we are to the tree the more it will reach up into the sky or background. The further away we are from the tree the more its height will shrink relative to its background.

          So don't just accept what nature gives you where you are at. Think about how the image will look the best. Then change your position to get that perspective. Always be safe. Cliffs, water, animals, and such may not make it safe to position ourselves where we would ideally want to be.  No image is worth your life. Move around to get the image you want only if it is safe to do so.

My wife and I drove to the eastern side of the Sierras. That night the cloud of smoke moved over the mountains like a blanket. Here are a few more images:

These opportunities do not happen every day (for which we are thankful). Be on the lookout for such events. Perhaps unusual dust helps to create special atmospheric conditions for a great sunset or a storm or other event brings about extraordinary circumstances. Be out there (if safe) and grab these opportunities to not only record the events but to get something different and special.

          Remember not to only spend all your energy on that which is brought about by the special event. We still need to capture a compelling photograph. So spend time on composition, finding a great foreground element, and making a great image. When people view our image a year or two later they don't remember the fire or the storm. The hype caused by the media coverage is long gone. Our images do not capture the sound, the smell, and other things that may tie us emotionally to the image. The image needs to be a strong image without any of these additional things that make it special for you. Whatever is special is just the cherry on top of the cake.

The woodpecker and log were right next to the road, so distance was not an issue. I had both my 70-200mm and my 200-600mm lenses with me. The bird seemed quite happy and not bothered with our presence. I believe it would have allowed me to get even closer if I needed to. Yet I opted to not fall into the trap of taking a portrait or cropping very tightly. I wanted to show a bit more. The log was littered with holes. The woodpecker had clearly worked the log. I wanted to show some of the holes. These holes tell a story. They show the bird in its environment. It shows what the bird does.

          Too often we crop tightly thereby foregoing showing a bit more. Not every image of a bird needs to be a solo performance. In this image, the bird is still very prominent due to its placement in the image and its striking color. However, there is more to the image than just the bird. The viewer can start looking around at the texture of the log and the holes.

          Don't be afraid to show a bit more.

This is not always a bad thing, especially if you are shooting stock images. Clients needing stock images most often need space in the image to place text in. For fine art photography, a blank portion of the sky can create imbalance. We cannot magically move clouds into the blank area. These days photographers use sky replacement offered by many image editing software such as Lunimar (click on affiliate links to get a discount). Software such as Luminar not only offers a sky replacement feature but also the ability to insert clouds into your existing sky. Other photographers don't want to replace skies. So what are they to do with a blank portion of the sky?

          May I suggest having a person stand in the image? Get your spouse to take up a position in the image. Position your spouse in the right spot to bring balance and to add interest to that part of the image.  Of course, you can use a fellow photographer if your spouse is not with you. I suggest that you never go out to photograph alone. You never know if you are going to fall and need help. Being there for each other brings peace of mind and provides someone to make your images more interesting. So don't be afraid to include people in your images if the sky does not cooperate with you.

          As you might expect from any respectable photographer, I arrived early to catch the good light. So what do you do when faced with a scene as described above? When the grand scene does not work out for you just shrink your world. Think small. Go for images of small sections of the scene. Eliminate that which does not work. So I forgot about the mountains and also eliminated wide shots of the water because, due to my personal taste, I am not a fan of a neighborhood in my landscape images.

Shrinking our world means that we go for a more intimate subject. Narrow the field of view. Rather than shooting the whole large expansive view, look for images within the expanse. This is what macro photographers do. They find an interesting subject which is really small. As landscape photographers, we can do the same thing just on a larger scale (but still much smaller than the grand view), like this little water feature. This water feature is not large but by isolating it I was able to get a reasonably nice image.

          As discussed last week, we experiment with different shutter speeds to get what we think is the right shutter speed to show the water movement. I did not want a milky smooth water motion. So I opted for a shutter speed that left enough definition in the water while clearly still showing off the motion.

          When the large expanse just does not work for an image, look for different images within the larger scene and focus on them. In fact, if you struggle to see expansive images, shrink your world. Go for this kind of small feature and before long your vision will expand. This helps photographers to get out of vision block (similar to when writers have writer's block).

This image was taken just as the splash is over and the water is now running down the rock. To show the motion of the water running a longer shutter speed is used. To get the best results you will have to experiment a little to get the most pleasing shutter speed. The longer the shutter speed the more motion blur you will get but at the price of definition. Choose a shutter speed that does not turn all motion completely smooth. We want to see lines of water not just a mushy, definitionless, blurry sheet of milky water.

          The photographer's vantage point is important and should be chosen carefully. Leave clear gaps between the rocks to separate them. If I was positioned a bit to the left the main rock with the water running off of it would have touched the rock a bit further into the photograph. When that happens the two rocks look connected and become one rock in the image. Thus we lose depth. If I stood a little to the right the bottom middle rock would have merged with the main rock with the water running off of it. Pay attention to different elements in the image touching each other.

          The way this image is composed creates depth. The viewer's eyes jump from rock to rock deeper and deeper into the image. This is what we want. The rocks form stepping stones for your eyes to walk into the image. If we can help it we want to keep every element in the image separate. Lastly, this image is well balanced. The main rock is balanced by the darker clouds. When moving around the scene to finalize the composition think about all the things.

Here are some best practices that you may find helpful:

1. Timing is everything. Treat wave action like you would fast-moving animals. Use a fast frame rate and fire away. This way you can choose the best frame. The best frame is often the one with the biggest splash caught at the point where it is at its biggest.

2. Use a fast shutter speed. The idea is to freeze the action in mid-air. We want to catch the dops hanging in the air. Smaller splashes can work with a slow shutter speed to show the motion but are not advised for large splashes unless you want to create an abstract image.

3. Strong backlighting or side-lighting works best. The lower the angle of the sun the better.

4. Leave some room in the composition for the wave to move into.

5. Use tide charts to maximize your chances of getting good wave action.

6. Be safe. Every so other larger waves can appear and sweep you into the ocean or crush you on the rocks. Make sure that your elevation is safe. Keep an eye on the waves coming in. Always keep alert and watch out.

          Waves come in waves. Be patient. Good wave action will stop for some time and is then followed by many large waves. This cycle repeats itself. Watch for ocean spray. Saltwater or salty spray is not your friend. In fact, saltwater is hard and damaging to your equipment. So watch for the wind direction. Days on which the wind blows into the ocean are best and can add drama to the images. Have a soft cloth ready to wipe the front element of your lens and check it regularly. A drop of water on your front lens element will ruin your image.

          Go out there and enjoy the experience.

This image just does not work with a blank blue sky. I have been to this location many times. At last, things came together. This image was only possible to get within a few short minutes since the sun only came out briefly prior to disappearing below the horizon.

          Even with great weather reports, one cannot predict which clouds will be exactly where when you need them to be in a certain place. That is the joys of weather. The only real solution is to be out there often when the weather predicts a good outcome. Had the clouds not left the little gap for the sun this visit would have been a waste and I would have had to go again. With the sun and the clouds in the right place, the only other variable is the waves. I waited for some wave action to liven up the bottom of the image.

          Being out in exciting weather is very exciting photographically speaking but less exciting experientially. The wind can pester a person. It can be cold, rainy, misty, wet, you name it. On the other hand, getting an image like this is worth enduring the joys of the weather to me.

It was interesting to watch the Oxpeckers interact with the Giraffe. I love how the water drain from their mouths.

          Once again I am shooting at a fast shutter speed. I want to freeze the fast-moving head of the Giraffe and the falling water. The background is not distracting so there was nothing to worry about there. Its spread out legs was used to frame the image.

          Be on the lookout for any opportunity to showcase animal behavior as such images are typically interesting. This would make a nice large print.

• A camera with a high frame rate - the higher the better.

• A camera with great fast autofocus that can track subjects well and stick on them.

• A longer lens (unless you use a blind/hide or feed the birds). Ideally, if you can afford one, this lens should be a fast lens (large aperture).

While on a workshop in Botswana I was shooting with a Sony A6400. I chose this camera for the wildlife part of the workshop because it has great autofocus and can shoot at 11 images per second. The attached lens was the Sony 200-600mm. The combination worked well:

The best settings are also very important. Cameras are not set up to perform the best for bird-in-flight photography by default. Here are some helpful settings to remember:

• Chose a fast shutter speed. The bird is flying fast and the wings flap even faster. You are moving the camera to track the bird which will cause blur if your shutter speed is too slow. Ideally, you will want a shutter speed of around 1600/second or better. I prefer 2000 or above.

