Posted by dan elster on September 17, 2007 at 8:40 PM
Something I really want to work on is wildlife images where the subject is part of the landscape. I thought I had a real winner with this one, but am now undecided. Any thoughts from you landscape shooters?
Canon 40D, 1-400mm IS, out of vehicle.
f10-1/1600 of a second.
Posted by Jack Graham on September 17, 2007 at 11:53 PM
I'll take a stab at this Dan.
We've all been tempted to shoot big buck's when they are around, especially when they are looking at you so clearly. For me, they are just too far away. Even with a 1/5 tele on that 400 you might not get the image you really want. The image itself does tell us "where they live" however to me, the animals are just to smallin the image, and the backgrounds not defined eonugh.
I'd try cropping off the out of focus foreground and a a lot of the background (make it into a kind of a pan shot, and you might salvage this somewhat deer are nice and in focus and the eyes are sharp.
Now if there were a whole herd looking at you that's another subject.
Been there---done that!
JG
Posted by John Williams on September 18, 2007 at 1:29 AM
I think Jack has summed it up well.
Wildlife images as a part of the landscape work the best for me when, for example, the wildlife is either the main subject filling a lot of the frame, an anchor leading into the rest of the image, or as a small addition to a landscape that stands well on its own.
Posted by David Schoen on September 18, 2007 at 11:02 AM
I have tried this too. It seems that if you go over to the fauna or avian gallery, most of the photographers will say: "nice behavioral shot" and leave it at that. The only thing which seems to get high marks in both sites is "bird on a stick" or fauna with "OOF background". I like to see critters in context but most don't. It is frustrating. You had expressed interest in my bear shots. Here is a link to my flickr site where I posted images for members of our trip. So far there are 50 images.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/coho222/
there are at least 12 bear images so far. This trip involved sea kayaking about 40 miles from Quadra Island to Bute Inlet and the Orford drainage. It is at the Discovery Islands in British Columbia between the east coast of Vancouver Island and mainland BC.
Posted by Pradeep on September 18, 2007 at 6:15 PM
IMO - any habitat shot should very vividly depict the habitat and the animal subject - meaning there should be no OOF elements. The scene should be completely sharp and the point of interest should be drawn to one subject. The subject can either be a single animal or a group of them. I was never successful at taking habitat shots mostly because there were too many distracting elements in the photo.
Discussion
4 repliesCanon 40D, 1-400mm IS, out of vehicle.
f10-1/1600 of a second.
We've all been tempted to shoot big buck's when they are around, especially when they are looking at you so clearly. For me, they are just too far away. Even with a 1/5 tele on that 400 you might not get the image you really want. The image itself does tell us "where they live" however to me, the animals are just to smallin the image, and the backgrounds not defined eonugh.
I'd try cropping off the out of focus foreground and a a lot of the background (make it into a kind of a pan shot, and you might salvage this somewhat deer are nice and in focus and the eyes are sharp.
Now if there were a whole herd looking at you that's another subject.
Been there---done that!
JG
Wildlife images as a part of the landscape work the best for me when, for example, the wildlife is either the main subject filling a lot of the frame, an anchor leading into the rest of the image, or as a small addition to a landscape that stands well on its own.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/coho222/
there are at least 12 bear images so far. This trip involved sea kayaking about 40 miles from Quadra Island to Bute Inlet and the Orford drainage. It is at the Discovery Islands in British Columbia between the east coast of Vancouver Island and mainland BC.
- pradeep