- This topic has 12 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 2y, 7mo ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
-
-
-
Many thanks for your feedback, Diane & Jasenka! Unfortunately, the crop is because the albatross was close to the edge in the pic. It shared space with two giant petrels, the three of them occasionally being aggressive (the one against two) over the sharing of the food.
I have worked on the beak which was not quite what I remember. Added a little saturation, plus a bit more of sharpening. I did sharpen first time around, but whilst the feathers seem okay, the beak was not quite there. Hope okay now.
Have cropped a bit more, etc.
Know that I will not be able to enter it into a nature competition, because of some of the changes.
-
I think one of the things that frustrates me most with shots like this, is that wet feathers never look ‘sharp’ or even ‘clear’. So, I think you did well – specially in the 2nd version where you’ve sharpened things up a little. A bit faster shutter speed would have made it even better but hey, it’s a keeper regardless!
-
-
-
-
Many thanks for your feedback Tobie, Dahlia, Ken & Frank. Mistakenly, I thought that I had already posted this edit where I have added the top of the bird’s head and some extra sea. Hope you think that improves the image!?
-
-
-
Improvement, yes! One reason why, something I was taught. Clipping off an edge of a flower or the top of a head is fine, if it was intentional. For example here you had just a small amount of the head clipped. Did you mean to, or did you just miss? If you had cut more off we would probably assume that you meant to do so. In this photo it does not make a big difference, because it is an action shot, and the emphasis is on the excitement going one in the beak area, including the splash and the object in the mouth. Since it was a split second moment, a piece of the head missing , in my opinion, is not a major factor. If it were a still life of a flower or a portrait it might matter more. A close-up of a face, clipping might matter less than if it were a portrait where the hair is important, or including the whole head is important. If a person its standing or sitting. it might be fine to cut off just above the knees, but not at the shins. ( I have a post card off a cardinal sitting still on a branch. If a piece of the tail missing was missing that would not have been good. Cutting off most of the tail, bringing the head and body closer, would be a different look or composition and okay.)
-
Thanks Dahlia and Robert for your encouraging comments.
I do agree with you Frank, similar thoughts had crossed my mind, however I did think that adding the bit of the head missing would increase its appeal to an even wider audience. However, as usual I found that making the change took up more time than I estimated. Even more so, because later I enhanced further (to the version shown above) by adding a few bubbles, etc to the bare bit of head I had added – luckily, that turned out well 🙂
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
