Nature Photographers Network
This is the preserved archive of the original Nature Photographers Network. The community continues at naturephotographers.network.

Marsh Tit-Not BIF+BIF

Discussion

9 replies
Posted by John Robinson on September 25, 2012 at 8:15 AM
Marsh Tit-Not BIF+BIF
Marsh Tit
This was the first in a sequence of this bird before I had time to rack out as normal. Looking at the pics later , all the others were more or less “normal” but this small in frame first one seemed to stand out to me. I began to think that this is really how we see birds and perhaps I should do more of it. I don’t know . Interesting to see what others think. I think the effect is better in the biggie
D7000
Sigma 50-500mm
800 ISO
250th sec @f11
Slight crop. for comp.
Paint shop Pro7 Levels etc.
CZM/neatimage.
Thanks for your comments on the last image.
Cheers
JR
Posted by David Sewell on September 25, 2012 at 8:56 AM
I think you are right, John. This is exactly how we see birds when we are not photographing them, and it is one of the reasons I like the shot. It would be interesting, however, to see one of the"normal" shots for comparison.

David
Posted by John Robinson on September 25, 2012 at 9:09 AM
David
This is after it moved down to a lower perch after I'd zoomed out and is the normal type of shot I might have gone for.
Cheers
JR
Posted by David Sewell on September 25, 2012 at 9:23 AM
They are both fine shots, John, but like you I keep going back to the first one, which shows the environment as well as the bird.

David
Posted by Neil Burton on September 25, 2012 at 10:12 AM
I actually like both equally, both have their strengths.
Posted by Bob Johnson on September 25, 2012 at 12:07 PM
The first has more interest for me :wink:

Bob :smile:
Posted by Oscar Dewhurst on September 25, 2012 at 12:24 PM
First for me too John, nice vibrant colours, bg, and like the setting as well :toast: :toast:

Oscar :wavey:
Posted by Phil Ellard on September 25, 2012 at 2:16 PM
I prefer the second, i know i should say the first because of the environment and thats how we see them but thats why i like the second because everyday we see birds like your first shot but very rarely if ever do we see them like your second so to me its more interesting :toast: :toast:
Posted by Robert Lawrence on September 25, 2012 at 4:35 PM
I don't want to appear to be sitting on the fence when I say that both have their merits but it is the case. That said, I do prefer the first image John.
Posted by Nick Mckeown on September 27, 2012 at 12:51 PM
Both shots are very fine images JR but each has its own merits and I would term the first as a habitat shot and the second as a portrait shot which enables the viwer to see the subject in more detail and without any distractions. Habitat shots are always harder to achieve as you have to be careful that the subject doesn't become overwhelmed. In the case of the first shot you have achieved the right balance. To sum up I like both equally for different reasons and for the same reason, if that makes sense!

Nick. :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :smile: :wavey: