A night heron by the waterfalls, but is it likeable?
Greetings, pious warbling wonderbirds! I tend to like my pictures, which is a good thing, because if I don't, then who will? I have no idea if I like this one. I guess I sort of do, but it also irritates me a little bit, although I can't say why. I would love to hear from you. Be vicious, if you like, it won't matter to me. No no, be gentle. But truthful! Anyhow, this b.c. night heron and waterfall picture was taken with a Canon 7D and 70-300L at 300mm, iso800, 1/640, f5.6. This is approximately 82% of the original capture...
Thank you for looking at this picture and thank you in advance for your jeers and pokes!
I do like the waterfall in the background and the rock. I can't imagine how he will find a fish where he is but maybe he has some learning to do. If I had any changes it would be to have him lower in the frame - less rock and more water above the falls. You often find the unusual and I like that.
Thank you, Laurie...I do have more room above, so I can try that. I wasn't crazy about the green water and so cropped some of it out...I'd like this shot a lot better if I'd had a lens with a 2.8 aperture, I think, but for now a 300mm f2.8 is only a dream...something like that...as it is, the waterfall's water is blurred in a way that I find unpleasant. Or, perhaps it could have gone the other way, maybe a smaller aperture, or even a very slow shutter speed? Obviously what's done is done, but I'll be curious to hear what people might have to say about that. If you were taking the shot, what settings would you have used?
I kind of like creamy smooth waterfalls in landscapes but those are hard to get with a bird in the photo. So I might have tried a lower shutter speed for a shot or two if the bird was there for a while and not moving around. I remember seeing a really cool photo of a green heron standing in water where the water was very smooth cascading over rocks. Would love to try that if the opportunity comes up but I think something less than 1/25 sec would be required to get it.
A 2.8 300mm lens is a dream for lots of people, I rented one once - very front heavy. I think I would rather have an f4.
Kudos for a different composition Jack. I personally like the water movement as it is, has a rather nice glass effect and I get a bit tired of seeing the usual extra milky water effect from slower shutter speeds, so I think your choice of settings was good. Looks like the ambient light may of difficult for exposure, so cant expect miracles, but I do thin you have done quite well
Hi Jack,
I am trying to like this shot but I am afraid I don't. It is just too busy and bright and the heron gets lost.
I would definitely take a large chunk off the LHS to reduce the amount of bright water.
Sorry to sound like a negative nellie...
Gail
Different strokes, as always! Gail: normally it's Negative NANCY, but Nellie's o.k. too. Graeme: I think I agree with you the most! Yes! I don't want to look at the heron either and also look to the left. Ah well! And Phil: many thanks for your kudos. I'm glad I posted this shot...most educational indeed...many thanks for your time and your comments, each of you! Much appreciated....
I do think that the background is more of a distraction than it is a compliment to the photo. I agree with Laurie and would have tried shooting this at 1/30" | f/8 | ISO 100. These herons are known for staying very still, so you might have been able to get away with it.
Interesting, Miguel, I shall try my hand at such things next time I see a heron on a rock by a waterfall. And it will happen again, believe it! This particular heron WAS staying very still, and the new IS makes such shutter speeds possible! A marvel!
Using a slow shutter speed might have been a sweet option here.
Another idea would be to try and get a lower shooting perspective
to get the heron to show against the darker water right above
the falls, while still showing the falls...without knowing anything
of the setting...maybe that would not have even been possible, but
if possible, the heron would have "popped" a lot more against that
color field vs the bright water fall, where the heron becomes just
a bit lost in comparison...at least in my mind's eye :)
Shawn, you're absolutely right. Unfortunately I was as low as I could get without falling off a cliff! A bit of a hard-to-describe scenario, certainly with my limited powers of description, but as getting lower was not an option and the light was what the light was, I spent some time snapping, all the while thinking "This just doesn't look right. And yet, there is a heron on a rock and there is a waterfall. Hmmm."
Before I throw this picture into the proverbial gutter and pee on it, I figured I'd burn in everything but the bird and crop a little bit off the right side...if anyone has any thoughts RE this version vs. the original, I'd be more than happy to hear them...
The bird's definitely not so offensive to look at now :)
This edit solves the main problem, it's now a pleasing photo to look at and a keeper for me.
That lighting and a smoother water flow would be fantastic, I'd expect.
I like both original and repost. I do not necessarily like a slower shutter speed with smooth water - just an option - I would have liked to try both but maybe at the time I would not have thought of it. Don't throw it away, great environmental and unique photo.
I opened the photo in PS and darkened the blues through selective color and adjusted the levels just a tad. Made those bright waters soften a bit and the bird become more prominent.....give it a try.
A night heron by the waterfalls, but is it likeable?
Reply With Quote
