A few weeks ago I had a weekend camping up in Carmarthenshire with the intention of trying to photograph Dippers. Found them on one side of river on the first evenings recce. In position at first light in bag hide and spent most of my time watching an adult and two juveniles out of reach on the other side of the river !!!! Managed a couple of distant shots which I had practically dismissed but yesterday had a go at some post processing with them. Both images I'm posting are fairly heavy crops but what I'd like is opinions on the different crops. The first is my favourite but I have also included one where I have shown more of the water below the subject. Unfortunately the small size on here doesn't really do them justice either as both show more subtle detail in the shadows when seen larger.
500mm
1/250 @f6.3
iso 200
I love both Robert,the first with the Dipper being smaller in the frame and the longer,pano crop works well and the second where the juvenile is higher up in the frame,with more room between him and the water.I really like the effect the OOF, fast flowing water has created in the foregorund,adding impact,movement to the images I feel, the shaded areas well work well also.Dippers have 'Preening' stones up and down the river,which they use throughout the day to re-oil their feathers,look out for these,which will have more white excrement on than other stones giving you clues to where they are.Maybe further up river where you took these images, cutting down on the need to crop as much.Lovely moments capture though and I wish you well with this Dipper family Robert
I prefer the first image but feel the second one would work better without the 'mass' of oof white in the central foreground.I like the oof highlights on the left but just feel that 'mass' is too much.
Rob, what is it you are trying to convey/achieve in your image?
Personally I prefer the OP as this meets most of the criteria & balance, but sadly as you say, a huge crop which is evident in the quality, even at this stage. The second obvious is more pleasing in the placement of the subject as it meets the thirds rule, but that should not always govern the shot. If you were to tone down the highlights in the water then perhaps the choice might be the second version? Either way, I think a second trip might be on the cards perhaps, good luck. Not sure if this has helped?
TFS
Steve
Posted by Simon Litten on July 11, 2010 at 11:45 AM
Both have their merits and both are very nice shots but if they're both fairly heavy crops will that not show in the final print?
Thanks for the comments all.
Simon and Steve: yes they are big crops and I doubt if they will ever be printed as I did this more as an excercise in varying the cropping. I was interested to see which type of crop would be the preferred one. The second does follow the rules of thirds and I included the larger amount of water to see whether it would convey more of the 'lifestyle' (for want of a better word) of the bird than the first crop which I felt gave the impression of the bird living more on the 'edge' between water and land. I have to say that although the second adheres more to the general rules of composition I do find the first, with the bird placed almost on a central line (but equally on a vertical third), the more pleasing of the two. Of course what I have to do now is get a decent close enough shot to have a worthwhile end result.
Phil: I agree the large patch of 'white water' is a bit distracting and wondered whether to tone it down or not. Indeed, in the first picture I did tone down a similar piece, but as I was purpoefully including a lot of water in the second I left it in order to try and convey the force of the river.
Craig: thanks for the advice and if I get another chance I shall take note. Indeed, on the previous evening I had actually watched a Juvenile preening on a very attractive stone, (complete with droppings) and that is where I set up my 'stakeout'. Unfortunately it never returned to it !
As always, glad to get good constructive critique.
Rob, I really have enjoyed this thread, as for me, it has all the 'Hallmarks' of what the Forum is all about and the dialog and input is great, from all. I think your summing up is very good and observation is spot on.
Thanks for bringing this up, and is so refreshing IMHO. Something we ALL can learn from and take for granted on a daily basis, but to question it well...
Thanks once again.
Steve
Posted by Andy Astbury on July 12, 2010 at 4:01 AM
Forgetting the 'heavy crop thing' and just looking at the comp side Robert it's the first image that floats my boat.
It's a lot more visually balanced as Stevo said - it's not too far off RoT comp.
The second one doesn't sit too well with me, and I'm not too sure if without the dominant highlight area it would make me feel any better.
It's definitely worth keeping that first image in mind when and if you return - as Craig said, get a bit further upstream and you'll have it cracked.
Discussion
9 replies500mm
1/250 @f6.3
iso 200
good invironment shot here.
I like the second better but would set the bird lower in the
frame, less water.
Bertl
Phil.
Personally I prefer the OP as this meets most of the criteria & balance, but sadly as you say, a huge crop which is evident in the quality, even at this stage. The second obvious is more pleasing in the placement of the subject as it meets the thirds rule, but that should not always govern the shot. If you were to tone down the highlights in the water then perhaps the choice might be the second version? Either way, I think a second trip might be on the cards perhaps, good luck. Not sure if this has helped?
TFS
Steve
Simon
Simon and Steve: yes they are big crops and I doubt if they will ever be printed as I did this more as an excercise in varying the cropping. I was interested to see which type of crop would be the preferred one. The second does follow the rules of thirds and I included the larger amount of water to see whether it would convey more of the 'lifestyle' (for want of a better word) of the bird than the first crop which I felt gave the impression of the bird living more on the 'edge' between water and land. I have to say that although the second adheres more to the general rules of composition I do find the first, with the bird placed almost on a central line (but equally on a vertical third), the more pleasing of the two. Of course what I have to do now is get a decent close enough shot to have a worthwhile end result.
Phil: I agree the large patch of 'white water' is a bit distracting and wondered whether to tone it down or not. Indeed, in the first picture I did tone down a similar piece, but as I was purpoefully including a lot of water in the second I left it in order to try and convey the force of the river.
Craig: thanks for the advice and if I get another chance I shall take note. Indeed, on the previous evening I had actually watched a Juvenile preening on a very attractive stone, (complete with droppings) and that is where I set up my 'stakeout'. Unfortunately it never returned to it !
As always, glad to get good constructive critique.
Thanks for bringing this up, and is so refreshing IMHO. Something we ALL can learn from and take for granted on a daily basis, but to question it well...
Thanks once again.
Steve
It's a lot more visually balanced as Stevo said - it's not too far off RoT comp.
The second one doesn't sit too well with me, and I'm not too sure if without the dominant highlight area it would make me feel any better.
It's definitely worth keeping that first image in mind when and if you return - as Craig said, get a bit further upstream and you'll have it cracked.