Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
One of the “rules” is to ‘leave room’ for the animal like Jonathan so wisely suggested. Having both head and tail in the shot is less important if it means the lion runs smack-dab into the edge. Birds especially need room to ‘fly into the picture’,
Another shot might have the lion’s eye (hopefully with a highlight) at the lower right third (rule of 3rds) and allow for the body to be off right.
I can see you worked to keep it from a bull’s eye shot; good idea. Next time give her room to chase an errant zookeeper or gazelle. NICE for a zoo shot.Lots of great advice from everybody, not much to add. The first question when you’re pushing that button is “what is the subject?”. Can it be isolated? Does it need movement? Are there too many distractions to make it a good photograph no matter what?
There are those who would say to forget about rules (photo 101)… listen to them AFTER you’ve shot a zillion shots using those “rules”. I.e., rules are meant to be broken but they’re there for a reason.I think you might have two shots here. Your cropped shot didn’t go quite far enough, IMHO. I suggest losing the portion of the tree where the light shows through the branches or Photoshop those specular highlights out and leave it mostly dark. Our eyes go to the light and (again, my opinion) there’s too much of it on the left.
There might be another shot on the right, cropping to leave just one of the fir trees… something to play with; it might not be there but it’s fun to try. The craggy tree has interest. Whether or not you can use it is THE question.
Thanks for sharing.MUCH BETTER; a totally different shot; I love it!
More of the same from me. Great shots of dragonflies don’t have branches racing through them; the subject is isolated. I have a thousand bird shots from Kenya to Alaska to Australia that have one thing in common with your shot; most folks don’t like ’em very much š I understand the emotion, Michael; I’ve lived it for thirty years.
“grounded” isn’t the right term… it needs ‘location’, otherwise it is what it is. IMHO A change of perspective could yield most anything… lots of possibilities… or not. Sometimes it’s just not ‘there’.
It looks fun to play with though… I’d like to see what you come up with.I agree w/@sabb all the way. There could be an entire coffee table book of photos from inside.
Great.
1. You found and isolated your subject
2. Rule of thirds makes it pleasing to the eye.
3. Changing the light further brings out your subject and eliminates most of the clutter; it’s FAR MORE pleasing to the eye.
Ignore those who sarcastically tell you to throw away the rules and listen to those who tell you what works. IF AND WHEN those “rules” (used and taught by the finest shooters in the world [like Joel Sartore of NatGeo]) don’t work for your shot; THEN THROW THE BOOK AWAY (just like the best shooters in the world like Joel do).
You’re the artist… good job here IMHO.It’s obvious you don’t have the ‘stretch’ to accept a critique without reacting like a spoiled child. Too bad, you have some great comments and your train shot is cool. It’s OK; you’ll grow up (too).
Apparently Jonathan didn’t realize there was a period after the “I agree… .” sentence. I went on to say that it’s far too busy [for a shot that of size.] There’s not enough DOF [for a shot that of size.] Cropping at every conceivable point, i.e., moving around doesn’t seem to help [for a shot that of size.] Black and white and a busy scene [for a shot that of size] calls for more contrast then (I feel) you can muster [for a shot that of size.] For my money it needs color OR contrast, the latter being tough to find here [for a shot that of size.]
In-camera exposure is ideal. Learning exposure as in m-l’s suggestion is always best. This picture CAN BE helped in post processing though; it’s the 2nd or 3rd best option.
I’m sure jonathan was being cute š picky, picky picky… as expected.
Having been on a gazillion workshops I can tell you of several recurring themes. Subject, lines, curves, floating objects, tree limbs touching the edge, etc., and “grounding.” I only learned about these things because of the gazillion mistakes I’ve made on each one of those gazillion workshops.GROUNDING things like buildings and trees are important to our brains. It’s obviously difficult to explain and I don’t know how to post an example here. BUT, in my experience(s), actually seeing that the building isn’t floating behind the grass gives the viewer a better result.
OF COURSE we’re pretty-darned sure it’s not floating. The bottom line is that seeing a grounding point would make it a better shot.
More vertical? Straight up and down? It pulls me in two directions instead of inviting me in.
It needs to be “grounded”. Where is it? Is it part of a run-down building (assumption that it is?) This looks like a phone shot you’d take to the glazier for a bid. It needs to be dead center, top & bottom, side to side or OFF center. This composition doesn’t do it for me.
Your positioning of the subject is right on. The background is fine but that tree needs to lose 90% of it’s little twigs. It’s not ‘art’ but it IS a good subject for the Tank.
OK, this sounds picky but it’s worked for me over the past 20 years or so:
If you look at the building you’ll see that it’s not actually attached to the earth in a convincing way. I realize that sounds silly but that thing needs to be grounded. Also correct the exposure with levels. I downloaded it and hit level, auto and kapow! Great.
I can smell how fresh the air was that day and THAT’S a story in itself!This is a tough one. It’s obvious that you want this train to do two things. But there’s a disconnect in my brain with what looks like a train chugging straight by me… but wait! There are weeds and grass growing around the tracks and engine… both stories are impossible; erk… brain says STOP!
I once had an instructor tell me that “flow” is vital in nature shots [There are obvious exceptions.] ‘Nature doesn’t stand still; your eye needs to flow in, around and eventually out, having been entertained in the meanwhile.’ The weeds puts the brakes on this one for me despite how cool it is.
There might have been a different shot… perhaps from the side. The Little Engine that Couldn’t?
Fun shot for sure.Click on the shot for a bigger view on the shooter’s page.