• Use the largest aperture. This helps to give you the most possible light to enable that fast shutter speed. It also blurs the background, which is what we typically want with bird/wildlife images.

• Use auto-iso. Let the camera pick the iso because your shutter speed is not negotiable and your aperture should stay on the largest one available.

• Each camera is different so find out how to tune your autofocus to best suit bird-in-flight photography. I prefer a sticky autofocus for birds that grabs focus quickly.

• Use a silent shutter, if your camera has one. We don't want to scare the bird away. Smaller birds are typically more skittish.

I highly recommend the mentioned Sony lens. The zoom ring moves the lens from 200 to 600mm with a very short turn. This is important, especially as you begin learning the craft. At 600mm it can be really difficult to locate your bird in the frame. With this lens, you simply look for the bird with the lens set at 200mm. Once you located the bird and placed it in your frame it only takes a short turn to zoom in quickly. Longer turns mean that you are not zoomed in enough to shoot fast enough. By the time you zoomed another lens with a longer turn the bird is out of sight, behind a bush, or no longer in an ideal position.

Be patient. Practice a lot. This is not easy.

We can wait for the growl, yawn, or aggression.

We can play with contrast and mood.

We can feature the tongue.

We can show age. This male looks fairly tired.

          The point of these examples is that we should not be satisfied with a portrait or close-up of an animal simply to have a portrait. There are so many ways to make a portrait just a bit more interesting, more impactful, more story-telling, funnier, etc. Don't settle for the ordinary when you can get an image that is better. Be patient. Wait. Shoot much, but get something just a bit more interesting than a straight-faced frontal headshot that is boring. The only time where that kind of image really works well is when the face itself has something different to say, like this tired lion.

I and the people I show my images to tend to prefer the last image. But why? What is the difference between them? They were taken, literally, within a second of each other. Can one second or a fraction of a second make a large enough difference to make one image better than another? The mud being sprayed by the elephant is nicer in the first image. In the second image, the mud spray is less and already visible to the right of the elephant. The background and the grasses are just about the same.

          There are two major differences between the two images:

1. There is a bird in the second image. It even looks as though there is some interaction between the elephant and the bird. This bird, its placement, and the direction of the elephant's look add interest to the image.

2. In image one, there is another elephant laying in the mud right in front of the mudslinging elephant. In this image, the second elephant happened to be raised up a bit higher whereas it is laying down totally in the second image. In image one, this second elephant is distracting whereas it does not really feature in the second image. Now, in reality, this second elephant was much brighter (in both images) in real life but I darkened it in post-processing in an attempt to lessen the distraction.

Small things like this can make or break an image. But how do we as photographers chose the right moment to press the shutter and make the shot? Yes, knowing the animal's behavior patterns helps since things then become more predictable. In reality, as far as these little small things are concerned, they are just not predictable. I wish I can tell you that I timed this image just right, but I can't. This is good news for you because it means that you too would have had this image if you follow my advice.

          So how then do we chose when to press the shutter? We don't. To maximize our chances of getting that perfect moment we simply set the camera's frame-rate (drive mode) to the fasted speed the camera is capable of and just keep shooting. Discard the unwanted images and keep the great ones. Things like this just happen too fast for us to react with individual shots. You will be surprised how much of a difference a split second can make with the shape or position of the flying mud, a flying bird's wings (open or closed), etc. Use a fast frame-rate to your advantage to capture the right moment.

          The natural human response to someone looking in a certain direction is to also want to look at what he or she is looking at. This means that if a subject is placed near the edge of the frame while looking towards the same edge of the frame, the viewer's eyes will want to leave our image and look towards that edge and off of the print. There are rare circumstances where that might work compositionally like where an animal is being chased and needs to escape out of the scene to survive. Mostly though, we don't want the viewer's gaze to leave the image. Our goal is to have someone look at the image for as long as possible.

          Therefore, if the animal or person is looking towards our left, we place them on the right side of the image and vice versa. We want the viewer to look into the image not out of it.

Think about composition and look-room. Be willing to swing the camera this way or that way depending on how the person or animal moves his or her head. Look-room is important.

          These images were taken early one morning in Botswana. When getting to such a scene, there are a few things to look out for in choosing where to position yourself:

• The direction of the sun. Remember that sunlight from behind creates a rim-light. Sidelight is usually dynamic with nice shadows. Frontlight, if early morning or late afternoon light, is warm and beautiful but can result in a flat image. Note that shooting into the sun can be challenging in terms of dealing with dynamic range.

• The background. For animal photography, we want a distraction-free background. The more uniform the better. The more blur-able the better (the further away from the background the better). Avoid bright colors and detail in the background.

• Reflections. If there is water in the scene, try to shoot from an angle where you can see the reflection nicely.

Always be thinking when shooting. Remember, amateurs take images, pros make images.

• Is there action begging to be captured?

• Is the animal acting out some animal behavior that should be shown?

• Is the surrounding landscape interesting?

• Does the light scream for attention?

This image would just not have worked tightly cropped. We want to look to where the animal is looking. The light draws us into the image. The light would have drawn us out of the image had this been cropped tightly.

The larger view shows the animal working to get a meal. It is shown with its natural surroundings. Once again the light works with this composition whereas a tight crop would have had the brighter lit sand on the edge of the image. Don't be afraid to step back and show a larger view. These images are often just as interesting or more so than tightly cropped wildlife images. There is a time for tightly shot images and a time for wider framed images. Before you shoot, try to ask some questions to help you decide whether to zoom in tightly or not.

          Although I make money with my photography I don't photograph wildlife enough to justify such an expense. Most of us use much cheaper lenses. My lens of choice is the Sony 200-600mm. It is a fantastic lens but at 600mm it is an f6.3 lens. So what can we do with more budget-friendly lenses (which are f6.3 at 600mm or worse) to get a creamer out-of-focus background? How does depth of field really work? What determines how much of the image is in focus?

There are four factors that determine the depth of field:

1. The f-stop of the lens. Use the widest aperture that your lens has.

2. The focal length of the lens. The longer the lens the shorter the depth of field. So shooting at the furthest end of your telephoto zoom lens helps to make your background more blurry.

3. The distance between your camera and the subject. The closer you are to the animal the more out of focus your background will be. So get as close to your subjects as you can. Use a boat or a blind (hide) to get close.

4. The distance between your subject and the background. The further your background is from your subject the creamier your background will be. Pick your spot to increase this distance. 

It also helps to get down low. By shooting upward we can often exclude grasses and brush which are lower down. In the case of this image, the Plover was on a little mound. That helps to separate it from what would have been right behind it.

          Remember that smaller f.stops have a bigger depth of field. If you cannot afford large aperture long lenses use these four factors that influence depth of field to your advantage to create that creamy background.

This image mixes the abstract with wildlife. I love the abstract part of the image; the ripples, the color, the out of focus sections. It is almost as if the bird is out of place. But that is exactly what immediately draws the viewer's eyes to the dove. it stands out. This mixture of the abstract with wildlife creates discomfort, contrast, and mystery (is it real?).

          The light was flat. There is not much variety of color. There is not much difference as far as light and dark are concerned. It is the focus that calls your attention to the bird. It is the focus that creates the abstract side of things. Had this image been shot with a smaller aperture resulting in more of the image being in focus this image would not have worked.

          There are five things photographers can use compositionally:

1. The obvious one here is the elements in the photograph and their placement;

2. Brightness versus darkness. The human eye will always go to that which is bright rather than the darker parts of the image. Photographers can use brightness to guide the viewer's eyes to where he or she wants them to go;

3. Color. Colors that stand out from the rest of the scene draws attention. We can use color to make our viewer's look where we want them to look;

4. Focus. The eyes will always go to that which is in focus and avoid that which is out of focus. By selectively focusing on our subject and blurring the rest of the image we direct our viewers.

5. The different. Whenever something is different from everything else that is where we will look. Our attention follows that which stands out. Take ten pens all lines up. They are all in focus. They are all the same color. However, one of them is significantly smaller than the others, or larger. This is what our attention will focus on.

In this image, the dove is placed in a strong compositional position and we used focus compositionally. Due to the circumstances, it turned out to be a mixture of abstract and wildlife. I think it came out nicely; a different kind of shot.

          Knowing the relationship between these animals comes in handy for photography. We know that this is not a chance encounter and that the bird will stay on the buffalo. If you have the time and patience to watch them you may be rewarded. I chose this moment for the photograph because of the closed eye. It tells the story. It may be comical. It evokes questions. Showing interaction between animals is usually more interesting than just having one animal in an image.

          Be patient and wait for something special. Look for interaction between animals, especially interspecies interaction.

Why would you want to take this image more zoomed in? Framing it the way you see it here works well. Tell the story. Show their lives not just the animal by itself. Allow the atmosphere of the image to come through. Include nature.

          I treated this scene just as I would any landscape scene. I waited patiently tracking everything that happened through my viewfinder, ready to click at any moment. I felt the moment was right when these two elephants faced each other. Having them look this way prevents the viewer's eyes from leaving the image. Pay attention to such details as they can make or break your image. For images of wildlife shot with a wider field of view, the composition is very important. That is why I view the composition the same way I would for landscape images.

How can we make life easier for ourselves and our cameras in situations like this? The setup of your autofocus system has a lot to do with your success. Your camera (if "pro" enough) will have different autofocus settings. For great wildlife photography set the stickiness of the autofocus system fairly high. This way branches or grass will not let your camera lose focus.

          Secondly, when it is difficult to spot your subject, I prefer to take the camera out of the zone focus mode and I pick a specific focus spot. This tells your camera what you want in focus. You just hold the focus spot right on your target and then focus. Once focused your camera can lock onto your animal and the stickiness of the system will prevent it from being distracted by other things.

          Know the different focus settings of your camera and set it up for each situation. This is easier said than done. Cameras are computers that happen to be able to take images. They have hundreds of different settings and combinations of settings and menu choices. How are we supposed to remember the right settings for each scene, let alone how to actually set it that way and where to find the right settings in the menus?

          May I suggest a few helpful tips?

• Use the "my menu" option in your menu settings. Store the most used settings there so that you don't have to search for items in the menus. Animals tend to move, they don't wait for you to change your camera's focus settings. Getting to the right settings instantly speeds things up dramatically.
• An even better option is to set up and use the custom setting located on your mode dial. My camera has three custom settings there. I have one option programmed for landscape photography, another for wildlife (slower moving), and another for fast action. Once set up correctly, one turn of the dial has my camera set up perfectly for the situation at hand, and I don't have to remember or fiddle with any menu settings.
• A third option is to use a custom button anywhere on your camera. My normal back focus button is set up one way while another button is set up for another focus mode. Focusing becomes really simple, press this button for zone focus and that for spot focus, for example.
• If you don't shoot regularly, make sure you know which button or dial function does what before you go out photographing.

Having said all of that please know that not all autofocus systems are created equally. Some manufacturers shine at autofocus while others are slower and less sticky. Within each brand each tier of camera (consumer, prosumer, pro) will have different autofocus capabilities. Choose the right camera for what you want to shoot.

          All the best.

In a split second, everything changed. The Leopard darted to a log on the ground like lightning. I did not get a shot of that because another very selfish vehicle drove in right in front of us. When that vehicle was passed this is what we saw.

The Leopard grabbed this African Wild Cat from the log. Dust enveloped them. Things happened quickly, very quickly.

It was over. The Leopard got up and left with its lunch. The sad part is that a few photographers did not get the action right away. It happened too fast. There was no warning, or was there? The body language foretold what might be coming. Knowing how to read animal behavior can be really helpful. It can be the difference between getting the shot or getting the aftershow.

          Do a bit of reading prior to going on safari. Luckily for me, I grew up in Africa and have many years of experience in photographing wild-life. Just be prepared and being prepared speaks not just to your gear and travel arrangements but also of getting to know animal behavior and body language.

          The Leopard was exhausted and panting. It had just killed an Impala. There were no tall trees around to carry its catch into for safety. It had to rest up quickly and eat before other preditors arrived. After a few minutes, it got up and started working on its dinner. I did manage to get a few usable images of that too, but that was it. We had to leave and the light was no longer any good.

When we see something we don't often see and get to photograph it is important to work quickly. Just get the shot. Never mind a high ISO. Would you rather have a grainy or out of focus image because that is the only choice you have in situations like this? The noise cleaned up pretty well. What would you have done with your out-of-focus image? Shoot with whatever lens you have on. First, get the shot even if it is a portrait. Once you have an image or three it may be time to slap on a more appropriate lens.

          This is when it is important to know your kit and bag well. You need to be able to find the lens you want with one touch. You need to be able to work as quietly as possible. This is not the time to drop things. It is a good practice to practice quickly and quietly exchanging gear.

          We ended up getting our images that night. But being ready and able to quickly change lenses and settings is vital as you will see next week. The next day we met up with another Leopard and witnessed a kill. It happened in seconds, it took its catch and disappeared in the brush on its way to a hill. Many missed that opportunity because of missing these lessons.

1. The eyes or an eye needs to be sharp. Animals may have much longer faces than humans. To get the whole face sharply in focus wait a bit for a side profile. See point number 5. Sometimes our depth of field is shallow. A shallower depth of field requires a side profile to get everything sharp.

2. The face needs to be fairly large in the frame. The face is the image in portraiture, therefore show the face large.

3. There needs to be space for the animal to look into. In other words, there must be more space in front of the face than behind the head.

4. Wait for the right moment, the right expression, the right look.

5. Blur the background to prevent distractions. You do this by using a large aperture (a smaller number is a bigger aperture).

6. Overcast light is a very good light for portraits. This light is soft and often flattering.

Follow these guidelines to improve your portraitures. 

          The baboons came to drink. There may have been 40 or more of them. Which one do your photograph? In which scene do you invest to yield the best images. The rule of thumb suggests following the action.

I decided to focus on the two fellows who were fighting. The little guy tried to get away. The bigger one went on the pursuit and caught up to the little guy. He grabbed him to pull him back down. He is already looking down to orchestrate their fall. The little guy is not happy. He is hurting as he is being pulled. His face tells the story. This image is alive with the story. Would an image of these two same fellows just sitting next to each other have been this interesting?

          Following the action paid off. Always ask yourself, what is the most interesting thing I can see right now? Photograph that. It may not always be the easiest thing to shoot. In this case, it was very difficult. The two are moving really quickly. Keeping up with them with a long lens is not easy. Keeping them fully in the frame is not easy. Keeping focus can be a struggle as they run behind obscuring objects. To make matters worse, most of the time there is an annoying stick, leave, branch, or whatever, in the wrong place to ruin the image.

          Just persist. Keep on going. Follow the action. The moment will come when you get that shot with the story. It is because these images are difficult to get that make them so scarce (the good ones). That is the very thing that makes your images stand out.

Taking images like this can be difficult and frustrating. They require a lot of patience and trial and error. Most of your images will probably end up in the trash bin. But then again, you may end up with one or two creative images like the one of this elephant throwing mud on itself. Because we are zoomed in so tightly many images will have cut off the trunk. Or the nice mud pattern will be too high and out of shot.

          Here are a few tips to help you play the creative game:

• Zoom in tight on where the action is or what you want a shot of.

• Set a very fast shutter speed and high frame rate. This is needed to catch that moment just right. A split second can make all the difference.

• Shoot and shoot and shoot.

• Quickly review what you got and make adjustments accordingly.

• Shoot and shoot and shoot again.

This is a numbers game that just requires you to keep on going for some time. The moment will come when you get that perfect image. These kinds of images are very cool. People can just stare at them for a long time. They evoke smiles. They sometimes evoke questions. You are presenting something that few people have seen that way or even noticed before. You get images that are different, that stand out. These are images that are not only a recording of the sight everyone saw, but art. This is creative.

The best way to photograph these birds, when they seem to zip around without lingering anywhere long enough to acquire the bird in the viewfinder to photograph, is to put the camera down. Yes, put the camera down, stop photographing. The thing to know about these birds and many other species is that they are habitual. They have certain favorite perches and will always go back to the same ones. Spend some time to just watch them, take note of where they land, and sit. Once you find out their routine, where they always go, choose the perch that the bird actually uses that suits you best. Think about the distance between you and perch and how long your lens is. How does the background look? Are you at the best angle? What angle is the light coming from? You have time. Think about all these things and pick the best perch that will yield the best image.

          Now, set up your view for only that one spot, and just wait. The bird will come back (if you picked one of the bird's favorite perches). The next time the bird comes to that perch you will be ready. Even if the bird only stays there momentarily you will be ready because your viewfinder is fixed on the perches and you have already acquired proper focus before the bird even showed up (or reasonably close to it). So be patient, watch the bird, learn its habits, and then prepare to photograph it accordingly.

          An added benefit to this course of action is that it minimized your movement. Some birds can be very skittish. The slightest movement from you can spook them. Having picked one perched and being pre-setup means that you are not moving around. You are just sitting still waiting. This makes the bird more comfortable to stay there a bit longer.

          Getting the know these birds can be the difference between getting the image or not. So spend some time watching them prior to photographing them if they don't sit still for long.

Here you can see that the face and eyes are sharp but the wingtips are not. This is due not to a focusing issue but the used shutter speed. The wings are moving faster than the shutter speed is able to freeze. Is this a problem? Does it detract from the image? I would argue that it artistically adds to the image. We sometimes do this on purpose to show movement, to create the feeling that the eagle is coming.

          We do this by choosing a shutter speed fast enough to freeze the bird, helicopter, plane, etc. but slow enough to blur the faster moving objects (wingtips, rotors, props, etc.). We do the same with moving cars, bicycles, and so forth because their wheels need to show motion. Yet, the car or bicycle needs to be sharp.

          Experiment with your shutter speed the next time you shoot moving objects. Try to get that balance that renders that which needs to be in focus, sharp while leaving blurred that which moves faster. Whatever you do, if there are a face and eyes they need to be sharp.

          Then there are those who enjoy photography (making images in the field) more than image editing. This group is not as well versed with editing software as the previous group. They are often frustrated because they see (in their imagination) what they want to do with the image in editing but they often don't know how to get the image there, in post-processing. They find post-processing overwhelming and limiting (by their limited skills).

          I personally find myself somewhere in between these two groups. I love being out there making images but I also enjoy the editing part. I know my software reasonably well but have also been very frustrated that I just can't achieve in post-processing what I want to. I am just not good enough in PhotoShop. Let me put it this way. If I had to do a self-assessment I would rate my photography knowledge and skills much higher than my editing skills. I am a very quick learner but my schedule is beyond busy and I just don't have the time to get more proficient at PhotoShop. I heard someone say that many photographers have spent an average of sixteen years learning PhotoShop. I too have used PhotoShop for many years, but due to all the things I am involved in, I have not spent as much time as needed on it.

          How will the first group of photographers get more time to be in the field as they are consumed with computer work (even if they love computer work)? How will the second group of photographers get their final image better when they either don't know how to get it better or don't have the time to properly learn all the software necessary for the job?

          Artificial intelligence (AI) has matured to such a level that image editing software is at a crossroads. This is a crossroad I am very, very happy to stand in front of. One fork of the crossroad is using AI to make their software better and more precise. The processes and steps used are still similar or even the same but will yield much better results. AI is working behind the scenes. The other fork of the crossroad is using AI to make their software different and better. AI is not working behind the scenes on this road but is front and center. AI does for you what you don't know how to do yourself in the software. Now I remember people saying, in the mid-1980s, as autofocus was introduced that "the day I can no longer focus my own images is the day I quit photography." People might now feel the same way, if I don't process my own images it is not my image. I don't feel the same way. I have a vision of what I want the image to look like. As long as the final image reflects that vision I don't care how I get there - doing it myself (which I have already admitted I am not as proficient in as I should be) or letting AI do it for me. To me, it is all about the final image, not how I get there. I am an image person, not a process person.

          This is why this second fork is what I am so excited about. Imagine loading an image into your software and the software's AI will analyze your image, measure depth, know what is in your image and recognize elements, then suggest just about perfect results to you. You pick from a few suggestions and with two clicks your image is transformed and you are basically done. Imagine if this software still allows you full control, should you want it, to refine their suggestions to closer align with your vision for that image.

          We are reaching that fork in the road this holiday season. Skylum, the creators of Luminar 4, is coming out with a brand new product called Luminar AI. What you have just imagined is coming true. AI is here not just working behind the scenes but upfront. Have you ever looked at an image in your editing software and not known where to begin with the post-processing process? Now AI will take the lead and show you what it thinks. Soon you will have a vision of how you want that image to look like if you did not have one from the start. Two clicks and your image is transformed. Yet, you retain control so that you can change things so that it will be your image with your look.

To get a sneak peek at what is coming, have a look here:

Luminar AI

Disclaimer: I am an affiliate of Skylum and have been on webinars about this software. I have been able to ask questions directly to Skylum. When you buy software from this link you save and I get a "coffee." I personally use Luminar software on 100% of my images and love it.

          When we have close encounters we should try to get intimate images. This Bushbuck came close to us. It helps make the animal feel safer if you avoid eye contact. Look to the side and keep them in your peripheral vision. Move slowly and keep quiet. This fellow and her mate cautiously came towards me. Here are the two images I took:

The first one was taken just before sunrise. There is something special to look right into her eyes. Lift your camera to your eye while still looking to the side then slowly rotate to face the animal. This is an intimate image. The viewer is connecting with the animal. We almost want to touch it. We are staring at each other. This is special.

          The second image was taken a few minutes later as the sun came up. Try to get that warm light fall on the animal. Photographing animals like this with a short to shortish lens from close up is an experience. Try to give your viewer that same experience. The surroundings should not be totally blurred as that is what long lenses do and the experience of meeting the animal in the environment where they live is lost.

          I know that this experience was probably more special to me that it will ever be to the viewer because of my encounter but I try to show that encounter to the viewer. I attempt to catch the intimacy.

Get down low. Lay down if you need to (as long as it is safe to do so). Such images have a unique perspective. Viewers love to be shown things in a way they have not seen before. Most viewers will never see a guinea fowl from this angle which makes the image more special. This perspective also makes the animal seem larger and taller than what it really is.

          When shooting upwards make sure that your sky is not distracting or just plain definitionless gray. If the sky is not pleasing then don't include it. In an attempt to create a special connection with the animal it helps to shoot from eye-level or lower. It almost makes the viewer feel part of the scene instead of looking down on the animal. As photographers, it is our job to find intriguing and interesting angles to shoot from. For animals try shooting from low down.

This is not your typical landscape image. We don't have lead-in lines or much depth. Yet, I find this image appealing. I love the rays of light shooting out. I had the drive reposition us to allow me to get the sun star. The tree itself is full of character as Boabab trees usually are. The backlit foliage in the foreground is nicely lit and has a nice color to them. The sky is pleasing too with warm tones. It kind of all comes together.

          I just want to remind us all not to be so focussed on the purpose of being out (in this case, wildlife photography) that we lose sight of other photographic opportunities. This image was just a quick take, but don't forget about the quick takes. Always be on the lookout of any and all opportunities. However brief, take the opportunity.

We are still at Victoria Falls but we are trying to get more and different images from the same shoot. So we lower our angle and move in closer. The ferns and flowers are what make the image but the rainbow and the falls behind it all adds so much to the image. As always, remember to focus on your composition. I moved around here to find this composition with the leaves at the bottom leading the viewer's eye into the image. Pay attention to small details.

          Most of all, be on the lookout for images like this. The waterfall can be so dramatic that it demands our undivided attention but this is a trap, don't fall for it. Once you have the image of the main attraction start looking at what is closer to you. Start finding things to photograph while still using the falls and the rainbow as a background. Our goal is not just to enjoy the waterfall but to be detectives looking for every possible image we can find (assuming we are talking about good images).

          So, in conclusion of the last three weeks, get the main attraction then get more intimate with longer lenses, and then use the dramatic landscape as a background to get even more images from the shoot. Concentrate on "seeing." Seeing the images to shoot is 80% of photography or more. Learn to get into the mode of seeing ALL the possibilities not just the obvious ones.

This image is still of Victoria Falls in Zimbabwe but I zoomed right in and took a more intimate image. We still need to pay attention to good composition. There still needs to be something prominent for the eye to go back to. I have chosen a shutter speed that shows the water flowing (by using blur) yet still leaving some definition so that the water is not just a blur. Just take a few exposures using different shutter speeds so that you can pick the best one. I cannot tell you to use a shutter of .... (insert value) because there are too many variables at play to determine that for every situation. These variables are the speed at which the water is falling and the focal length of your lens. The longer the lens the more blur there is (because your field of view is closer).

