Musk Ox 'animalscape'

[Steve Kaluski]

On reflection, to haul both the 500 & 200-400 lens would have been a good call, but when we set out that day we had no idea how far we may have had to 'yomped' across the undulating terrain which was still a DMZ area, still to be cleared by the Military.

Often folk feel that a 500 is purely for close up, hey they are oh so wrong, it also works well for the wider aspect too. This Musk Ox had the lovely Svånåtindan mountain range as the backdrop, very impressive and with the weather cooperating too - in turned out nice .

Thanks to those who posted a reply to the previous posting.

Steve

Subject: Musk Ox (Ovibos moschatus) with the Svånåtindan mountain range
Location: Norway
Camera: Canon 1DX MKII
Lens: 500f/4 MKII
*Exposure: 1/2000s at f/8 ISO320
Original format: Landscape, slight crop
Processed via: LR 'Classic' CC & PSCC2018

* Spot the flaw in the techs

[Sanjeev Aurangabadkar]

Hi Steve, a fine image and yes the 500 does a fine job dealing with wider shots. Love the habitat and the back drop. Nicely done. How do you carry those two lenses? Think tank bag??

[Steve Kaluski]

How do you carry those two lenses? Think tank bag??

Plus two 1DXMK2's in my Kata bag, sadly am now on the hunt for a new one, had thought about f/stop, but Customer Service sucks, maybe the TT Airport Accelerator, functional, but not a stunner in it's looks.

[Rachel Hollander]

Hi Steve - The wide look works very well here. Interesting colors of the vegetation contrasting against the blue sky and white clouds. The only thing I am not sure about is the near central placement of the ox.

Not to go off topic but as I am sure you know, Manfrotto bought Kata so the line is still available just re-branded.

TFS,
Rachel

[Steve Kaluski]

Not to go off topic but as I am sure you know, Manfrotto bought Kata so the line is still available just re-branded.

But sadly they don't have anything suitable.

[Glenn Pure]

Steve, a stunner of a frame - but I'd be disappointed if it was anything less from you! I can see where Rachel is coming from on the central placement but suspect you had no choice as I reckon taking in more on the right may have detracted? I'm guessing the colour of the meadow is quite natural but it does look weird to me. The colour on the rest of the frame looks really natural. The animal looks wonderful with that mop-shaped fur and the background is magic. As for techs, I'm wondering if it was your aperture/DOF choice although I think it works to have all the foreground meadow in full or near full focus. Maybe you'd have preferred the background to be softer? Easy to achieve in PP if you want to go there though.

[Steve Kaluski]

Well here you go folks, slightly different crop, but lees 'central'.

[Rachel Hollander]

Steve - I prefer the rp

[Jonathan Ashton]

Steve not at all keen on the first, it was in between for me, i.e. the surroundings and the musk ox competed rather than complimented, repost infinitely better from my pov.

[Stu Bowie]

Hi Steve, love the landscape perspective here, and good detail on the big fellow too. I like your RP, and can just see those clouds rolling in on your BG.

[Andreas Liedmann]

Hi Steve what a stunning animals cape from the color and tonal perspective ....... love it from that point.Nicely processed as ever .
The subject is special ...need to go on my own .
The two crop versions are ok , RP does work better . I do not know if you have tried other options for the subject placement in camera ? I would have rather liked to see the animal lower and more on the LHS . With two options ...more BG or more FG , just a matter of taste IMHO.
Still a great frame ...and a again i do love the autumn colors of the Dovrefjell or is it not there ?

Maybe i misunderstood you ...but you carried both big whites , if so tough guy

BTW what is the flaw ? The low ISO ?

TFS Andreas

[Steve Kaluski]

I do not know if you have tried other options for the subject placement in camera ? I would have rather liked to see the animal lower and more on the LHS . With two options ...more BG or more FG , just a matter of taste IMHO.

This is why I should have taken the 200-400.

BTW what is the flaw ? The low ISO ?

Are you asking me or telling me?

Shame only few have taken up the question.

[Andreas Liedmann]

I do not see a reason why not to compose a image i have in my mind with the 500 ,as you have wide view in the OP . Just placing the subject somewhere else in the frame .I would have understand if the Ox was too close for the wider view.Then the 200 - 400 would have been the better option

Asking you ...., but would tell you go 400 instead ....and you know where that is coming from ...LOL !!!!!

[Steve Kaluski]

Andreas here is the FF, the 200-400 would have given more flexibility as we did get closer, but having the option with a 1.4 was at times too much until the afternoon. But now off loading the 300f/4 and with Uncle Canons help, I did pick up the 100-400MKII for 'a song' just in case. As there was plenty of space all round I specifically went for central placement providing lots of options 16x10, 3x2 ...

BTW if you go to Dovrefjell you will need to organise a Guide, as you cannot move freely in the area without one.

[Stuart Philpott]

Steve it is a wonderful image so full of atmosphere,but your approach slightly confuses me. I don't really understand why you placed him central,I feel my thoughts run with Andreas's. Steve if it was me making the image I can see why I might do thius,but your skillset is way more advanced ,plus one looses detail when cropping Regarding the flaw ,well buddy I'm found wanting there too and I have been pondering for a day. I feel 1/2000 is dast enough if the ox is moving slow so the only thing I'm coming up with is higher iso for more dof ,rather than ss. I feel that theory is flawed because the mountain ridge is so much further away it would take a big step to get that in focus too and I am utterly unsure if one would want that in focus anyway. Hey ho probably found wanting but worth a crack , Steve good exercise this,I'll learn something here I'm sure and even though I feel I'm no where near getting in your head I have really enjoyed trying.

Mate I think placing the Q right at the end,not everyone is spotting it,I didn't first read,and I normally read the op pretty thoroughly .

lovely frame Steve the colours the atmosphere,the vegation all add to your muck ox

take care mate

stu

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi Stu, I'll try to explain my thinking right or wrong .

I don't really understand why you placed him central,I feel my thoughts run with Andreas's.

I'm bang on 50m away from the subject, to maximise the AF the central point is the most accurate IMHO. In addition I planned to crop in PP leaving plenty of room all round, but knowing the crop was not going to be hefty as I wanted to convey the vastness of the location.

I feel 1/2000 is dast enough if the ox is moving slow so the only thing I'm coming up with is higher iso for more dof ,rather than ss.

I knocked the dial on the back, the DoF was too much (f/8) and so f/5.6 was the original choice, going higher would reduce the amount of DoF.

[haseeb badar]

Hi Steve -- Pretty late on this but a never to be missed image for me. Absolutely fantastic , loved the colours and the subject is a super gorgeous one. I think the crop in your RP works best for me . Superbly done . TFS !

[Gabriela Plesea]

Superb "Oxscape", wonderful sense of space and the colours are breathtaking. A truly inspiring frame, dear Steve. Love the powerful presence of the subject, a creature of vast strength among flowers, rocks and silence.

The RP appeals to me most in terms of composition. Great tonality and detail as expected. Oh and I wish I could "bottle" that lovely sky...

Warmest regards,

[Stuart Philpott]

Hi Stu, I'll try to explain my thinking right or wrong .



I'm bang on 50m away from the subject, to maximise the AF the central point is the most accurate IMHO. In addition I planned to crop in PP leaving plenty of room all round, but knowing the crop was not going to be hefty as I wanted to convey the vastness of the location.




I knocked the dial on the back, the DoF was too much (f/8) and so f/5.6 was the original choice, going higher would reduce the amount of DoF.

Right or wrong wasn't what I was interested in......... the why's were.


Thanks Steve great reply,I was leaning the wrong way(DOF) Animalscape, I oft feel I can't explore Steve (might endanger subjects giving away locations. especially my hares),so I'm incredibly niave in this fascinating aspect of "representing" our subjects. Can't help it mate I worry for 'em here/
Framing now understood ,Steve I've mused center is most accurate and i'm not going to cut that much and use it oft,but i'm not always framing the big picture usually one much tighter.

Cheers learnt here thank you

stu

[Rachel Hollander]

Hi Stu, I'll try to explain my thinking right or wrong .



I'm bang on 50m away from the subject, to maximise the AF the central point is the most accurate IMHO. In addition I planned to crop in PP leaving plenty of room all round, but knowing the crop was not going to be hefty as I wanted to convey the vastness of the location.

.

Steve - You could have locked focus with the central AF point and then recomposed to place the ox in a more desirable position.

Cheers,
Rachel

[Steve Kaluski]

Steve - You could have locked focus with the central AF point and then recomposed to place the ox in a more desirable position.

Yes I know, but never liked it or use it, happy with what I did.