Muddy Lion

[Ken Watkins]

Another image from my muddy Lion sighting on a dead Buffalo, in Kidepo National Park, Uganda

Naturally dark as late on 18.05, and no real sunlight and of course the mud.

EOS 1D MkIV

500mm F4 hand-held

F4.5, ISO 800, 1/320

Green is very green due to late rains and swamp like conditions

[Hilary Hann]

I can almost smell the swamp! Good to see some intensely green backgrounds so that people don't think that Africa is only dry, dusty and brown. Very nice eyes.

[Andrew Merwin]

Fabulous detail Ken. Her eyes are beautiful & riveting.

[Marc Mol]

Love the mud coloured detail in this Ken, well done indeed, I'm a little surprised that the BG is not a touch smoother for this lens @ f/4.5?
However the portrait pops nicely still from the BG.
TFS

[Ken Watkins]

Thanks everybody for your comments, the BG on all of the shots from this sighting proved to be difficult, I know from prior experience people seem generally surprised in seeing rich green grass in Africa, but we do get lots of rain.

Our garden is particularly green at the moment and it is also really cold, roll on summer!

[Dumay de Boulle]

Nice and green, maybe some NR on the BG and a sliver off the top but nice pose and the mud adds.

[Morkel Erasmus]

Certainly a great setting. I don't mind the green BG at all. Love the mud on the face.
Would perhaps brighten the lion a smidge, seems underexposed by about 1/3 stop?

[Ken Watkins]

Dumay,

You should have seen the noise to start with.:w3

Morkel,

The only way I could have got more exposure was by losing shutter speed, I suppose I could have increased the ISO. Believe me it was dark both in terms of ambient light and the dirty lion.

[Morkel Erasmus]

Morkel,

The only way I could have got more exposure was by losing shutter speed, I suppose I could have increased the ISO. Believe me it was dark both in terms of ambient light and the dirty lion.

I understand that. I was talking about dodging or adjusting midtones, an easy way to correct it. Despite it being dark you can still expose for best detail...in this case I believe the 1Dmk4 has enough Dynamic Range to withstand this kind of adjustment. :bg3:

[Ken Watkins]

Morkel,

I am trying to understand your comments but cannot, I really fail to see how adjusting the image to make it look different to what it actually was can be considered an improvement. Do you believe more detail is neccessary?

[Gregor Bergquist]

Ken, You are the mud-master :bg3:

I really like this fellow. That seriously looking lion stare... I guess life for them is seriously. Great light in his eyes.

TFS, Gregor

[Morkel Erasmus]

Morkel,

I am trying to understand your comments but cannot, I really fail to see how adjusting the image to make it look different to what it actually was can be considered an improvement. Do you believe more detail is neccessary?

Ken, of course there is more that can be extracted. There always is.
It's your prerogative not to...but do you presume to say that the camera happened to record this exactly as your eye-cum-memory recalls it? Isn't the point that the camera is a tool, a limited tool that can capture light but not nearly as accurate as our eyes and memories can. If you're saying this is processed to look exactly as you recall it, fair game.

I'm just suggesting to try and adjust exposure on the face a wee bit and see how it looks. If you don't like it, fair enough. Why won't you even try to assimilate suggestions made by others (specifically the mods) and see if they have merit, instead of a de facto rejection of nearly all the advice given on processing your images? :2eyes2:

Recently I made a repost to your cheetah image and you did not acknowledge the fact that there was more to be done with the image, you merely mentioned something of your monitor needing recalibration. It was another case of the subject being in the shade, but processing can help improve images like that. In all honesty - if I did not know I could change the appearance of that shot as you presented it with processing, I would have binned it. I would not bin the one I posted, though. :w3

I am probably wasting my time as you will still prefer your OP...but here is a repost for the heck of it...
It's amazing what can be done even on a small jpg like this :S3:
Quick job - dodging midtones and shadows on the lion's face
There was some magenta in the muddy colour - desaturated that
Darkened BG very slightly using Robert's luminosity action

[Morkel Erasmus]

Sorry for a double re-post, but this is your OP side-by-side with my RP. Subtle changes...but they enhance.
I'd like to know what you and others think... :c3:

[Ken Watkins]

Morkel,

Having asked the question, I am glad you answered even if the tone was a bit abrupt.

I do not refuse to take notice of any suggestions as can be clearly seen by my response to Steve Canuel's suggestion on my recent Waterbuck image.

As to comments by you and Robert I believe I have always responded, but that might not be 100% correct, I presume you know of the other situation?

My simple view is that the image should reasonably represent what was seen, OK it is possible to manipulate your way to make it look better if you choose to to do so.

As for your re-post I can see a slight difference most noticably the lightening of the eyes, and it looks a bit too sharp.

I suppose it all depends on taste, over processing is the curse of Digital Photography, just because you can does not mean you should.:w3

It is all a matter of taste in the end, I also find it odd that nobody else suggested this.

[Robert Amoruso]

Ken,

Morkel's repost has better detail in the face and the increased luminance helps to accentuate that detail. The image is not over sharpened. There is nothing over processed about it.

Did you consider that no one suggested it before because they already know your canned response so why bother.

As I have told you before, this is a critiquing forum - the goal being to help photographers get better. I think if you look at any serious contest finalists you will see that in most cases they have an advanced comprehension of not only esthetic matters, but technical ones as well. That includes post-processing. To bring out the best in an expressively composed image, it may take more then causal post-processing.

Though you may occasionally acknowledge comments by others meant to help better your image, in more instances then not they are blown off by you. Such an attitude does not give the moderators or others much reason to say anything beyond a casual comment or two.

[Ken Watkins]

Robert,

Thanks for the comment, perhaps you could be kind enough to send me by PM some or all of these instances of my "blowing off" comments that have occurred.

By the way I have no interest in being involved in photographic contests as I see no point in them other than pumping up your own ego.

I have a strange feeling of "deja vu":w3