Posted by Chris O'Reilly on September 8, 2009 at 6:39 PM
Hi All
I'm not trying to be a smart a*$e with this image (I'm sure you all know what it is) but I'm wondering if the bird's sharp is distinctive enough to work in silhouette?
Some species are obviously well suited to this treatment, does this work? All thoughts welcome.
Cheers,
Chris
PS. Go on then, someone tell us what it is!
1Ds 3, 500 mm, 1/6 @ f/4, ISO 400, Bean-bag weighted tripod, Car 'hide', Cable release with mirror lock, FF.
Posted by Lee Newman on September 8, 2009 at 6:45 PM
This works for me Chris, yes the Owl silhouette is nice & sharp. The sky is a very nice dark blue & the oof trees frame the bird nicely with a good comp too.
A very nice looking image.
Lee
Posted by Andy Shepherd on September 8, 2009 at 7:31 PM
If I'm honest Chris, then it doesn't quite work for me, just personal taste I guess.
Andy...
Posted by Liam Pauling on September 9, 2009 at 3:25 AM
I really like this, it shows the owl in its habitat and when it is most active, Little Owl?
This is a good idea but I think the image is a bit cluttered and unbalanced with the three elements seemingly on three different focal planes. There's something in there perhaps from a different angle (if that's possible?).
Either way I'm a little jealous. There is a pair near me but I can't find out where they like to hang out!
Cheers,
Chris
Posted by Craig Jones on September 9, 2009 at 4:34 AM
A portrait crop and cone out the OOF areas would work better IMO Chris, love the silhouette and the colour of the sky, and with my face touching the screen I can make out it's a little owl Very nice
Posted by jack chapman on September 9, 2009 at 10:42 AM
nice idea Chris but i don't think it quite works, i think owls are really a bit too 'blobby' for this treatment, other than that like the colour and use of foreground vegetation
Posted by Chris O'Reilly on September 9, 2009 at 11:23 AM
Thanks for the feedback - a mixed response is what I expected to be honest. I'm sure if it had been a long-eared owl its ear-tufts would have made all the difference. I don't dislike the little owl in this shot but it just doesn't add masses of 'wow'!
Anyway, good to canvas opinion. Thanks. Back to the drawing-board!
Chris I live this image but think I would prefer it with the OOF leaves removed on the right.
Posted by Mark Sisson on September 10, 2009 at 3:33 AM
Hi Chris - I've done quite a lot of owl silhouette work, and the "problems" with this as I see them are that (a) it's a bit too busy on either side (either piece of foliage ok but not both as it overpowers the bird), (b) you're right about tufts really helping but Little Owl's don't have them:) (c) you'd have got away with this if the bird hadn't been in such an awkward pose and finally I think it'd be better witout the little bit of detail that's left in the bird - make it a full on silhouette!
Hope this feedback is of help.
Mark
Posted by Chris O'Reilly on September 10, 2009 at 5:19 AM
Hi Mark
Thanks for commenting. Firstly, I agree with most of your points. To add to the discussion, I've re-posted the image with a bit of 'methodology' - or put another way, the image now has a triangle on it and has been cropped
The triangle indicates what I saw at the time and shows elements within the image that I hoped would take it beyond a just a 'full on silhouette'. Compositionally, the triangular orientation of the elements give the image a strong basis, admittedly though, the method hasn't quite reached its full potential here. Placing the owl on a 'third' works well but maybe, as someone suggested, the different planes of focus reduce the effectiveness.
Nothing wrong with the approach you suggest, in fact, I'm going back to the site to do it, but in different light (hopefully!). That said, I'm always interested in experimenting to come up with something a little different - it'll be interesting to see what the picture researcher's make of it!
I genuinely find it interesting how we all see things differently and take various approaches. Fascinating.
Discussion
10 repliesI'm not trying to be a smart a*$e with this image (I'm sure you all know what it is) but I'm wondering if the bird's sharp is distinctive enough to work in silhouette?
Some species are obviously well suited to this treatment, does this work? All thoughts welcome.
Cheers,
Chris
PS. Go on then, someone tell us what it is!
1Ds 3, 500 mm, 1/6 @ f/4, ISO 400, Bean-bag weighted tripod, Car 'hide', Cable release with mirror lock, FF.
A very nice looking image.
Lee
If I'm honest Chris, then it doesn't quite work for me, just personal taste I guess.
Andy...
This is a good idea but I think the image is a bit cluttered and unbalanced with the three elements seemingly on three different focal planes. There's something in there perhaps from a different angle (if that's possible?).
Either way I'm a little jealous. There is a pair near me but I can't find out where they like to hang out!
Cheers,
Chris
Anyway, good to canvas opinion. Thanks. Back to the drawing-board!
Cheers,
Chris
Hope this feedback is of help.
Mark
Thanks for commenting. Firstly, I agree with most of your points. To add to the discussion, I've re-posted the image with a bit of 'methodology' - or put another way, the image now has a triangle on it and has been cropped
The triangle indicates what I saw at the time and shows elements within the image that I hoped would take it beyond a just a 'full on silhouette'. Compositionally, the triangular orientation of the elements give the image a strong basis, admittedly though, the method hasn't quite reached its full potential here. Placing the owl on a 'third' works well but maybe, as someone suggested, the different planes of focus reduce the effectiveness.
Nothing wrong with the approach you suggest, in fact, I'm going back to the site to do it, but in different light (hopefully!). That said, I'm always interested in experimenting to come up with something a little different - it'll be interesting to see what the picture researcher's make of it!
I genuinely find it interesting how we all see things differently and take various approaches. Fascinating.
Cheers,
Chris