That is very nice indeed John with bags of detail. I would like the birds just a tad higher in the frame to give a bit of space for the reflection at the bottom. Personal choice as I know you don't like reflections..!
On reflection I think this is great. Very calming indeed. The 'Bigma' helps you deliver the goods again. John.
Posted by Simon Litten on June 2, 2010 at 10:30 AM
Nice grebe image although not keen on square crop - always seems a shame to go to the trouble of getting the shot and then 'chucking' half of it away! Could you not have composed an image keeping all of the frame?
Simon
PS Love the attention to detail in reflecting your signature as well! Very clever
Posted by Simon Litten on June 2, 2010 at 11:34 AM
Nice grebe image although not keen on square crop - always seems a shame to go to the trouble of getting the shot and then 'chucking' half of it away! Could you not have composed an image keeping all of the frame?
Simon
PS Love the attention to detail in reflecting your signature as well! Very clever
Thanks all.
I can see it need s a slight rotation and its a bit noisy too. I think the mark is where I put me name in the wrong spot and couldnt't be bothered to start again so I wiped over it. !
Interesting views about cropping though. Most periodicals etc are in the portrait aspect and yet our natural field of vision is more landscape surely. To me a square crop is a compromise between the two.
As for shooting vertical there is a good reason I didn't Firstly the bird turned and I only got the one shot with her head on and the chick in the right position. There is no more room at the bottom of the frame. The other main reason is this. The Sigma 50-500 in my opinion has a weak tripod mount. If you hold it, then extend the lens fully you can move it up and down.
So I made an adjustable spacer that sits between the mount top surface and the lens barrel.
It takes out the movement but stops the ability to swivel the camera to vertical.
Can't win em all ?
Cheers
JohnR
A tranquil moment beautifully captured John. Would agree about a little more room below but see your reasoning for a square crop. Still an image I would be proud to have taken.
Heres one with your suggestions implemented. Rotated, glitch removed, more canvas created (faked ) and added to bottom, more of a portrait format etc,etc.
Might appeal more but its not my original image
Food for thought.Cheers
JR
Discussion
13 repliesNever known a bird so confiding.
A picture of calm I thought.
D200 Sigma 50-500
180th @f8
ISO 500
JohnR
Brett
Simon
PS Love the attention to detail in reflecting your signature as well! Very clever
Simon
PS Love the attention to detail in reflecting your signature as well! Very clever
Hi John,
Great reflection shot!
I agree about the crop, but its still a cracker.
Cheers,
Lewis.
Not sure if it needs a slight CW rotation and there's something odd with the reflection 2/3rds up the frame above the chicks head - 3 lines ?
Minor nits though John and I'd love to get my GCG's so close to the shore ...
I can see it need s a slight rotation and its a bit noisy too. I think the mark is where I put me name in the wrong spot and couldnt't be bothered to start again so I wiped over it. !
Interesting views about cropping though. Most periodicals etc are in the portrait aspect and yet our natural field of vision is more landscape surely. To me a square crop is a compromise between the two.
As for shooting vertical there is a good reason I didn't Firstly the bird turned and I only got the one shot with her head on and the chick in the right position. There is no more room at the bottom of the frame. The other main reason is this. The Sigma 50-500 in my opinion has a weak tripod mount. If you hold it, then extend the lens fully you can move it up and down.
So I made an adjustable spacer that sits between the mount top surface and the lens barrel.
It takes out the movement but stops the ability to swivel the camera to vertical.
Can't win em all ?
Cheers
JohnR
Might appeal more but its not my original image
Food for thought.Cheers
JR
Simon
No- but a square crop off an original is "as was " Its just a part of the original image and not "manipulated "
So there !
JohnR