Loon eating mud puppy
This image is copyrighted material as indicated, and is watermarked! Unauthorized use or reproduction for any reason is prohibited
Loons and More MI 06/'09
As always luck favors the prepared.
1Ds Mark III, 600IS W/1.4X
Manual (incident + 1 EV), 1/320 @ f/5.6, ISO 400
Post-production- LR2, CS4
See you where there is light, or at the computer
Best,
Chas
Hello Charles,
Great sharpness, detail and I really like the color of the water. The water-drops on the bird make the image for me. Very nice post; congrats.
Amazing texture. The eye looks so vivid.
I can see some jpeg artifacts around the beak probably due to compression.
fantastic shot.. everything seems to be in perfect condition. master shot.
just a quick thought of having some room arround can be a gr8 frame.
Simply, 100%!
Congrats!!
Now, please explain "As always luck favors the prepared"; how were you prepared?
Cheers Mate, Jay
The thumbnail did not do this justice. Great moment. Well exposed with good detail and comp well done
Simply awesome, Great clarity , sharpness
Thanks for sharing
Harshad
Being "PROACTIVE, rather than REACTIVE" I always try to eliminate as many variables as possible, and I am extremely goal oriented in my shooting. Exposure was set manually in camera, focal length and shooting angle selected for the specific task (head shot of loon feeding) prior to capturing the decisive moment.Originally Posted by Jay Gould
Best,
Chas
Last edited by Charles Glatzer; 06-18-2009 at 10:09 AM.
Amazingly sharp details and rich colors. Some adjustment will bring both out better.
David,
With all due respect the reposted image is un-natural to the way it appeared in NATURE.
Better depends on intent ;)
Chas
Last edited by Charles Glatzer; 06-18-2009 at 11:18 AM.
Excellent capture and super colours and detail
Chris Kotze
Mr. Photoshop Magician and Mr. Light (to distinguish from Gus - Dr. Painted Light :))David Thomasson: "Amazingly sharp details and rich colors. Some adjustment will bring both out better.”
Chas Glatzer“With all due respect the reposted image is un-natural to the way it appeared in NATURE.”
Interestingly, this takes the - do we change what we captured? - one step further.
Chas, you do make some changes as described in the Pileated with chicks post. If you will excuse the comparison/pun, it is kinda like being a little bit pregnant. You are willing to make some changes - do your changes in any way change the way you actually saw the image in the field? However, you are not willing to go as far as suggested by David.
David, while I like your repost, I can understand that given the distance from Chas to the Loon, the Loon in this setting was quite dark and he wants to keep it that way. You repost would be similar to a super long flash + Better Beamer.
Frankly, I like them both, and in this case I would opt for the original because that is what Chas saw. The sun simply wasn't shinning on the Loon/a long enough flash was not used to bring out the colors as David has done.
I agree, it depends on intent ... and other things.
Amazing catch, for both of you! Great light, detail, colors, prey, species and natural moment! Congratulations!
Jay,
It is simply my preference to maintain a bit of "as taken" with my images. I make no judgments or definitives, others can do as they please with there images. Every RAW image requires a bit of tweaking, even to get the image back to square one. Drawing lines in the sand is never a good thing.. the wind often blows the lines fuzzy ;). You can add a point source catch light on an overcast day if desired.. but careful observation a field will tell you this is highly unlikely in nature. I agree it does add a "spark of life" to the image overall impact. As creators/artists we should all be free do as we see fit.
Cheers,
Chas
Charles, I am a big fan of your work :)
I frequently review your work in an attempt to make improvements in my photography. This shot is excellent in every way.
With that said ... I have to ask if you used any NR on the BG?
Thanks,
Bill Sharkey
I think there's a constant tension between two ways of thinking about photography:
The first view: This is what I recall seeing "out there," and my job as a photographer is to render as faithfully as I can what I recall seeing "out there."
The second view: This is what I envision "in here." It doesn't match what I saw "out there." And yet, somehow or other, I find this internal vision more moving
or more beautiful or more elegant than what saw "out there." My job is to render my internal vision and and make it externally visible,
so that others can see what I see.
Some lean toward 1, others lean toward 2, and some vacillate between the two. I don't think there will ever be any resolution of these conflicting ways
of thinking about, and rendering, the art of photography. And so I say, to each his own.
Bill,
Thanks, glad to help.
I typically do not use noise reduction (NR) when processing images taken at or below 800 ISO, and I did not use NR with this image. I use an Edge Mask when sharpening, as this allows me to enhance edge detail without applying sharpening to smooth areas. When I do feel noise reduction is necessary I use a Surface Mask (inverse of Edge Mask), as this protects the edges already sharpened from the effects of noise reduction.
All of the above is applied in one push of a keyboard stroke, as an Editable Action incorporating Smart Filters, Blending Modes, Opacity, Masking, and more.
Warm Regards,
Chas
David,
Dare I offer a third view: To faithfully reproduce the image as envisioned when depressing the shutter. Be it through the application of shallow DOF, Selective focus, Slow shutter speed, Flash, etc.
I am not a photo purist (no such thing in my book, especially in the digital world), I will use whatever tools and techniques I deem necessary and at my disposal to render the vision as I see fit, not always as it exists. But, as an educator I do feel for EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES it is important to show the image as taken, least the techs and the image provided be misconstrued. This is the same reason I post all images in 2x3 proportions, as one would see when looking through the camera viewfinder. Sure some images may look better cropped otherwise, but I am trying to teach composition as it appears when taken. Making the best in camera image possible is key, and what my teachings are all about. That said, at seminars and on workshops I always additionally show participants how to use post-production to enhance images for maximum Visual Impact. And, I will often do this with my own images to the best of my ability...but when posting in an educational forum I believe in disclosure.
Is posting the taking aperture and shutter speed relevant if the image shown has been altered/corrected in EV through post-production without disclosure? Those not savvy enough to know that the image posted could not be possible at the numbers provided will I assure you be led astray.
To thine own self be true...I judge no one.
Best,
Chas
Last edited by Charles Glatzer; 06-18-2009 at 11:15 PM.
Well Done Chas. Great detail, great action, and great background. I don't know if I could ever be that prepared. ;-)
IMO, as a photographic artist the scene or resulting image should be what the photographer wants seen!
If you exercise "creative control" during the photographic process, the resulting images will in fact, be what you want your viewers to see.
Whether a faithful facsimile of the scene or the scene modified using "creative controls", it will still be what you envisioned.
Your photography is really exceptional and very, very inspiring Charles. This image conveys to me peace, serenity as well as the natural beauty of a bird I much long to see one day in my life. Your rendition of it to me is simply breathtaking.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote