Camera: Canon 20D - Exposure: 0.003 sec (1/400) - Aperture: f/10 - Focal Length: 1200 mm-
ISO Speed: 200 - Exposure Bias: +2/3 EV - Exposure Program: Normal - Metering Mode: Ctr Wtd Avg - Color Space: sRGB
Shot near Eco Pond at Flamingo, Everglades NP in January. Cropped from horizontal. Cloud cover enhanced in Photoshop.
I'm looking for feedback regarding the photo in general, but also about the big change I made in the sky. Is this a "frowned-upon" or an "acceptable" thing to do?
To show details in the sky is ok.Try to give your subject a llitle more room (canvas)
It might be a little hard but try to reduce the shadows under the wings.
If not, you could look at it as a case study and try to improve on the field next time with the feedback you get here.
Hi David,
I'm not sure what the "rules" here might be concerning posting of nature images that are changed. But, I would like to comment that the intense sky looks artificial to me. (However, it is a striking image because of that change.) To me a more subtle sky would look more natural.
I like the pose and eye contact. It needs a bit S/H to bring out more details in the shadows. As for the BG, I'm not too crazy about it since it looks too much like a composite. If you like the cloud pattern, I would blur it. Overall, I wish for more space around the bird.
David--as a compositional unit the bright blue now overwhelms the bird. Was the bird your main intentional subject or was it the sky? If it was the sky then you need more of it in the frame, but even still if you do that the comp would not really rock. The bird is contrasty. You could work on that sucessfully in PS. The talons are what I personally would go for as the main subject in this shot. They're big , impressive, closer to the edge of the frame--therefore having more unit power, and right up in our faces. You might even try and put the sky in B&W. Your definitely too tight on the frame. The bird should have the virtual ability to strech his wings or the viewer will get claustrophobic looking at him, and thats not someting a person wants to keep on expiriencing. So the shot will get the once over and pretty much get ignored anytime after that. This shot has a lot of different ways to go but as presented it has disturbing flaws.
Number one rule of a good composition my man---There must be ONE compositional unit to which all other units are subordinate and supporting to.
Last edited by paul leverington; 02-17-2008 at 08:43 AM.
Thanks everyone.
My plan now is to go back to the original shot and post-process it again from scratch keeping in mind all the comments. In the original, the frame was horizontal the sky was homogeneous bright blue.
I had a devilish time with the shadows. I'll approach them differently this time. I'm trying to internalize and make automatic so many "important principles" and "muscle memories" that adding the "one compositional element" principle to the list won't be a problem.
The background looks artificial too me. There are too many clouds in the sky for the narrow viewing angle of a telephoto lens. It would have to have been taken with a wide angle lens placed very close to the subject. I think it is a very nice osprey portrait and would prefer the seeing the original simple blue sky background. I certainly think that added background to this image would qualify it as photo art and should be duly noted by the photographer.
Osprey
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
