I was wondering whether bird/ wildlife photos always need to be taken at the subject's eye level? (with the obvious exception of flight shots)
For example I took the photo below at a local reservior whilst on the top of the bank, this was a precursor to attemping an approach at a lower level. Unfortunately before I could retreat and attempt the low angle approach a group of coots came along and the two Redshank moved off, went into feeding mode and the opportunity lost.
Now I ask the question partly because some of the best opportunities I get for photographing Herons and Egrets (in my local area) are all from hides on nature reserves which are well above the water, with no provision for lower level access.
And at other times when I am able to go low in attempting to make an image there are ugly background elements which could be most easily removed with a slightly higher angle of capture.
So I realise the eye level thing is the ideal, something to strive for, but can some photos still work if they don't obey it? Please let me know your thoughts.
In most cases, the lower perspective is more intimate and compelling. But, there are many times when it isn't possible and you can still get a good shot, or even better to shoot at a higher angle. Reflection pictures are a classic example of the latter. Too low of a shooting angle, and the reflection is elongated and distorted.
The length of your lens makes a difference also. The longer the lens, the less the need to lie on the ground like a reptile!
So, go low when you can, if it is possible and makes sense, but if there are other factors that preclude it, or make it undesirable, go for the best shot you can!
Angle of Capture Question
Reply With Quote
