Juvenile Red-necked Phalarope Serendipity!

[Daniel Cadieux]

Photographed yesterday morning (Sept. 10). This is an uncommon visitor to our parts, and my first time seeing let alone photographing one! An unexpected visito, but that is not the cause of serendipity....

Last month I photographed a Lesser Yellowlegs in beautiful calm waters. It proceeded to bath no more than 12 feet away from me (you may have seen my thread a couple of weeks ago). Well, for the first time ever that time I filled the buffer of my card (I am not normally "trigger happy"). Well, as fate would have it, the Yellowlegs jumped up and flapped its' wings just as my camera was busy writing data and emtying the buffer!@$#!?$:bugeyed:

Anyways, I was photographing this phalarope and without any warning at all it jumped and flapped its' wings just as it entered good light angle and filling the frame nicely...and I had the reflex to capture it all, perfect full-frame composition no less, to redeem my previous mistake...and with a rare for our parts species to boot!!

Low angle created by being knees and elbows to the ground, in 4 inches of water, with my head and shoulders way down and butt sticking up towards the sun. Not a pretty sight, and Stephen, if you are reading this I am sorry for the view:t3.

Canon 7D + 100-400L @380mm, manual exposure, evaluative metering, 1/1600s., f/7.1, ISO 400, natural light, handheld, FF.

[Randy Stout]

Daniel:

Neat angel pose, low angle (getting muddy again I see :bg3:),sharp and nicely exposed.

I like the slightly offset comp.

Only the location of the far shoreline detracts a smidge.

Cheers

Randy

[Randy Stout]

Daniel:

I was curious how it would look without the far shoreline weighting down the wings, so did a quick and dirty shore-ectomy.

Not something I normally do, but purely from a compositional point, thought I would give it a go.

You could do a much neater job of course on the original.

Cheers

Randy

[Nancy Bell]

Wing pose fabulous, along with the nice sharp view of the side of the head with a gleam in the eye! I like the bkgd on both images but I tend towards the 2nd one as it is less competing. However the brownish layer in the 1st post complements the browns in the phalarope and adds a bit of warmth.

[Emily Norman]

What an excellent capture! Both versions are lovely but I also slightly prefer the second. Well done!

[dankearl]

The water and pose are really good, and as usual, great processing.
I do prefer the Repost.

[Grace Scalzo]

Well, I guess I am the only one that is not bothered by the background. It just didn't even catch my attention as the bird and the action are so good. On my calibrated monitor, I could stand a couple points more of brightness and might even consider a very slight desat of the blues as the color is so strong that it competes with the bird for my attention. Note the words "very slight" and "a couple points". :w3 An image to be happy about for sure.

[Arthur Morris]

Wicked sweet. I once shot nine rolls of a single juvie of this species in a puddle at Jones Beach. Kodak Fairlawn sent back nine rolls of plain acetate with nothing on them.... You gotta love that.

We you able to age this one? I would guess a juvie by the date.

[Cheryl Arena Molennor]

I really like the pose and I'm not to bothered by the bg line and I'm not a big fan of such major changes on a great shot as is. Maybe there is a way to fade into the color change softly? I sometimes use the clone tool on low opacity and steal from a different color to sorta overlay? Sometimes works for me but easier if you select out the bird then do it to the bg. Just a helpful suggestion you may not have tried. :)

[Sidharth Kodikal]

This is super sweet, Daniel. dof, sharpness and light are just perfect, not to mention the pose. I really like visible feet and the wavelets around them.
The shore is not a problem for me at all.
Congratulations on such a fine capture of a rarity - enjoyed your story too.

[RakeshDhareshwar]

Brilliant pose and sharpness here . Love the colour of the water here !!

[Randy Stout]

I just wanted to be clear that I am not advocating major changes in images such as removing an entire shoreline as I did in the repost. I did it to illustrate how various image components effect the feel and composition of the image. That knowledge can help in camera composition prior to pushing the button.

Cheers

Randy

[Cheryl Arena Molennor]

[QUOTE=Randy Stout;716834]I just wanted to be clear that I am not advocating major changes in images such as removing an entire shoreline as I did in the repost. I did it to illustrate how various image components effect the feel and composition of the image. That knowledge can help in camera composition prior to pushing the button.

Cheers

Randy[/QUOTE

Hey Randy. I hope I didnt offend you with my comment as it wasn't meant toward your work. You actually did such a great job on the repost and I did prefer it to the original if it was the way it was. I'm so on the fence about post processing and it is my own personal stuff. Please... no offence meant at all. I appreciate everyones input, suggestions and critiques as we all have our own way of seeing and expressing our art. Some we take and some we just think about for a while then maybe take and some we don't .:t3:bg3:

[Karl Egressy]

Both look nice but I would go with the original. Great work, Daniel.

[Stu Bowie]

Great story Dan, and well timed for the flap. Sharp where it counts, and your perspective looks great.

[Daniel Cadieux]

Thanks everyone for the comments!!

Randy, what you did to my image is what I would have hoped for in camera...looks very nice. When the phalarope was sitting in the water that is pretty much the BG I had, but when it jumped I moved up slightly thus introducing the far shore. In reality, it's not that there is a shoreline that sorta concerned me, but the fact it is skimming along the top of the wings. Thanks for the rework, looks great and gives me a "what if" sentiment:S3:

[Randy Stout]

[QUOTE=Randy Stout;716834]I just wanted to be clear that I am not advocating major changes in images such as removing an entire shoreline as I did in the repost. I did it to illustrate how various image components effect the feel and composition of the image. That knowledge can help in camera composition prior to pushing the button.

Cheers

Randy[/QUOTE

Hey Randy. I hope I didnt offend you with my comment as it wasn't meant toward your work. You actually did such a great job on the repost and I did prefer it to the original if it was the way it was. I'm so on the fence about post processing and it is my own personal stuff. Please... no offence meant at all. I appreciate everyones input, suggestions and critiques as we all have our own way of seeing and expressing our art. Some we take and some we just think about for a while then maybe take and some we don't .:t3:bg3:


Not at all Cheryl. I have very mixed feelings about image manipulation as well, and rarely do much, but I thought this strong image provided a good teaching point about your positioning and how the background falls.

Daniel added a nice note, and I am glad he took my repost in the spirit that was intended.

Cheers

Randy

[Randy Stout]

Thanks everyone for the comments!!

Randy, what you did to my image is what I would have hoped for in camera...looks very nice. When the phalarope was sitting in the water that is pretty much the BG I had, but when it jumped I moved up slightly thus introducing the far shore. In reality, it's not that there is a shoreline that sorta concerned me, but the fact it is skimming along the top of the wings. Thanks for the rework, looks great and gives me a "what if" sentiment:S3:

Thanks Daniel. I felt the same way about where the shoreline hit the bird, just seemed to weight him down. An alternative would have been just remove a small strip of the shoreline where it hits the wings.

Cheers

Randy

[Arthur Morris]

Hey Randy. I hope I didnt offend you with my comment as it wasn't meant toward your work. You actually did such a great job on the repost and I did prefer it to the original if it was the way it was. I'm so on the fence about post processing and it is my own personal stuff. Please... no offence meant at all. I appreciate everyones input, suggestions and critiques as we all have our own way of seeing and expressing our art. Some we take and some we just think about for a while then maybe take and some we don't .:t3:bg3:

Obviously I do not mind cleaning up images. :S3: I would surely agree that the decision is 100% personal and I have always urged that folks let everyone know what they did, i.e., full disclosure.

There is however one important point that folks often miss: once you remove a single blemish from the background of your image, be it a tiny black piece of plastic on an otherwise pristine white sand beach, you have stepped onto the slippery slope and therefore lose all right to criticize others who might clean up their images more aggressively than you do. (The you here is the collective you and my remarks are not at all directed at you.) If folks are gonna play God they need to be consistent. :S3:

[Cheryl Arena Molennor]

[QUOTE=Cheryl Molennor;716838]


Not at all Cheryl. I have very mixed feelings about image manipulation as well, and rarely do much, but I thought this strong image provided a good teaching point about your positioning and how the background falls.

Daniel added a nice note, and I am glad he took my repost in the spirit that was intended.

Cheers

Randy

:S3:

[Cheryl Arena Molennor]

Obviously I do not mind cleaning up images. :S3: I would surely agree that the decision is 100% personal and I have always urged that folks let everyone know what they did, i.e., full disclosure.

There is however one important point that folks often miss: once you remove a single blemish from the background of your image, be it a tiny black piece of plastic on an otherwise pristine white sand beach, you have stepped onto the slippery slope and therefore lose all right to criticize others who might clean up their images more aggressively than you do. (The you here is the collective you and my remarks are not at all directed at you.) If folks are gonna play God they need to be consistent. :S3:

Absolutely Art and by no means would I criticize those who do aggressively edit and I would never want the job of playing God whewwwweee no thanks.:eek3:. One of my best published images shot at a zoo was a great moment I captured yet there was a typical zoo rope going across the image. I couldn't just toss the image because it was such a special moment so I painstakingly cloned it out. It has been published a few times yet I have fully disclosed that .. This discussion will always be a big can of worms opened so I'm gonna pull the covers up and go to bed Heee!!!! Thanks Art for very educational sight and pleas all know that we are here to share our thoughts and advice to become better at what we love. I would never intentionally set out to offend anyone for there personal choices.:5

[Arthur Morris]

Cheryl, We are on the same page. :S3:

[Cheryl Arena Molennor]

Thanks Art and what a pretty page it is :t3:bg3: