Rainbow Bee-eater

[Jon Thornton]

I'm hoping that this shot will be a conversation starter. When is it a good idea to focus on something other than the bird's eye? Who does this successfully? Why would their images be weaker if the eye were the focus point?

Please note, I've raised all of these questions for fun and discussion. I enjoy questioning and discussing "rules", especially the ones we all take for granted.

Nikon D300, Nikon 200-400mm VR, Nikon TC-14E II teleconverter @500mm.
ISO 400, f/11, 1/125th sec.
Two Nikon SB800 flash heads both at 1/4 power. One from the left. The other from the right. Both triggered by Pocket Wizards.
Hide and tripod.

[David Thomasson]

When is it a good idea to focus on something other than the bird's eye?

Answer: Whenever there is something else in the image that is more compelling than the bird's eye. That something else can't be identified by "rules." You have to use your own eye.

Your image is an excellent example. Simply beautiful. (But I do wonder why you say that the eye isn't the focal point. That makes sense only if you think "the focal point" is determined by the "rule" of thirds.)

[Juan Carlos Vindas]

Hi Jon!

I don't find anything wrong with having your focal point on other place than the eye.
I see a great compo here as well as colors and details. My only nit is the noise on BG. Here is my version without it, I hope you don't mind.

[Jon Thornton]

Thanks David. For this shot, I probably should have zoomed out even further to carry DOF over the entire bird. I have however, seen great shots where the bird's tail is sharp, but the head is completely out of focus. As you said, if there is something more compelling in the shot, you should focus on that.

Juan Carlos. You are right. The background did need some NR. I should have done this myself before uploading, but I got a bit lazy.

[Axel Hildebrandt]

I like the pose, light and details but find the bird too tight in the frame.

[Rob Drummond]

Nice shot John. I agree with Axel in that it's a little too tight for me but you've done a great job getting that wing stretch/body twist that bee-eaters do quite regularly.
cheers Rob

[Jon Thornton]

Thanks Axel and Rob. I've got heaps of shots of this bird. Some are tightly cropped like this one. Some are a bit looser.

[DanWalters]

Great color and pose. Would like to see a little more room around the bird.

[Ramon M. Casares]

TERRIFIC, STUNNIG, SUPERB! Yes, I like it that much :)
Pose, light, detail, colors, species, all is just perfecto to me! Congrautalitons!

[Rafael Rodriguez Mojica]

I think is something preprogrammed in our brains to look for the eyes. For that reason th eyes should be focused. That doesn't mean they should be the focal point, though. In this case with an f11 you got both the wing and the birds eye into focus, and of course the beauty of the wing is the focal point. Excelent shot BTW.

[Jon Thornton]

Thanks Ramon and Rafael.

[WIlliam Maroldo]

Jon: I think there is confusion here about focal point and what you focused on during the taking of the picture. The focal point would be the main point of interest of the image. This is usually what grabs the viewers attention first. Whether you personally were trying to get the wing in focus, for example, this in itself this isn't going to make it a focal point. Anything that is substantially different than its surroundings would become a focal point, and often this technique is used on purpose. In this image there is the red of the eye, and no other red in the image. An obvious difference that stands out, and here you go; a focal point. Take a line of a number of cubes, and one sphere. The sphere would be the focal point. Often one element, much larger that other elements, or everything blurred except one element in focus, become focal points. What ever method is used a main point of interest is almost essential. It is what grabs the viewers eye first, and directs the viewer to additional elements of the image. By the way, well done photograph, technically excellent! Hope I've been helpful~Bill