We can even go a bit more abstract. Just don't be afraid of shooting landscapes with longer lenses. Get a variety of images from the same shoot. I have chosen a faster shutter speed here because I wanted to freeze the water a bit more. I needed to do so, so that it is not just a blur. In the previous image, the rocks provide sharp focus but here I don't really have that.

          Be creative. Get as many different images of a shoot as you can. Push yourself.

The mist is really important here as it adds to the mood of the image. It also helps the sun to give color to the image. Timing in these situations is important. Too much mist and you lose the detail of what is behind the mist. When taking a moody image of a swan for example you want lots of mist or fog because it gets rid of the background but in a landscape image like this too much mist ruins the shot (and your gear). With not enough mist the mood and atmosphere of the image are lost. The mist typically comes and goes with lulls in the wind. So just time it right and you have your shot.

This image helps us to compare the atmosphere and mood between the two images. Can you see that this second image just does not have the same atmosphere and mood as the first image? So go out and try to capture more mood and atmosphere in your images. Many sleep in when there is fog. Many put their cameras away when there is mist. Great images are often made when we don't do what non-photographers do. We should be out photographing when non-photographers are at home. We should probably be home when others are out. The reason for this is that others go out for the experience and the experience needs to be pleasant for them. Photographers go out to take great images and are very willing to have terrible experiences (wet, cold, early, etc.) as long as they get great images. Sometimes we get both a great experience and good images but most of the time you need to decide between the experience and the great image.

• Great composition

• Emotion

• Much of the success of awesome people's portraits are in the eyes

• Finding a great face with character

• Good lighting

          The composition of animal portraits is just as important as in portraits of people. However, some animals' faces are not as flat as ours. In fact, some of them can have very long faces which creates focus issues, especially when taken with a long lens (as you cannot get close to them). Long lenses have a shallower depth of field.

          Emotion in animal portraits can be just as strong and important. Their eyes can also communicate a lot but they don't listen to your instructions so getting that moment is more difficult and requires more patience. The best lighting for good outdoor portraits is when the sky is overcast. I am not talking about gloomy skies. There should still be a good amount of light, the light just has to be diffused and soft.

Because of the crocodile's long face, it is probably best to take the image from the side to retain focus. You can see that the light is nice and soft. The focus has to be sharp on the eye. If the eye is not in focus the image is trash. What do that eye and face tell you? Do you trust this fellow?

Don't be afraid of going in really closely especially if the portrait is telling a story. The story here is the interaction between the bird and the buffalo. So that needs to be shown and it is best shown by getting in close.

This fellow is tired, tired of life. Once again, I am really in closely. Let your animal portraits say something, communicate emotion, and get close.

This image is so much more interesting than one where the baboon just stared at the viewer with an expressionless face. So how do you capture images like this? It just takes patience. You have to watch the animal through the viewfinder, finger on the shutter. It may take a long time to get an image showing action but that is the price you are asked to pay to get an image worthy of the animal it portrays.

          Make sure to pick a large aperture because we want the background blurred. We want the animal to stand out, distraction-free. Most people have probably never seen a baboon's teeth. So when they see them in your image it makes them stop and look. It creates a central point of interest. As usual, frame the image right with more space in front of the animal than behind the animal.

          So show life. Capture animals living. Show their behavior. Show their interaction with one another or with nature.

Here is a little one nibbling on Mom's nose. Would you prefer a shot of both of them just standing there looking at you instead? I doubt it. Animal interaction is interesting. It calls forth emotions within the viewer, perhaps a chuckle. Animal interactions make them more relatable to the viewer. It personifies them. The viewer's eyes are always going to go straight to where the action is which can be used compositionally. Here that interaction is placed where the rule of thirds lines insect, which is a very strong compositional position. Both the foreground and the background are blurred so nothings else competes for your attention.

          Spend time with animals. Get to know their behavior. Capture their behavior and show them interact with each other. It just adds a bit of sparkle to wildlife images.

When a photographer sees something large and something small he or she would be well advised to try to place them both in one image. This is the time to practice patience. Wait for that moment. When one of the two objects interact or intersect with the other things can get very interesting. In this case, the baby is in a precarious position. Is Mom accidentally going to step on the baby?

          I was camped in Mana Pools, Zimbabwe once. My only protection was a little two-man tent. An elephant visited my "residence." I stood watching from a distance. Not once did the elephant even touch one of the anchor ropes. This baby is safe! Still, the image makes one wonder, perhaps even hold one's breath.

          In this image, we have a comparison of size and proportion, power and vulnerability, strength and fragility. This image brings emotion forth from the viewer. It is an image a person can connect with. It tells a story. It speaks of being tired. Mom's foot is in the air which adds to the suspense and questions. Where is that foot going to land?

          Look for size and proportion comparisons. Use them to show scale. Better yet, attempt to let them create a bit of drama.

So how do we capture scenes like these? Today I am not going to talk about settings and autofocus and frame rates, and such. Rather I would like to share about being ready. This bird surfaced for just a few seconds and disappeared under the water, fish and all, as fast as it appeared. This is not the time to start asking which settings to use or worse yet, how to set the camera in the first place.

          It amazes me how many people will spend a lot of money to come on a workshop with us without knowing their equipment. We really need to be better prepared. Before going on an important shoot make sure you know how to set the camera (not which settings but how to actually set it). Read the manual through again. Make sure you know which buttons do what and where they are. Make sure you know the menu system. As an instructor, I can give you the settings but it is really hard for me to help you set your camera because every camera system is different. Even if I happen to know your particular brand's settings well, by the time you have handed me your camera and received it back the bird is long gone.

          The best advice I can give you is to practice. Go shoot regularly. Play with your camera. Preparation is the key to being ready to capture scenes when they present themselves.

Here are a few things I find helpful:

• Get to know your bird's behavior. They often signal before they take off by lowering their necks.

• Please leave enough room for large wingspans.

• Having lots of megapixels are advantageous because you can afford to leave enough room and crop later while still retaining enough resolution to be useful.

• Good light is still essential.

• Use the fastest possible shutter speed to freeze the wings' movement. Remember the wings move much faster than the bird. At times one can get creative images of sharp birds in flight with blurred wings. Those images can also work.

• The eye has to be sharp, period.

• It takes a lot of practice and patience, don't give up.

Getting great images of birds in flight can be very rewarding. Even if you don't succeed, trying will make you appreciate good birds in flight photographs even more.

          There are many nice images to be had by zooming in even more. Photograph just a part of the animal. These images can be very intimate and interesting. At times they ask, "what is that?" At other times they have people say, "wow, I never realized that elephants have hair!" Or people comment about the texture of its skin. For many people, your photograph may be the closest look they have ever had of the animal in question. These images make us see things we have never seen before. They amaze us.

So please don't stop zooming in. Find something interesting by zooming right in, get something intimate and close. For the most part, I like these images to still be recognizable, but that is just my personal preference. I also prefer that there is still something specific that draws attention for compositional reasons.

          Challenge yourself. Shoot using different focal lengths. Go for the intimate. Give people something that they probably have never seen before. Zoom in. Remember not to get too close to wild animals, for their comfort and your safety. Use that long lens instead.

          During our recent African Safari Photography Workshop, we were in special photography boats on the river bank. Baboons were horsing around and playing with each other. There was no special focus. Then one of them got thirsty. However, every time they take a drink they are taking their lives into their own hands as crocodiles lurk beneath the waters. The only way to increase their chances of surviving drinking from the river is to be laser-focussed when they drink. They lean back to stay as far away from the water as they can. All attention is on the water looking for any sign of movement. Their muscles are ready to jump backward should a crocodile attempt to strike.

          This fellow is right-handed as both right hand and right leg are closer to the water, ready to propel him backward at any time. He is ready for action.

Just look at those eyes. You can see that this is serious business. He is not looking at the water right in front of him where he is drinking but further ahead. There is danger and he needs to be on the lookout. As wildlife photographers, we want to capture such focus because it tells a story and creates interest. We want to know what happened. Did he survive? (he did)

          When you see animals really focussing pay attention. Be ready for something may happen. Even if nothing special happens you still end up with a shot that shows the focus and tells the story.

          My wife looked at a few of my African images and exclaimed in horror, "oh no, don't show that ..." The reason for her plea is quite understandable as these images evoke emotions and reactions that are not pleasant. Yet, images that moved the world and stood the test of time are often images that showcase the harsh reality of life. I choose to show it, yet acknowledge that these images are not for everyone.

