Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Moonrise  (Read 2961 times)
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6230



WWW
« Reply #20 on: October 26, 2010, 11:35:19 AM »
ReplyReply

However, say I see a brief glimpse of a wild animal and capture it in perfect focus, color, etc. ... but because of the fleeting moment I didn't quite place him as well as I might have ... or if I didn't get quite close enough to fill the frame ... I will crop the photo and keep the amended work.
Jack

Jack, I certainly can't disagree. The same thing's true of street photography. You can't exactly plunk down a tripod and set your camera on mirror-up. On the other hand, I think that with enough practice you can learn to frame very quickly. Here are a couple examples of the kind of "wild animal" shot you're talking about. Neither of these is cropped. In the spirit of full disclosure I do have to admit I've missed a lot of these, but they all were clean misses. None of them were situations where cropping would have helped.
Logged

JohnKoerner
Guest
« Reply #21 on: October 26, 2010, 11:58:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Jack, I certainly can't disagree. The same thing's true of street photography. You can't exactly plunk down a tripod and set your camera on mirror-up.

I can see how that would hold true also ...




On the other hand, I think that with enough practice you can learn to frame very quickly.

Agreed. More than that, just as the true pro in nature photography will learn all the nuances of his environment well enough to position himself to get a good shot ... even before his intended subjects arrive ... I would imagine this would also be true of a street photographer. Thus, rather than being "surprised" by the moment, they are prepared for it.





Here are a couple examples of the kind of "wild animal" shot you're talking about. Neither of these is cropped. In the spirit of full disclosure I do have to admit I've missed a lot of these, but they all were clean misses. None of them were situations where cropping would have helped.

I like the first image quite a bit, and there is enough interesting detail in the wings, the light, and other elements of the capture to make me very forgiving of some of the secondary (and less interesting) elements of the watery background. Cropped, I would think it would be even more compelling.

The second image is just okay. It's a bit too close, and the background too ordinary, to inspire me a lot ... so I agree, no cropping would help this image become extraordinary.

However, with the first image, while not perfect it still demands that someone stop and look at it longer than usual ... and I would imagine more people would be inclined to "chimp" over it (ooh!-ooh!) than not Smiley

Jack




.
« Last Edit: October 26, 2010, 12:00:43 PM by John Koerner » Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6230



WWW
« Reply #22 on: October 26, 2010, 04:34:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Jack, That's an interesting response. How would you crop #1? The sunspot and the rays that bounce out from it need space. The only thing I can see that might improve it would be to clone out the bright spots to the right of the bird's beak. Maybe I could just crop off his head. That would turn it into sort of an abstraction. What I was after in #2 was the bird rising out of the water without any distractions. That's exactly what I got. But I'm not all that interested in birds either. I only shoot them when I'm in Florida and haven't gone into one of the nearby towns where there are people to shoot.
Logged

JohnKoerner
Guest
« Reply #23 on: October 26, 2010, 04:49:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Jack, That's an interesting response. How would you crop #1? The sunspot and the rays that bounce out from it need space. The only thing I can see that might improve it would be to clone out the bright spots to the right of the bird's beak. Maybe I could just crop off his head. That would turn it into sort of an abstraction.

I'd probably crop it like this:



Admittedly, it is easy to find flaws, but the strength of the image is the wings and the transparency that the sunlight brings to them. They're like a magnet to the eyes. Try as I might to look for flaws, my eyes always seem to be drawn back to the shadows and light surrounding the wings and body.

What hurts the image most, to me, is the debris on the water and the shadows of the trees by its head.




What I was after in #2 was the bird rising out of the water without any distractions. That's exactly what I got. But I'm not all that interested in birds either. I only shoot them when I'm in Florida and haven't gone into one of the nearby towns where there are people to shoot.

#2 is the cleaner shot, no doubt, but there is nothing particularly riveting about it. It's a nice shot, but it's a bit too close ... the water which forms the background is blank uninteresting, and the pose of the bird is not as dynamic as in the first photo (nor is the light either).

So it may be the cleaner shot, but it's not as captivating, not to me anyway.

Jack




.
Logged
jeremypayne
Guest
« Reply #24 on: October 26, 2010, 05:36:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Jeremy, Though I'm not sure, it seems to me in one of our discussions you mentioned that you were shooting with a D3. If so, you can set the camera up for a 4 x 5 AR, though you're throwing away some pixels if you do that.

I've got a D700, so I can't do that like the D3 does.

Here's the original, intended crop for the first image.

Logged
Christoph C. Feldhaim
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2509


There is no rule! No - wait ...


« Reply #25 on: October 27, 2010, 01:00:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Here's the original, intended crop for the first image.

This is quite exactly how I would have cropped it.
I find it much stronger like this.
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6230



WWW
« Reply #26 on: October 27, 2010, 07:08:54 AM »
ReplyReply

No way.
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #27 on: October 27, 2010, 09:36:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Have to agree with Russ; squaring it up like that has taken away any drama that the quiet picture was capable of offering.

It's the fact that, visually, vertical 1x1.5 formats are difficult to fill that makes good ones come to life. Your last shot just turns it into a still pond; the full shot brought visual excitement to the same situation. It's also a problem I eventually associated with 6x7, but, perversely, not with 6x6.

Rob C
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6230



WWW
« Reply #28 on: October 27, 2010, 10:13:02 AM »
ReplyReply

What hurts the image most, to me, is the debris on the water and the shadows of the trees by its head.

Jack, Again, as Mike once said, we all get to have our opinion. My opinion is that the crop doesn't improve the picture, but, that's my opinion. I agree about the debris and shadows, but with this kind of photography you take what's there. The sunspot was the clincher to me and I got lucky enough to be able to get that guy just as he passed the sunspot. It's conceivable that extensive work in Photoshop might get rid of the shadows and debris, but would it be worth the trouble? The picture is striking because of the sunspot and the backlight through the wings, but it's not one of my favorites, mainly because I'm not that interested in birds.

Quote
So it may be the cleaner shot, but it's not as captivating, not to me anyway.

I don't think I'd use the word "captivating" with reference to that picture either. But I do like the detail in the bird. My point was that with enough practice you can learn to frame quickly.
Logged

Bruce Cox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 680



WWW
« Reply #29 on: October 27, 2010, 11:26:58 AM »
ReplyReply

I've got a D700, so I can't do that like the D3 does.

Here's the original, intended crop for the first image.


    I very much enjoy the image in the original crop and prefer it to the full frame.  Bruce
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad