Fawn

[Marina Scarr]

This 5 day old fawn was photographed earlier this year, and I am just now getting to the processing. The adult left it all alone for hours in the woods. You can tell how dark it was by the speed of 1/40th of a second. It must have wiggled its nose just a little b/c I see a little motion blur. Every 45 mins or so, the fawn would get up and lie down again to reposition itself. It was a joy to watch and photograph, and it paid no attention to me at all. This is almost full frame.

Canon 1D3, Canon 100-400L @ 400
F5.6, 1/40sec, ISO 640, manual mode
Feisol tripod, Mongoose 3.5a head

C & C always welcomed and much appreciated.

Marina Scarr
www.marinascarrphotography.com (http://www.marinascarrphotography.com)

[Ofer Levy]

Very sweet!! Maybe a tiny bit tight in the frame - especially on the sides.

[Roger Clark]

Marina,

Wonderful image in nice soft light. While tight in the frame. depending on what is around, if clutter (like near the tail), I would keep the crop. Otherwise I agree it would be interesting to see more of the environment. One thing, with the light on the back, the eye and face are relatively dark. I suggesting lightening the face.

Roger

[Ken Watkins]

Cuteness personified, I agree with the above comments regarding space and light, but very happy with this as is:cheers::cheers:

[Harshad Barve]

May be little tight if mine , cuteness alert all over
TFS

[Rachel Hollander]

Marina - very cute. I agree on it being a little tight but you handled the low light well. Did you get any when it was standing?

TFS,
Rachel

[Marina Scarr]

Thank you everybody for your comments and critiques. I am posting below the full frame photo and would appreciate you weighing in with thoughts about my crop and how I might improve on my original post. As I think Roger suggested, I have lightened up the head and neck just a tad. I am thinking maybe I could have left it full frame but not sure about that branch in the bottom of the frame.

Rachel: I did get some shots of Bambi standing up, but they weren't as sharp as I would have liked b/c it was so dark. For some reason, he also seemed to turn his head away whenever he stood up.

Thank you all for your help. I really learn a lot in this forum!

Marina Scarr
www.marinascarrphotography.com (http://www.marinascarrphotography.com)

[Rachel Hollander]

Marina - I don't mind the branch at the bottom. It's blurred slightly and just part of the pile of brush. However, you could crop it out and still leave the additional room on the side. For me, the tightness in the OP mainly is on the sides. The lightening looks good.

Rachel

[Steve Kaluski]

Marina a cracking shot of Bambi which certainly conveys the CUTE factor. Personally I would have liked more space all round too, to allow the subject to breathe in the frame and if possible an even lower POV. Having foliage etc OOF at the foot of the image and a lower POV I feel gives a more intimate feel, especially if you are almost at eye level with the subject. Both posts have their own merits and perhaps I might swing towards the OP, it's all down to how we see it and what you think best illustrates the scene. Nicely process with good detail where it counts.

Hope to see more soon.

TFS
Steve

[Roger Clark]

Marina,

Having seen your full frame image, I like the top and bottom crop of the original but full frame width of the repost. Nice job on lightening the head.

Roger

[Sid Garige]

Cute little guy in nice pose Marina. Very well done.

[Ofer Levy]

Repost (full frame image) looks just right to me - won't crop off the top or sides. Like the brighter face.

[Ken Watkins]

Marina,

I think you should fully utilise the extra space on each side as shown in the repost. The slight crop is not really having much effect on the "pesky twigs" in the left hand corner, but I might try to tone down the "bright patch" just above them. Still unbelievably "cute" though.

[Ofer Levy]

Hi Marina, here is a repost with some boost in levels/contrast/colours and some lens blur applied to the BG and FG. WDYT?

[Steve Canuel]

Sounds like a nice moment to experience and photograph. While I like the OP, I think the repost with just the touch of extra room works better. As Steve K. alluded to, the additional OOF FG gives a more intimate feel of a lower POV.

[Dumay de Boulle]

Very cute and the repost looks good for reasons mentioned above!

[Marina Scarr]

Hi Marina, here is a repost with some boost in levels/contrast/colours and some lens blur applied to the BG and FG. WDYT?

Thank you for working on my picture, Ofer. I do like what you have done, esp the blur in the FG which really lends itself to making Bambi stand out. Thank you for your time.

Thank you to everyone for your critiques, comments and advice. It is very helpful to me!

[Roger Clark]

I too like Ofer's repost, but I find the bottom OOF area distracting. I would darken it so the eye is drawn away from the fawn.

Roger

[Stu Bowie]

Cute little Bambi Marina, and I like your repost. Good detail for such a slow ss, and I also like what Ofer has done.

[Morkel Erasmus]

Too cute Marina! I second the thought Roger voiced of leaving the width on the sides but cropping top and bottom as in your OP.
You could also have zoomed out slightly :e3, or moved back? What were the options? :bg3:

[Marina Scarr]

Too cute Marina! I second the thought Roger voiced of leaving the width on the sides but cropping top and bottom as in your OP.
You could also have zoomed out slightly :e3, or moved back? What were the options? :bg3:

Hi Morkel: I took a # of pictures over a 2 hr period from different vantage points but I think this is my favorite. The fawn for the most part stayed tucked away in this spot and it was very dark so my options were few and I wanted to move as little as possible. I have others which are zoomed out and I will post one of them as well but I feel the BG & FG are even more distracting in those. That said, this IS the type of environment in which they live out the first weeks of their lives in the area where I photograph them. So as much as the FG and BG may be distracting, that is the story.

[Ken Watkins]

That said, this IS the type of environment in which they live out the first weeks of their lives in the area where I photograph them. So as much as the FG and BG may be distracting, that is the story.

I could not disagree with your comment, nature rarely provides a technically perfect setting:cheers::cheers::cheers:

[Marina Scarr]

I could not disagree with your comment, nature rarely provides a technically perfect setting:cheers::cheers::cheers:

Ken, I think you misunderstood me and/or I didn't make myself clear. I completely agree with you. In this particular case, it was much less perfect than normal. But all of the distractions were a part of the overall story. That is what I was trying to say.

[Ken Watkins]

Marina,

It seems I have not made myself clear (yet again:2eyes2:), perhaps I should have said I agree entirely with your comments. Ok it is abit of a nuisance that you do not have the [erfect surroundings, but this should in no way distract from the overall pleasure that anybody should get from the subject. IMHO, the image is what counts, petty distractions should be capable of being ignored:S3: