White-rumped Sandpiper

[Bill Dix]

From JBWR on Friday morning. C&C always appreciated.

D7000, 500f4 + 1.4, ISO 1000, 1/1250s @ f/7.1 manual, groundpod (lying in the infamous JBWR muck)

[Stu Bowie]

Hi Bill, great low perspective, and just love the angled feeding pose and HA. The light looks nice and soft, and I do like the inclusion of the blues of the ripples in the water. Good detail and colours on the Sandpiper too. Maybe a bit off the top.

[gail bisson]

This is really nice Bill.
Love the water and the HA and IQ. The green of the BG blends seamlessly with FG.
Simple and calming image.
I am OK with the composition as is,
Gail

[Robert Holguin]

Wonderful shot. I really like the shooting angle, verh nice pose, great light, and i love the green water.
Well done.

[Sanjeevprakash]

Bill Great shot of the Sandpiper.Really liked the Low angle on this one. The green BG is very pleasing and gives a soothing effect.Nice work.

[Frank Schauf]

Perfect comp and bg, nice work, Bill.

[Shawn Zierman]

Very nice! Love the low angle, and a great species to capture...one of the less often
featured/photographed north american shore bird species imo.

[Satish Ranadive]

Simple and very very sweet image.Love it.

Regards,
Satish.

[Daniel Cadieux]

Congrats on getting down low in the muck! A superb low angle has resulted and quite an itimate perspective. Love the foraging pose, and the water still clinging on the back leg. I could see the subject higher in the frame. I just photographed some of these at point-blank range this weekend too, will post one tonight :-)

[Jim Crosswell]

I like the low angle, sharpness, exposure and green water. I could see a version with a little off the top but still a beauty as presented. Well done Bill.

[Josh Clark]

Great low POV shot of this species. The BG color really makes this guy stand out nicely.

[Bill Dix]

Thanks everyone for the comments. Moving the bird higher would have exposed some oof foreground muck, which is why I cropped the bottom as I did. I agree that a semi-pano version with a bit off the top is a reasonable alternative. Thanks for the suggestion.