This Egret found a baby bird to eat. After a struggle to get it eaten it finally succeeded. This is that harsh life. This image makes me ask questions:

• Did the baby die before the Egret found it?

• Did the Egret kill it?

• Where is the mother of the baby?

These questions keep me looking at the image as my mind thinks about them. The longer an image keeps the viewer's attention the better. Harsh or not, we just record life and show it.

• Capturing action, such as animals fighting

• Animal interaction, like a mother looking at her baby or birds intertwining their necks

• Typical animal behavior that shows their character

• Running, jumping, diving, etc.

I say it again but the best advice I have for wildlife photographers is to keep following your subject through the viewfinder always being ready. Even slowish moments can happen too quickly for you to react if you are not ready. Be on the lookout for behavior that is repeated because that will tell you what to expect and warn you to be ready when it happens again.

          Many elephants crossed the river to graze on islands because the grass there has not been eaten by other animals (they can't cross the river in fear of crocodiles). An elephant started to kick/push the ground with his foot to loosen the grass. He did it quite a few times which got me this image:

Would this image have been a capture of a special little moment if the elephant just stood there? These images are all about capturing the right moment. The right moment is when something special is happening. The right moment captures a slice of time that is more interesting than other times, a slice of time that asks questions, create wonder, that draws attention, and that makes the viewer want to look at your image.

          Sure, I have many images of animals just standing there, but they are not that good and people don't get excited looking at them. To make your images stand out something in the image has to be outstanding, different, special, say something, evoke emotion, and generate curiosity. Capturing the right moment does that.

Here we have all the pieces of a good image. The late afternoon sun is nice and warm. The elephant is walking into the image, there is more space in front of it than behind it. There is nice color in the image. Yet, even so, this would have been just another elephant shot had it not been for the water splash. This is what I mean by saying we should try to capture special little moments. When these moments are added to your images they are much more interesting. They often evoke questions. They often freeze something different from what the next guy has.

          So, how do you get images of wildlife showing special little moments? Here are a few tips that may help:

• Learn to know animal behavior. The better you know the animals you photograph the better you will be able to predict when something is going to happen. I will write more about this in the coming months relaying how I got the image when I witnessed a Leopard kill.

• Be ready. Yes, this can be boring but you have to be ready for when it happens it is too late to lift up your camera and shoot. Track the animal, expecting something, even if it is for a long time.

• Set your camera to expect fast action. This means a fast shutter speed and focus tracking.

• Position yourself in the best possible place. For wildlife, that means you need to be at eye-level or below. Be ahead, where the action is coming to.

Do your best to include something different, something special in your wildlife images. Make them stand out.

          Don't get discouraged. Just bring two boatloads full of patience and keep doing what you are doing. The key to great wildlife photography is to capture the right moment, that right expression, or that right composition. On our recent African Safari workshop, we were on photographic boats which make the task of tracking the animals with your heavy lens easy because the boat had professional gimbal supports built-in. Sometime before sunset we would search for elephants and position ourselves so that we are shooting into the setting sun. Here is that capture:

I really like this image. What makes it what it is, is also the composition. When do you take the shot? The elephant is constantly moving. You don't want the elephant to look to the right because then the viewer's gaze would also move to the right and leave the image. If I was lying I would tell you that I had to watch the elephant's movement closely and snap the image with him looking slightly to the left so that he and the sun complement each other. But that is not how you successfully get great wildlife images. So how do you get that right moment or right composition when photographing animals? Truth be told, things happen much too fast for you to snap at the right moment. So you shoot at the camera's fastest frame rate and pick the right image later. You shoot thousands of images and end up with just a few good ones. So the trick is not as much when you shoot, although you still do your best to frame it right, the trick is to select the right image out of the sequence. Pay attention to the composition and pick the image that works best as a whole. This requires even more patience because you are looking at sequences of 20 or 40 images of the same scene. Look at each one carefully because expressions, action, and composition can change with each image. Pick the best one.

          Gather all the patience you can find and go out and find some wildlife to photograph. By the way, if you would like to join us on our next African Safari workshop in 2021 please contact me.

The "special" light just hits El Capitan. Nothing else in this scene gets good light. However, the light on El Capital is orange because the sun is really low behind us shining through an opening in the clouds. It draws the viewer to El Capitan. That small area of orange light is enough to add punch, something special to this image. Unfortunately, only two photographers saw this as everyone else left. What a pity.

          Stay longer. Linger. Just wait a bit. Most of the time nothing will develop but from time to time something does and then it was very worth it to wait.

Half Dome is certainly not hidden. It is an important element in this scene. However, Half Dome is not where your eyes go immediately upon viewing this image. The sun star pulls the eyes first. The backlit foliage and trees are strong compositionally. Half Dome takes a back seat here. Everybody seeing this image will know where it is taken but the image is a bit different. This is not your standard iconic shot of the icon. These images are more difficult to get. They are also yours rather than taking an image that everyone else has also taken.

          Think differently. Get more unique images. feature the icons but as a secondary interest.

          Rather than think according to the conventional wisdom that wide-angle lenses are better at landscape photography than telephone lenses take some telephoto lens landscape images. I really want to challenge you. Go out and shoot landscape images with a telephoto lens. Telephone lenses can be great tools to teach us photography. They help us to find the compositions, to think and see compositionally. They force you to look at large scenes in smaller chucks. They help us to spot great compositions easier. So practice with these long lenses.

This image was taken from a distance using a telephoto lens. I think it was taken at 600mm. Not all landscape images need to be of big, wide-open spaces. We do not always need to see in the distance. Try to get some more intimate images. Change things up, build a portfolio that spans a wide variety of images. The more we use long lenses for landscapes the better we will become at composition.

          Do you accept the challenge?

The grasses in the foreground are on both sides with a gap in the middle which mirrors the mountains in the background. The two gaps are lined up deliberately to create the mirroring effect. You will be surprised at what a big difference a step to the left or to the right makes in terms of lining things up. Work the scene to make sure the elements are lined up and mirroring each other.

          We need to think compositionally. It is our job to try to create balance, order, and to get the elements in a scene to work together (unless the purpose of the image is to show chaos). Here is the same scene composed differently:

The same idea applies. We just stepped back a bit and added some height. The effect of what we did here is that the viewer's eyes move through the gap to the gap in the mountains in the background. This is what we want. We want the viewer to be invited to look into the scene, to move from front to back.

          Try to look for this kind of thing. Mirror elements. Arrange things in such a way to beckon the viewer into the image.

This was a difficult composition to spot. I had to work the scene to get this image. The far right of the image did not have much action as the sun monopolizes our attention on the left. I could not turn the camera to the left because the hill was in deep dark shadow - there was nothing there. At first glance upon arriving on the scene the rocks' positions seem random and uncooperative. However, by changing my position and going down much lower I was able to mobilize the rocks to greatly enhance my composition. They bring interest to the right side of the image. They lead to the sun. They have warm light on them.

          Pay attention to detail. Move so that the rocks work together to make a nice image. Pay attention to the placement of elements in the scene. A few steps this way or that way can be powerful to turn and ordinary image into a better image. Look at everything in your scene. This is why every image I shoot is taken on a tripod. It allows me to pay attention to the detail, to examine the edges, and to precisely "place" objects where I want them by moving around.

Here is our example. You can see that I am not talking about a thin branch on the edge of the frame. Much of the image is taken up by the foliage. This frame keeps the viewer looking at the hill. The pathway helps to give the viewer directions to the mountain (lead-in line). To get the frame to be the size you want in contrast to the scene behind the frame simply move closer or further away. In this case the frame is the inverse of the hill so they compliment each other well.

          Be on the lookout for good frames. Move around, higher up, lower down, to the left or right, closer or further to frame your scene the way you want to. Without the frame this image would not have been that interesting. Don't be afraid to use larger frames, as in this case.

This is a scene where I just felt that I wanted to create a peaceful landscape. I did not want crashing waves. I wanted to smooth out the water. I wanted to create a dreamy scene. To do that I needed to use a long shutter speed. However the sun is still up, in fact, I am shooting right into the bright sun. So how am I to get a long shutter speed?

          Here is where the neutral density filter comes in. They are basically sunglasses for your lens. They do not alter the color of your scene, they simply allow less light through allowing you to use long shutter speeds even when the light is bright. You can also stack them to make it even darker should you need to. I have a three stop and a six stop filter. Together they give me nine stops of shade. The filter is placed in a holder in front of your lens. Your camera should notice the lower light levels and adjust automatically. However, your camera's light meter does not go beyond 30 seconds. I use an app on my smartphone (LEE ProGlass, it is free) that calculates the exposure easily and quickly.

          If you are using a really long shutter speed you do not want to be holding the filter in front of your lens, rather use a GOOD filter holder because light will leak in and ruin your image.

          So what do you think? It takes me all of a few seconds to screw the filter holder onto the lens and one second to drop the filter in. Had this image been taken with a short shutter speed and crashing waves were visible how long would it have taken to get that image to look like this one using Photoshop? Call me old fashioned if you please but I still use neutral density filters and I love them.

What does this "line" in the grass make you do? You see, it happens automatically, our eyes just follow lines. Here is another one from the same shoot.

Lead-in lines can be formed by almost anything that lineup and go into your scene. I want to encourage you to look for and utilize lead-in lines. Most people walk up to this scene, plant themselves at the very place where they meet the scene and shoot. If this is done most people would have had an image of the green pasture and the trees and mountains but they would have missed creating a stronger composition by just walking around a bit because that would have lead the photographer to this lead-in line.

          Search for lead-in lines and use them to enhance the compositions you find.

          Reflection in water is one such case where it is perfectly okay to place the horizon in the center of the image. These images still work well compositionally even though we do have and are looking at two images; one of the elements and another of the reflection. Why then does this work with reflections and typically not well with other kinds of imagery? Well because the reflection is a mirror of the non-reflected part of the image which ties the "two" images together. The theme, the colors, the objects in the image, everything is similar so the viewer cannot help but see the "two images" as connected.

Does this image work compositionally? Yes, because the viewer's eyes keep on comparing the two halves of the image. This forces the brain to see the image as one image. Without the reflection, this does not work in the same way and we are usually left seeing two separate images. So don't be afraid of breaking the rules when you encounter a scene where breaking the rules still works. Reflections on water present an easy topic to start experimenting with. Give it a try.

Half Dome, (the granite rock just to the left of the sun) adds visual weight to the upper left of the image. If nothing is placed on the right side to offset that weight this image will not be balanced. Our minds will think that the image wants to tilt to the left and down because there is more weight there than to the right. Half Dome is also darkish which makes it weigh more visually. So how do we create balance? We need to juxtapose an object on the right that will bring about balance.

          That is exactly what I have done. The bolder at the front right adds weight there because it is well sized. It also adds interest because of the green letchin on it. The juxtaposition of Half Dome with the bolder in the foreground makes the image look well balanced. It makes for a pleasing composition.

          Think about visual weight in your composition and use the juxtaposition of weight to create balance.

          I arrived in Yosemite early, way before sunrise. But as usual, there were just too many trees in the way. I walked around, this way, that way, further down, higher up, and all over the place. I knew what I wanted but found it frustratingly difficult to find. Photography is not as easy as it seems. We often look at a nice image and mistakenly think that the photographer just walked up to the scene and clicked it. It usually does not work this way. On this morning I almost missed the sunrise because I just could not find what I knew I wanted. Be patient. Keep searching. Hurry if you must (remain safe). Eventually, I found the composition.

I found a clear shot of Half Dome with the sun peeking out next to it. Yet, I did not just want an image of Half Dome and the sun with no foreground. I wanted a foreground and I needed it to provide some much-needed color. This image combines both the foreground and the clear shot of Half Dome and the rising sun.

          We have a tree that frames the left side and a tree that frames the right side of the image. The trees on the right form a line that leads the viewer to the sun. The image seems orderly. We don't just have trees everywhere without rhyme or reason. Everything in the image works together. We avoided chaos.

          The next time you visit a scene like this keep looking and changing position and or lenses till you find what you are looking for. Try to get past the random chaotic placement of nature. Try to find order (unless your main purpose or subject is chaos). To illustrate how difficult this can be I need to tell you that I visited this same general area for five mornings running. I was getting out of bed at 4 am every morning. Hours were spent walking this way and that way. Eventually, I found what I was looking for and I really like the image. Hopefully, our efforts will pay off. We go the extra mile to get the extra smile.

The lit rocks in the top right of the image carry a lot of weight. If we have nothing on the bottom left to balance that visual weight out the image will just not be pleasing. The plants on the bottom left does a great job here of providing that sought after balance. They add color too. The viewers eyes go back and forth between the plants and the top lit rocks. This creates what we call flow. Great flow is where the flow leads into the image. Bad flow is when the flow leads the viewer out of the image.

          Visual weight and flow work together to bring about harmony and to lead from one element to another or to lead your eye from one place to another. Think of an image as being on a judge's scale. The middle center of the image is pinned to the scale. If one side of the image drops down the image is not balanced.  Obviously the lit rocks are much larger and physically heavier than the plants in the foreground. Visual weight does not care about physical weight. We use distance to cancel out the imbalance. Closer object visually weight more. That is why the plants can balance out the heavier rocks. The rocks are in the distance and therefore visually weight less.

          Place your objects strategically to create balance. Look for things in the foreground that would balance heavy objects in the background. A balanced composition is pleasing to look at.

The background standout rocks are the same but the foreground is different. We discussed the first image last week so let's turn to the second image today. It also has loads of depth. It has dynamic lines. We also used a shape; the J shape. The bottom corners of the image have lines pointing into the image. Our eyes follow the J shape to the main standout rocks in the distance.

          The foregrounds make these two images different. Yet, I am standing literally only a few steps to the left compared to where the first image was taken. I positioned the camera lower down towards the ground. I am shooting the same basic scene but I end up with two different images. I shoot stock. Having more images from the same shoot helps my business. Even if you don't shoot stock you still end up with two images rather than one. Hopefully they are both good, if not, at least you can choose the better one to use. Had you only taken the first image you would not have had a choice.

          I also place these two images here to help you see what a huge difference just a few steps can make to an image. So walk around. Explore. Try things out. This is how we learn. This is how our compositional vision develops.

We once again have a foreground, a middle-ground, and a background. This time we have added a shape to the image. The foreground forms a triangle that points to the background. This helps to tie the foreground and background together. The rock shelf also forms a kind of triangle also pointing to the standout rocks in the distance.

          Adding shapes to our compositions make our images more dynamic. Triangles that point to our backgrounds are powerful. S shapes and curves are even more powerful compositionally. The foreground captures our attention but then these shapes point us and move us into the image. This is what depth is. We always want our viewers to look into the image. It creates the feeling that we are there and can just step forward into the scene.

          The art of photography is the ability to start seeing compositionally. We start seeing these formulas and shapes. We actively look for them and use them when we shoot. Really pay attention to your foregrounds when shooting landscape images that need depth. Moving just a little this way or that way makes a huge difference. When I arrived on this scene I knew that my main compositional element is the rocks in the distance. Now that I know that I start walking around looking for a foreground to match. I start looking for shapes, lines, and curves. When I find a scene that puts it all together I have my shot.

          This means that the field of photography also is not as simple as applying a formula that just works all the time. Just last week I wrote about breaking the "formula" of thirds when it works. Having said that, let's talk about an easy formula that creates depth. Like all formulas outside of the sciences this formula does not always work, but it works well most of the time. Look at this image and tell me if you feel that there is depth to the photograph.

So, does this image have depth? Does it pull your attention into the image versus making you look at it from side to side? Do you look at this image from the bottom going up into the image? Now ask yourself why? Why does this image have depth? If you where there with me when I took this image you will know that this is a small space, it is not a vast expanse and we do not have that much room to work with. So how did we create the depth that really was not there?

1. We used a wide angle lens. Wide angle lenses stretches things out. It creates distance between objects creating the illusion of distance and depth. But they don't do this automatically ...

2. I was close to the foreground plant. This exaggerates the size and importance of the first plant. It makes the viewer start here when looking at the image.

3. There is a middle-ground. Your eyes go from the first plant to the second and third plants. I lightened the middle tuffs of grass to make them stand out a bit.

4. The rocks in the background stand out. They form a strong and certain background element.

          The easy formula for depth is to have a foreground, a middle-ground, and a background. When this formula is in place our eyes tend to move from the foreground to the middle-ground and on to the background. This makes us look into the image. This creates depth. Be warned, we do not want our images to all look the same, so the formula should not always be used. However, this formula does tend to work rather well.

         P.S. This image also has lines to help create depth.

Does this image work for you? Does it have depth? I like this image and took it this way very deliberately. First of all, the plant growing on solid rock is amazing and it tells a story or asks questions. It is very different from the surrounding and therefore it stands out making it a strong compositional element. Yet, it is placed right in the middle of the image, laterally speaking. So why does this work compositionally?

1. The plant is balanced with the brighter rock standing out in the distance.

2. There is a line that connects the plant with those rocks. This line creates depth.

3. This line kind of goes at an angle making the image more dynamic.

4. I brightened this line somewhat in post processing to emphasize the connection.

5. The juxtaposition of the plant with those rocks also create depth.

So don't be afraid to break the rules but only do so if it works. We need strong compositions for compelling images. Don't break the rules just to break the rules. I often call my wife to my office when I process images and ask her if the image does something for her. I want to make sure that it is not my emotional attachment to the image that makes it work for me. It is easy to be emotionally attached to an image, after all I may have hikes miles to get there. The image needs to work well even for someone who has never been there. If it is pleasing to an outsider then you may have a strong image. We need to test our images in this way especially when we break the rules just to make sure that it still makes sense and is still a strong image.

Here we have a foreground whose shape forms a triangle which points to the main compositional element in the image, namely, the standout rocks. The foreground is interesting and adds color not found elsewhere in the image. The triangular shape leads the viewer's eyes into the image and to where we want them to look.

          Don't just plonk down your tripod and shoot. Really look at all the foregrounds that are available to you. Move around and look at them from various perspectives. Find a foreground that really works well with the rest of the image. Move closer or father away to create the shapes you need to benefit the image. Foregrounds are often very important. Take your time to look around and to examine your foreground closely. Move into a position that makes the best use of the foreground.

1. Elements - the placement of elements shape composition

2. Color - certain colors draw the viewer's eyes more so than other colors so where we place these colors impacts composition

3. Differences - anything different will stand out which turns whatever is different into a strong compositional element

4. Patterns - patterns and shapes lead the eyes compositionally

5. Light and dark areas - our eyes tend to go to lighter areas more so than darker areas. Even when we explore the darker areas our eyes will always return to the brighter areas. So we can place these lighter areas in our images to draw the viewer's attention to these areas.

Slot canyons make for great photographic material. Yet, they can be difficult to deal with compositionally because you don't really have different elements, the color is similar, and not much is different. You do have patterns and shapes to play with. The strongest compositional tool we have with slot canyons, in my opinion, is light and dark areas. Let's look at some examples:

Close you eyes. Now open your eyes and look at this image. Make a mental note where your eyes go and how they travel through the image. You will notice that your eyes go to the brightest part of the image.

          Since we know that our attention is attracted by the lightest part of the image we can place the lightest parts of the image in strong compositional positions to create a strong image.

          Let's look at another example:

          The lightest parts pull the viewer up into the image. Think in terms of light and dark when you compose your images. Place the brightest parts of the image in good places for compositional value.

          Try this, your images may improve.

This is Horseshoe Bend near Page, Arizona. This scene cannot be photographed from the ground without using a really wide angle lens (yes, I know about panoramic photography - I am just talking about with one shot here). It may seem as if you have a lot of distance to play with but you don't, it is only the wide angle lens that makes it look that way. While wide angle lenses do make it possible to include the whole scene they also create other problems. Yes, we spoke about photography being all about tradeoffs last week. Well, here is another tradeoff. The wider the lens the more perspective distortion we get. Horizons bend. Trees lean and buildings are falling over backwards. So how do we fix those issues?

          Raw image developers (software) will know what lens was used and make corrections accordingly. However, it is just not possible for those auto corrections to restore everything. In this image I had issues with my horizon. I am going to share a quick and easy fix with you.

          Open the image in Photoshop. Make the images a bit smaller because you need space around the image. Well, don't make the image physically smaller just view it smaller (Control or Command and -). Select the whole image (Control or Command and A). Click on edit, transform, distort. Now place your mouse on one of the corners, click and hold. Now drag up. Use this technique to easily and quickly fix bending horizons. You can move your corners to the side as well to correct buildings falling over backwards too. This is a wonderful little trick. Oh, by the way. You have to do each side independently (not all at once).

          There you go, try it.

          The best way to avoid noise is to shoot at low (native) ISO and to properly expose - give enough light. However, noise is often unavoidable because of the situations we face. Let me show you:

While this image may look bright enough it certainly did not start off looking this way. There where parts of the lower sky that was rather bright compared to the dark water below (especially in the dark areas). I exposed for the brightest spots in the sky but that left many parts of this image very dark. Those dark sections naturally contain more noise. When you brighter those dark areas the noise also gets amplified, to such an extent that the image can be ruined. This is one reason why I left Canon for Sony. Sony's sensors are just better at dealing with noise when we push our darks brighter. Now Canon people (I was one for years) mock us and the tests we do to show how noise is brought out when we increase the exposure of dark spots by claiming that nobody shoots like that and that we should rather expose better to begin with rather than to underexpose. Well, simply put, you do not always have that option.

          Photography is all about tradeoffs. If I gave this image more light, sure my dark spots would have looked much better but then again the bright spots in the sky would have been blown. You have to pick one or the other (either brights or darks) to correctly expose, it is not possible with one image to expose both the bright areas and the dark areas at the same time (if the dynamic range exceeds certain boundaries). By the way, this image is not a good example of extreme dynamic range as it still has some latitude.

          Either way, I now have an image where the dark areas are too dark. To fix this I just make those sections brighter, but wait, there is a tradeoff as doing so elevates the noise levels. The image is now much better looking, the bright parts are not too bright and the dark parts are now brighter and pleasing BUT I have noise in the darker areas which I don't want. How can we best deal with the noise selectively (locally)? I follow a two step process.

          Firstly, I kill the noise using a duplicate layer. Every image editing software offers this ability. Don't over do it because remember the tradeoff is loss of sharpness and detail. Move the noise removal slider only far enough to just, just get rid of the noise and no further. Adobe Camera Raw also let's you automatically mask only the darker sections so that the loss of sharpness and detail is minimized elsewhere. However, I want more control. I now create a layer mask and simply paint the effect in only where needed (or you can paint it out where not wanted).

          Secondly, I now sharpen the image. Once again, certain software give you the ability to mask in the sharpening so that it only effects areas where you have detail. I still want more control. I create a layer mask again and either paint the effect in or out to where I want or don't want the effect. The trick is to selectively and locally apply the noise reduction only to the areas needing it and sharpening only the areas requiring sharpening. Why? Because sharpening also comes with its tradeoffs. Sharpening makes the noise look worse.

          So let's look at the image of today. The water received noise reduction but no sharpening. The other sections received sharpening but no noise reduction. The secret is to apply what you need to apply ONLY to the areas needing whatever you are doing. Smooth water and soft clouds (with no detail) don't need sharpening so don't apply it there.

Before I tell you how I remove flare in Photoshop let me first tell you what the two problems are that we are dealing with when we confront flare. Flare chances both the color AND the brightness of what is behind it. That is a two pronged problem that requires to different solutions. Depending on the nature of where the flare is I always try Photoshop's healing brush first (on a new duplicate layer). Sometimes that fixes it and I rejoice. At other times it just does not do a good job. I am not hesitant to do it over and over again. Sometimes that works. It is also possible to manually clone it out but this does not always work well. If both of these tools do not help I do the following:

          Open the image in Photoshop. Create a blank new layer on top of your image.

          Color pick a color with the color picker that is just outside of the flare - pick the color that resembles what the spot's color would have been had it not been for the flare. Take the paint brush and paint the picked color over the flare. If the flare is large and has multiple different colored objects just pick the right color for each object and pain over that object in that color. You can use multiple strokes using multiple colors in this way. Change the layer's blending mode to "color." There, the color of the flare is now gone. However, you are not going to like the result because the flare also increased the brightness of that spot. So now that spot is way to bright and still equally visible, distracting, and annoying. Can you tell that I don't like flare generally speaking?

          All you need to do now is to change the brightness to match the surroundings. The are many ways to do so:

          Dodge and burn

          Adjustment layers

          Curve layers

          And on and on and on

          I typically merge the "color" layer and the duplicate layer and take them into Adobe Camera Raw where I use the radiant brush to fix the brightness. With this brush I can set exposure, contrast, and all sorts of things. This is my preferred method rather than the ones mentioned in this list.

          Lastly, I do final touchups with the healing brush or cloning which is now easier to do and typically involve smaller areas.