The Perch

Hi Brad: Well, I solved the zero view problem! I'm always intrigued by "scapes" as well. The scene captured here is very nice. It speaks well to the eagle's life for me. I'm sure a LARGE print would showcase this much better. Even your 2400 px version doesn't seem to do any justice to the details of the eagle. I'll just imagine it.

Hey Keith,

Darn...was going for a negative record on the views and you spoiled it!

Agreed that even the 2400 pixel version doesn't give the full detail of this image. But you should see the full 4928 pixel version - delectable detail, right down to the eye of the bird...and the tree is wonderful!

You know, as we go more and more towards electronic displays being the main means of showcasing images, I wonder if shooting style (or cropping) is starting to be affected - i.e., folks shifting toward closer views and/or crops just because they appear better online.

One "tragedy" of this is that if one knows what they are doing behind a computer, you can make a pretty "iffy" image look good at 720 (or 1200) pixels - and it can lead to sloppy shooting. I have heard many folks say "Awww, it doesn't matter if it's sharp at full resolution and 100% magnification because no one will see it that way..."

Just food for thought...

Brad

Brad, like this a lot! Dare I call it a "Bateman" image? Thanks for sharing and your comments on size.

Nice comp on this Brad. I am a fan of animals capes, but also rarely post them online because of what you just said. I think this group will appreciate the image....at least I hope so.

I think this is fabulous, and know how great it would be larger. The comp is nice and the entire image makes me want to be there to see both the eagle and the setting. So glad you posted it! Sharon

Brad I really like how the tree and stone work together and stand out from the greenery in the BG. The eagle really pops against it. I hope we aren't doomed to become sloppy. Part of viewing a photograph at 100% is the wonder of being able to see and preserve details that would have been lost to the moment.

I don't think you need to worry about zero views Brad. I think that more people will click/view if they can't see from the thumbnail exactly what the image is about. If the image is too obvious in thumbnail format it seems that some people decide at that stage they don't need to view it bigger.
I think this is an image that can be revisited several times and each time you'll see something you didn't spot before.

As soon as I saw the thumbnail I knew this was something different and I jumped all over it out of curiosity. NOT disappointed, love the low key approach, mouth watering detail and I can clearly make out the eagle amidst the awesome scenery. Gotta love the province of B.C.!!! I wonder a little if including a sliver of water at the bottom might ground the image a little better. I know there's water down there, so my mind questions why it isn't included I guess?!?

Hey all,

Thanks for the feedback - definitely appreciated. And I WAS kidding about getting zero views - I didn't expect that. And I won't hesitate to post 'scapes in the future. A few specific responses:

1. To John: You say "Dare I call it a Bateman image?" I consider that a big compliment - so thank you. Ironically, Bateman lives quite close to where this shot was taken - under 100 km away! You know tho', while I've always super appreciated Bateman's technical skill - he's almost like a "human camera" - his images have almost photographic detail. Personally I prefer my wildlife art (i.e, paintings) to be a bit more interpretive and have always thought Bateman should just give in and become a photographer! It's obvious many of his paintings are from photos - the backgrounds and bokeh (and DoF!) in them are characteristic of a long telephoto lens, and not how our eye sees scenes (our brain filters out background detail differently than a long lens shot wide open, which is at best a "proxy" for how our eye-brain filtering system works).

BTW...to those who don't know, Robert Bateman is probably Canada's most famous wildlife artist and definitely has some international notoriety (in a positive way).

2. To Gary: On your comment about why no water below: I see your point, but the reality is that it was low tide and what was below the rocks was a wave-cut bench (more rocks), and in ugly light. It was more of a distraction than an asset. While we're now talking about a theoretical image and scene that doesn't/didn't exist, I THINK (but don't know) that if there WAS water down there, the inclusion of it might have been adding one element too many to the composition...you know me...always leaning toward simple compositions.

One last thing: I fully recognize that different photographers have different goals and definitely a "different eye". While I do appreciate the challenges of capturing "full frame" (tightly cropped) and technically sound images of wildlife (including both furry and feathery ones), to me wildlife photography is about so much more than just getting close to your subject. I personally derive more satisfaction from capturing images that are slightly "out of the box" or uncommon, be they 'scapes like this one, or under very tricky lighting and often contrasty conditions (like my last owl post) - which often end up being dark, moody shots. But I know this style - if you can even call it that - definitely doesn't work for everyone...which is what makes photography so much fun...different strokes for different folks! But it's very gratifying that many on NPN can appreciate a variety of styles! Thanks!

Cheers...

Brad

PS: Absolutely no intent to devalue any "other" image style with my comments above...just trying to express my appreciation for OTHER's appreciation for a diversity of styles...but I may have expressed it poorly...I guess I'm kinda showing my Canadian-ness with this PS!

Photographs such as this one are my favorite type of images to create when the rare opportunity presents itself (at least to me). A beautiful tree-scape with the eagle as the shinning star. The large version is pleasure to explore, bet it does look nice as a large print. Nicely seen, masterfully captured and processed.

A Beauty Brad!!!

Ken Archer