The ORIGINAL Water Bed!
A "not-a-bear" from my recent trip into the Great Bear Rainforest of BC. In this case, it's the harbor seal variety of "not-a-bear"!
When I saw this harbor seal chilling out in an estuary in the Great Bear Rainforest my very first thought was "...so that's where the idea of a water bed came from!" While it appears like this seal is somehow floating on water (with an almost unbelievable amount of its body above water), it's actually being supported by a submerged log that just got covered by the rising tide. Objects for seals to rest on aren't always in ready supply, and once a seal finds one, they are often very reluctant to give them up - just like this guy is showing here...
Subject: Harbor Seal (
Phoca vitulina) just chilling on the water...
Location: Great Bear Rainforest, BC, Canada
Camera: Nikon D4
Lens: Nikkor 400mm f2.8 VR - hand-held from floating Zodiac. VR on and in "Normal" mode.
Exposure: 1/400s @ f3.5; ISO 250. -1.0 stop compensation compensation from matrix-metered exposure setting.
Crop: Moderate- this is about 80% of full frame
As usual, more contextual info about this image - including processing details - available on my website, right here:
http://www.naturalart.ca/galleries/latest/.
Comments and critiques welcomed - probably best to view the larger version prior to doing so!
Cheers...
Brad
Comments
12 commentsGreat title on this one and, as usual, all the techs and composition aspects of this image couldn't be better.
I really like the feel of this portrait and how it moves the viewer to appreciate the natural beauty and playfulness of the Harbor Seal.
Max
Great image with a "funny" pose, great to be different
Like the 'original title as well
Nice
TFS
Steve
Thanks for the feedback on this one - much appreciated!
Steve: You ask: "How do you feel about the highlight on the tip of the tail?"
My honest answer? Fine. I saw it during image processing, but more-or-less forgot about it after that. I doubt many would view it as a distraction or something that grabs one's eye - it's pretty faint. Sure, in a perfect world it would be nice if it wasn't there, but I think removing it could be described as "excessive and unnecessary sanitization of nature" - and I wouldn't do it. I'm guessing that the only time it would be noticed is in a critiquing gallery (and not by the general public) - but that's the idea of posting images here and definitely makes it fair game to comment on!
Cheers...
Brad
Steve