One from a previous series of images of an encounter with a female Leopard & two, 3 month old cubs where she brought out her Impala kill that had been stashed away in the thick bush, taken towards the later part of the day, typical, in a shady part too! Not ideal having the clipped/cut tail, but that's the issue with a fixed lens, I could have picked up the other body & 300f/2.8, however I may have missed other shots in the process, so IMHO it was a trade off. Never really liked to push the MKIV (unlike the 1DX), so had to settle for a lower SS & wider DOF, however in an ideal world, more DOF to include the cub would have been better.
Steve
Subject: Female leopard with kill and cub (Panthera pardus)
Location: Botswana
Camera: Canon MKIV
Lens: 500f/4 HH
Exposure: 1/160s at f/5.6 ISO800 +0.33 stop compensation (FF on the width)
FWIW, Master file is 1.5GB, saved for web at 250kb - 67% IQ
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
Beautiful capture Steve. IQ is great; missing tail and hindquarters doesn't bother me. As you said, it is shame the cub is not in focus. My only other 'wish' would be that the leopard had raised her eyes a bit to give you some eye contact.
A difficult one.. Mother and even prey well exposed, luckily not much movement from her- so very sharp @ 1/160. All the techs spot on, but….can live without eye contact, curled tail not too bothering (except tip?) but the youngster ruins it for me. I was taught years ago never to have a OOF subject in front, at the rear it is acceptable, maybe I am still thinking IN my box?
I know the moment all to well, Sir.
I used this image as a screen saver today while at work.
My eyes are drawn to the cub, no matter how sharp and beautiful Mother Leopard is (and she is, indeed). Yet it is the cub's expression that grabs my eye, the little one who pays attention to this photographer his mother ignores. Because she has probably seen humans before, and he has not. He licks lis lips, perhaps he had a morsel of that fresh kill or maybe he is waiting for his turn. He is distracted by the click of the camera. He is also more beautiful than mom, because of his size and because his fur is fuzzy, but most importantly, because he is vulnerable- and therefore he appeals to us all.
Once again you live up to your words (motto): "Photography should evoke more than it describes". This image is not perfect yet it is so appealing to me because it is thought provoking (it does not conform to the rule "never have an OOF subject in front"). Another lesson from Mr. Kaluski I am happy to learn…You really can tell a story, Mr. K !!!
the little one does not bother me at all in front. Also that it is OOF, the subject is the adult for me. Many have a cuteness effect when they see this image, I think, because of the little one! The little cute vulnerable effect usually expressed by women, they wanna protect them, simple called "mother instinct" Men think different…maybe
Sorry Gabriela
My eyes went straight to the tail tip on top. Guess you left it in that we find it
Than to mum from there to little cutie pie showing me it's tongue.
For me personally it suits all, except the tail tip.
Very nice image and as always great details
Hi Steve, great image...I love the OOF cub especially since the tongue is sticking out...very cute. I also like the eyes on the mother as she tears off a piece...the tail does not bother me, perhaps toning down the white a bit would draw the eye less. Very nice capture!
Hi Steve - You know I like this one. Great low pov and IQ. I like the oof cub and the pose with the tongue out. Did you shoot any with the cub in focus and the mom oof for comparison. Clipped tail and tightness doesn't bother me. There's a white spot about halfway between the cubs head and the top edge that even I would probably clone out.
Hi Steve,
good job on this image with techs given, why not pushing the MK IV further?I know you do not.
Like the soft look in tones and colors, corresponding the shooting situation very well, taken from your intro.
The cub is a nice bonus , but not adding much for me, if it would have been a bit more in the focal plane would work, but not this way.The tip of the tail i would loose, too.
I think even at f 10, the cub would have not been in focus, WDYT?-
But i personally would be very happy to have this one, because i never saw this ,and have not even a decent image of this species, so i should stop complaining.
Dearest Anette, I must say, Andre's heart softened instantly when he saw the cub Most men don't really think differently, they just react in a different way because they are expected to do so, or they are brought up to be men, and therefore not show weakness. Some don't mind to show they have a soft heart for the little things, they do not really mind what other people think when they show emotion. And who can resist this little cub? He is vulnerable because he is dependent on his mother, because he is so small and he doesn't know the dangers out there yet. He looks weary to me in this image, or maybe curious to learn more about the man behind the camera. I am so taken with the cub that I haven't noticed the tail
The more I look the more I like this, Steve-it moves me, and that's all that matters
First off a fine image here Steve, with nice detail, however a real shame re,DOF, thinking you could have gone to ISO1600 would probably still not given you enough DOF for the cub,
I also find the white tail tip could go, as much as I don't like to clone very much, but otherwise you'd be a little tight on head room.
Would love to have seen that cub in focus.
TFS
Hi Steve,
I like the non-direct stare of the mom (mum) as she focuses on her meal. Robert A. often mentioned taking two shots of a scene and combining them during post. Don't know how you feel about that, but that was one of the first things that came to mind when I saw this image and the OOF cub.
Good Morning Steve,
just revisiting this file and having a look again.
I just stumbled over the technical PP details.
Question - why did you not go for 400 kb file size?
And i just wonder about master file size? Following "your" rules working a lot in Lightroom and keeping it simple in PS , with working mainly, if possible ,on adjustment layers (non destructive)..Those adjustments, as far as i know and PS tell me, adding nothing to file size.
You say you avoid working on pixel layers , simply you loose image IQ and/or destroy the pixel content. But from my understanding you have used a lot of pixel layers , otherwise you would not have that big master file ,right?
Would be interesting to know what you done on these pixel layers, if it is not "too" secret .
Hi Andreas, IMHO there is only so much you can do in LR, however this is the key platform and only certain things you can do in PS, especially using layers & masks.
There were about four adjustments to the overall colour, I just could not get the overall colour right in the initial file. You then have Curves adjs, Luminosity, midtone, expanded midtones etc on this one. I may also make a compound file along the way and switch off all the layers so you have a file with all the adjustments and keep building, but am able to go back to those switched off layers as I have everything there, hence having a PSD, but all tiffs are 16bit. 90% of all files are around 500-1000GB, but occasionally I will revisit a file and 'tweak' it, looking at something again after two days, a week or more can often highlight something, as your vision is not clouded compared to when you are working on a file initially, this is why I say either step away occasionally or leave it a day before posting as you can see things afresh.
You say you avoid working on pixel layers , simply you loose image IQ and/or destroy the pixel content. But from my understanding you have used a lot of pixel layers , otherwise you would not have that big master file ,right?
What I said was do as much in RAW as possible, likewise if required, combing two outputs or more from RAW and combining into a pixel based file to then work from, more perhaps suited for landscapes, but anything goes...
250kb is fine for me, even taking this file you can create a large 16bit tiff and the issues Anette has had recently, why add more help to those who 'lift' images from these social sites. As you can see, not much IQ lost in the resizing too, you have seen my RAW files so you know what I'm working with.
Now I need to load up the car another long drive, so will answer you later if required.
cheers
Steve
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
Great image Steve, nice colours detail and low pov. The only thing bugging me is the tip of her tail coming in from the top of the frame, with her tail leaving the fram and then coming back in again this just doesnt work for me, i would possibly take about half of the space off the top to exclude the tip of the tail. Just my thoughts, hope you are well!!
Hi Steve,
thank you very much about your info, i have seen your RAW files and know how they look like .But that was not the biggest question.
I understand roughly what you mean by Lightroom as key platform , even if you use lets say 10 smart objects from lightroom with various adjustments made in lightroom, which you can alter later , as they are still in RAW.
You will end up with a file size roughly 1000 MB in size, each layer of the MK IV in 16 bit is 100 MB in size, and all the adjustment layer for color /contrast.
Oh **** , forget what i said , i forgot the numerous masks you and i use, now i understand stupid how i am, wanted to be clever, ending up as an idiot…………..
Hi Steve, sorry for being late to the party. Lovely image with great details of Mon and the kill. The OOF cub does not bother me as there is enough details here for us to see his expression and cuteness. The clipped tail is an issue, but it see why you left the tip in. Without the tip, then the image is kind of incomplete. With it, yes, you have a clipped mid section of the tail, but you have the end and one can imagine the missing piece. I can see why the 200-400 would be such a great tool for situation like this. Loi
Hi Steve, excellent IQ on mom, and you have the colours spot on. The DOF on moms face and the part of the kill works well, and Im fine with the cub being OOF. If you were 'parked' at this sighting, Im sure you tried various comps. Its easy to say in hindsight, but cutting off a bit of the paws to have the tail in the frame may have worked, even though it would have fallen out of the DOF range.
Lovely moment and clarity Steve. All been said already - if mine I would lose the tailtip via a slight crop from top and RHS.
No more of these for you unless they are REALLY close now that you have the 200-400 LOL