mara male Lion

[ken dyball]

Taken in the Masai Mara Nov 2009, full frame no crop

Nikon D3, 600mm 1/640 f/6.3

www.africanatureimages.com

[Sabyasachi Patra]

Hi Ken,
It seems you were pretty close. I think the critical focus is slightly behind the eye. However, with the deep blacks in the eye, you may have got the looks you intended. Thanks for sharing.

Cheers,
Sabyasachi

[Steve Kaluski]

Sorry Ken, doesn't really work for me.
Firstly the main focus is the eye which is not sharp and overall no real detail within the head.
Secondly it just a little dark and the shadow areas are just blocked.

I might suggest to have backed off to increase the distance between you & the subject and perhaps shot at f/8 or 9 and then slightly crop the image.

Steve ;)

[Alfred Forns]

Agree with Steve ... need to have more dof for making this work, do like the intimate crop !!! Might list the exp come etc .. makes it easier to evaluate and comment !!

[Ken Watkins]

I agree with Steve & Al, to me this looks like an image that has been enlarged to fit a big poster print rather than full frame.

[ken dyball]

Hi all thanks for the comments, even though some seem to think it is rubbish, Ken you are probably were i was at 7-8 years ago (yep out of focus garbage i would have said), the original file is quite sharp around the eye erea & has been softened to make a artistic fine art print,
i photograph wildlife in Africa because i love it, secondly i do it to make money & to make money these days you need to think & do what sells, that Lion hangs in a big gallery & has a limit if 50, that is up to 22 @ $1,400 a pop not bad for a image that looks like its been blown up for a big poster print!!!
My point being moderators, not all images (most yes) need or should be pin sharp with loads of detail, they just look to harsh as art!!!:):):)

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi Ken

By posting an image we assume as readers/viewers you would like constructive comments back, whether they are good or bad to aid development or to improve the image in some way, or indeed that you just love it. In the guidelines we respectfully request that authors when posting, add as much information about the image as possible to aid in feedback. The comments posted from members are therefore based on the minimal information you supplied. If you had expanded to say you had 'softened' the original image for an 'artistic fine art print' then some comments would not have been made and we would all have had a better/clearer understanding of the concept behind the image. Without the whole picture we can only surmise and make judgements.

Therefore, perhaps on you next posting you can expand on the information supplied with the image, clearly stating you objectives (what you were wanting to achieve), thoughts & rational behind the posting and any changes you have made to the image to avoid any further confusion. You may also find this thread of use for that purpose.

http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php?t=53926

[Alfred Forns]

Hi Ken

Have to agree with you that art has no boundaries/limitation, its all up to the creative mind !!

Having said that I don't agree with softening a sharp image to make it "art", just my opinion. Glad you are able to sell your work and are doing well.

We are a nature forum with an open mind and encourage creativity but at the same time you can not expect us to see that your intention was creating art so we had to critique the image as posted. Also giving all the tech info will help in such critique !

[ken dyball]

Hi Ken

Have to agree with you that art has no boundaries/limitation, its all up to the creative mind !!

Having said that I don't agree with softening a sharp image to make it "art", just my opinion. Glad you are able to sell your work and are doing well.

We are a nature forum with an open mind and encourage creativity but at the same time you can not expect us to see that your intention was creating art so we had to critique the image as posted. Also giving all the tech info will help in such critique !

Fair Comment Alfred

The gallery instructed me of how they wanted the imagel, they are the pros at selling so i didn't argue & i guess they proved there point!!.

Cheers

[Alfred Forns]

.... Ken and also what you are posting on line might no look like the printed image !! ... good call on following advice !! They should know their clients best !!!

[Sabyasachi Patra]

My point being moderators, not all images (most yes) need or should be pin sharp with loads of detail, they just look to harsh as art!!!:):):)

Ken,
I agree with you that not all images should have tons of detail. We only want details at the places were it is required. So we use depth of field accordingly. One doesn't needlessly use f8, f11 or so or for that matter f2.8 or f4. I am sure in a tight head portrait, the eye is the focus. If the eye is not the critical part, then the blacks in the eyes would not have been so deep. I am not using the term blocked, as a gallery owner or client may not use that term. The comments of others regarding a narrow aperture was for a greater depth of field. If you wanted shallow depth of field, then I am sure, you could have just focussed on the eye at a wider aperture than f6.3. Anyway, it is upto the photographer to look through the viewfinder, press the dof preview button and decide which aperture is right. At times one does it by instinct as well.

I have said it earlier in my previous comment. The critical focus in this image is behind the eye. I am not sure it was intended that way, as when you blow up it becomes apparent. However, as you have mentioned that this is a image that has given you many print sales, you would consider it successful. At times well known artists can get away with murder. I mean even if an image is soft, people may think that it is designed that way, if comes from a very reputed artist.

In BPN or for that matter in any other online critique forums, people strive to offer their views. You may accept wholly or partly or completely ignore it, as per your convenience. The way the Sun picks up water (read evaporates) from even the muddiest of the places and leaves the rest, similarly one should try to accept the good things - as he or she sees it - and leave the rest.

I am sure you won't mind the frank comments. I do like a number of your images. Look forward to more.

Cheers,
Sabyasachi