Hi Dan, I think I coincide with most of your own comments. The background is neither sharp nor totally out of focus and that just makes it confusing. One of my first thoughts was that the head was too close to the end of the rock and I would also add that the lizard is a bit too small in the frame in relation the back ground for an effective 'animal in it's environment' wide angle shot. I appreciate that the lizard isn't a large animal to start with and that the tones in the images are very similar so getting it to stand out could prove very complicated.
The end result is more 'small in the frame' rather than 'animal in habitat'.
Posted by Lon Overacker on June 19, 2008 at 12:45 AM
Dan,
This thing that stands out immediate relates to your last comment. I'm really wishing there was some space on the granite rock above the lizard. But I do think this is a fine environmental image. The background is appropriately de-focused - yet enough detail to show the environs. This lizard is also sufficiently large enough in the frame - although closer would probably be better.
Overall, I think this works very well and you captured this nicely considering that little guy probably didn't sit still very long for you...
As a kid growing up near Sacramento, we learned to hand catch these fast Western fence swifts aka "blue belly" reptiles. Well maybe not very often but occasionally. The first thing to understand is never grab them by the tail or that is all you will have in your hand. After being caught, an interesting amusement is one can turn them over on their backs then gently stroke their tummies. For some reason that puts them into a trance or sleep haha and they will just lay there still upside displaying their pretty blue striped belly.
So Dan, catch one of these lizards, rub their belly, then at your leisure frame up a shot really close to make the subject larger.
Thanks. The problem I feel is that if the background is too blurred, you get too focussed on the animal, and don't get the sense of it in its surrounding. It becomes a sudio portrait... or feels like the sourrounding could have easilly been faked. For example, some people post gorgeous photos of wolves that look free, but mention they are in captivity. I want to convey that there's no captivity in the photo by providing an expansive surrounding for the critter.
[url=
What do you think about my thoughts?
Here's an example from the same series with a narrower DOF, subject is cut-out more but less sense of surroundings:
photo 3 - bush
http://rock-climbing.kicks-ass.net/Hiking/2008-05-30_Hetch-Hetchy/content/_6018769_large.html
On the other extreme, a smaller view of the animal, with full surroundings:
photo 4 - dome
http://rock-climbing.kicks-ass.net/Hiking/2008-05-30_Hetch-Hetchy/content/_6018789_large.html
Lon,
Thanks for the encourragements :) I know the photo is not exeptional, my post is a case study for the next time so I can get all the parameters right.
As for the rock around the head, it bugs me but I know I could doctor a few grains to make it stand out without cheating too much. I'm still bummed to not have noticed that when I shot it. I still need to hone my compo eye. Also someone pointed out the background tree line actually detracts the eye too.
David,
Good tip , but would you do that with a mountain lion or a bear? Eventually those are the photos that will benefit from me learning on blue bellies without cheating.
yes, I would rather see it all in focus as the oof background could make it look like a captive model shot. It could also be a wild animal shot anywhere and if your intention is to show it in a particular area then you do need a sharp background. In that case the one that works best for me is the last one, but the lizard is still a bit too small.
If the background is really scenic then you can get away with a smaller subject but you have to but the emphasis on the scenery and just have the animal as a accent
I guess I was aiming at small-to-big photo, where "big" is the universe in the background, present but not stealing the show, so a little OOF... That makes the subject stand out of the photo... I think the BG was too much OOF.
Discussion
7 repliesBump, for critics.
The end result is more 'small in the frame' rather than 'animal in habitat'.
This thing that stands out immediate relates to your last comment. I'm really wishing there was some space on the granite rock above the lizard. But I do think this is a fine environmental image. The background is appropriately de-focused - yet enough detail to show the environs. This lizard is also sufficiently large enough in the frame - although closer would probably be better.
Overall, I think this works very well and you captured this nicely considering that little guy probably didn't sit still very long for you...
Lon
So Dan, catch one of these lizards, rub their belly, then at your leisure frame up a shot really close to make the subject larger.
Thanks. The problem I feel is that if the background is too blurred, you get too focussed on the animal, and don't get the sense of it in its surrounding. It becomes a sudio portrait... or feels like the sourrounding could have easilly been faked. For example, some people post gorgeous photos of wolves that look free, but mention they are in captivity. I want to convey that there's no captivity in the photo by providing an expansive surrounding for the critter.
[url=
What do you think about my thoughts?
Here's an example from the same series with a narrower DOF, subject is cut-out more but less sense of surroundings:
photo2 - lurking
http://rock-climbing.kicks-ass.net/Hiking/2008-05-30_Hetch-Hetchy/content/bin/images/large/_6018771.jpg
photo 3 - bush
http://rock-climbing.kicks-ass.net/Hiking/2008-05-30_Hetch-Hetchy/content/_6018769_large.html
On the other extreme, a smaller view of the animal, with full surroundings:
photo 4 - dome
http://rock-climbing.kicks-ass.net/Hiking/2008-05-30_Hetch-Hetchy/content/_6018789_large.html
Lon,
Thanks for the encourragements :) I know the photo is not exeptional, my post is a case study for the next time so I can get all the parameters right.
As for the rock around the head, it bugs me but I know I could doctor a few grains to make it stand out without cheating too much. I'm still bummed to not have noticed that when I shot it. I still need to hone my compo eye. Also someone pointed out the background tree line actually detracts the eye too.
David,
Good tip
yes, I would rather see it all in focus as the oof background could make it look like a captive model shot. It could also be a wild animal shot anywhere and if your intention is to show it in a particular area then you do need a sharp background. In that case the one that works best for me is the last one, but the lizard is still a bit too small.
for proportions try something like this
http://www.enriqueaguirre.com/gallery/aguirre/1166808447.jpg
http://www.enriqueaguirre.com/gallery/aguirre/1166808400.jpg
If the background is really scenic then you can get away with a smaller subject but you have to but the emphasis on the scenery and just have the animal as a accent
http://www.enriqueaguirre.com/gallery/aguirre/1163547479.jpg
I guess I was aiming at small-to-big photo, where "big" is the universe in the background, present but not stealing the show, so a little OOF... That makes the subject stand out of the photo... I think the BG was too much OOF.
I agree with the comments/ideas expressed by Enrique. The examples he provides really illustrate things beautifully.
I will recommend that you also check out the work of Franz Lanting. BTW, he has a gallery in Santa Cruz where you can see his prints first hand.
Regards.