Resonance and the Cute Factor
This post is partially in response to an exchange I had with Phil Hodgkins on my recent Humpback Whale post...something he said got me thinking...thanks Phil!
There's a darned good reason why many children's plush toys are modeled after bear cubs (those fluffy teddy bears) - the real McCoys are just so darned cute! And so, so full of personality...
I consider myself to be a conservation photographer first, and a wildlife photographer second. A lot of the wildlife images I shoot are destined for some form of use in conservation campaigns, either by selected conservation organizations or even sometimes "just" on my website. It's my belief that wildlife images CAN be effective in influencing public opinion on conservation issues, but only if the viewer somehow identifies with the subject. Another way of saying this (CAUTION...major buzzword alert!) is that the image has to strike a chord with viewer...it has to somehow resonate with them...they have to be able to relate to it, etc. I strongly believe if you are able to capture an animal's personality or an expression that elicits an emotive response in the viewer the image has a whole lot better chance of influencing their behaviour (including their support for a conservation initiative) than if the image is just an image "of a" critter.
I photographed this cute little grizzly bear in a region of the BC coast known as the Great Bear Rainforest. Just prior to snapping the shot the little devil had been amusing him/herself by chewing on those grass seed heads that it has corralled in its claws. I snagged some shots of it chewing on the seeds but waited (and, it seemed, waited and waited) until the cub looked up at me and, on some level, made contact with me. And that's when I captured this shot. I'm not sure exactly what this look and expression conveys to me (Coyness? Shyness? Curiosity?), but he/she is definitely pretty darned cute! And almost everyone I have shown this image to has reacted to it quite positively - and certainly much more positively than they do to the images of the cub chewing on the seed heads.
Can cuteness alone carry an image? I'm not sure there's a firm answer to that - there has to be SOME technical merit to the shot. This shot is OK technically but not what I would call outstanding. It IS sharp where it counts and there's an interesting triangular thing going on with the in-focus (vs. out-of-focus) elements (something Lon is sure to notice!). In a perfect world I'd prefer the background to be more out of focus and softer, but the short distance between the cub and the background left me with little control over the background. But most viewers (except image critiquers!) rarely get beyond the face and the cuteness! So...I think in this case, the image is technically strong enough but the cuteness factor tips the balance in favour of the image working.
A final comment on this image. I spent a LOT of time tweaking the mid-tone contrast on this image - particularly in the head and facial region - before it "came to life." And, when I think about it, I spend more time tweaking and adjusting the mid-tone contrast in my images more than I do on anything else. Sometimes - even often - I do it through blending exposure "versions" derived from multiple raw conversions (with different exposure settings). And, after I've got the midtones close to where I want with exposure blends, I often use a product called "Lightzone" to further "explore" the midtones of the image. So if I have a "secret" technique in my post-processing (which I have been accused of having and hoarding) it's this - careful attention to mid-tone contrast. Now I just have to remember not to tell anybody about that...
Subject: Brown Bear (
Urus arctos) cub looking cute
Location: Great Bear Rainforest, BC, Canada
Camera: Nikon D3
Lens: Nikkor 600 mm f/4 VRII lens - handheld from floating Zodiac
Exposure: 1/200s at f5.6. ISO 400. -0.33 stop compensation from matrix metered exposure.
Crop: Full frame vertically (original capture horizontal) with about equal cropping off both sides
As usual, more info about the image (including more processing details, etc) available here on my website:
http://www.naturalart.ca/galleries/latest/.
Comments & critiques welcomed. Probably better to view larger version first...
Cheers...thanks for looking...
Brad
Comments
12 commentsThe vegetation in front of the bear works because it is being clutched by the claw/paw so to me it becomes part of the image - rather than a distracting element. A very nice scene, though a touch centered for my tastes.
A little off topic
Very interesting artical Brad, very informative, but is the software that much better in terms of control & detail compared to the almost same feature in PS, WDYT?
TFS
Steve
PS Might lift the way you present the techs if you don't mind.
Jagdeep Rajput
Thanks for the feedback - a few responses:
1. Luke: re: "...though a touch centered for my tastes" - I experimented with an off-centre placement of the bear's head but this resulting in clipping of the rock, which didn't work for me. Trade-offs!
2. Anand: re: "Do you have any pics of coastal wolves?" Nope. Have heard them howling many times (including from VERY close by), but have never actually seen one out there (have seen and photographed lots of them closer to home, but not in the GBR).
3. Steve: re: "Might lift the way you present the techs if you don't mind." No problem - go for it.
4. Steve again: re: "...but is the software that much better in terms of control & detail compared to the almost same feature in PS". Both Lightroom and PS are critical in my workflow, but after much testing I won't use them for raw conversions (wish I could, would make my workflow MUCH smoother). In depth (long-winded) explanation available here, two critical sentences in that explanation are this: Can I get output similar to that of Capture One Pro when using Lightroom or Photoshop? Sometimes...but it's my experience that when using Lightroom it takes many more image adjustments (and about 3 times the number of "clicks") to get there.
5. Jagdeep: re: "But I do find the BG somewhat distracting". Yep, I agree - background not what I wish it was.
6. Barbara: re: "It's almost like an outdoor studio shot of a grizzly bear cub". Thanks - some may not like that look - lots of different tastes out there. MOST of that comes from the work on the mid-tone contrast...(that secret I won't reveal
Thanks again...
Brad
Nice image and interesting commentary as always. I do agree that the background isn't perfect but the cuteness more than makes up for it!
cheers for sharing,
Billy
Great shot and as always, great back story.