Open mouth in open beak

Nice shot, what lense did you use?

I agree, I can't imagine how this capture could get any better. It's like you paid the bird and had him over for an one-hour modelling session...

OK, let's ask the $64,000 question: Is This A Composite?

This is a great capture, with the DOF being just right to capture the action. The subjects are tack sharp.

 

What a great body of work!

 

Unfortunately, I'm identifying with the little fish right now.

 

--Lannie

I too, would like to hear more details about the lens, camera, f-stop and distance from the subject. A truly wonderful piece of work. The nearby branch is out of focus which to me indicates a very narrow range of focus as the bird is sharp as a tack. Lovely background blur. Action shot with no movement. Great!

The technical details can be found by clicking on "Details" under the photo.

 

Many more shots are viewable on Ilia's website.

 

--Lannie

Bill, I just noticed that "you can't get there from here." Click on the Photo.net icon to bring you back to the main page, and then click on the picture there to be able to view the options.

 

--Lannie

As with the fish-dish a couple of weeks ago, there's a great crop in this ;) . Superb shot.

In response to Edward Horn's question, check the top rated photos list, where a remarkably similar shot is currently 7th. Different bird, different fish, different photographer. My guess is the "unmanipulated" box is not checked here because some distracting background was cloned.

Great picture, Although I have a feeling that the little fish is crying after mam.... Congrats !! regards M.Tekin

Good evening and happy holidays to everybody!

Thank you for all your critiques and kind words.

 

For Edward Horn:

I have to point out that this is not a composite or photo-montage or anything of the sort.

 

For Julie Styles:

No blur of background was made in this photo.

The only thing done on the photo is Horizontal to vertical crop.

 

Dr. Robert DeCandido Thanks for the information about the species,

it was right on the spot!

 

Some details about the capture:

I was in a hide with the camera, monopod, lots of water and

patience. The branch was placed there before, in exact place I

wanted the bird to be, 4 meters in front of my tent.

I have a lot of photos of three speaces of kingfishers on my site

I made with the same technique, but in this one everything came together just right - the angle of the bird, the fish and etc.

 

Thanks again and happy holidays!

Hate to be the only detractor, this is a nice photo, but it cries out for better light.

 

Bet the minnow didn't think it was a great shot either!

The look of surprise on the fish is priceless! I'd be very happy to have this shot in my portfolio. Your patience was well-rewarded.

This picture in combination with the photo that Julie Styles referred us to really illustrates how thin the line is between very good and perfect. The other shot - to me - is just a very good shot of a bird. This is something a bit more special. What makes it for me is that the bird and the fish are perfectly perpendicular. The bird is completely in profile (rare enough) and the fish is at a 90 degree angle. What are the odds of seeing that? And with the fish's mouth open like that? I'd have been so excited I'd probably have dropped my camera in the water. Congrats on recognizing a perfect moment and being skilled enough to capture it. I do agree though that the out of focus branch in the foregrounbd is distracting. Anyway, great shot.

Looking at it closely, I'm convinced that it is NOT a composite. Good stuff.

Some people always have to nag. There is nothing wrong with the out-of-focus branch, and there is nothing wrong with the light. All is supposed to be this way, and its perfect. Accept it!

I thought I would respond to "perfect". First I have to say that if I had taken this shot I would think myself a total star, and like Bill F, I would have been beside myself with excitement. And yet, since we're here to critique... I think Bill A made a valid point. I don't mind the branch, and the feet and tail feathers and lower wings are just stunningly gorgeous, but the bird's head is the least vibrant part of the whole photo, which I think somewhat detracts from the image as a whole. As already pointed out by Bill F and the choice of title, the strength of the image is in the mirroring of expressions and the orthogonal alignment of their faces. Yet the face of the bird is one of the weaker parts of the image as presented. I think this could be rectified to a large extent in post-processing... or of course cropping out the bird also works :)

Crop out the bird??? You've got to be kidding, right? Oh I get it, that was sarcasm. And really, who gives a rat's backside if the branch is out of focus. For me it made the shot more three dimensional.

Excellent photo and great timing. A priceless photo.

The detail and color are truly excellent, light is just fine, and the fish is so perfect (kinda feel sorry for it, what an 'expression'). Very good bird photography indeed! Cheers, -Greg-

I really like the analogy between the open mouth of the fish and the open mouth of the bird, obviously with different reasons. Everything else in this picture is just perfect.

Hi everybody and thanks again

I forgot to mention that the image was made in RAW format and

I selectively improved the light with Shadow recovery tool in PS.

Bill Atwood and Julie Styles have a point, the light is not perfect

and I took photos with a better light, but I dont think that it is so bad on the other hand.

Bill Foster and Bill Fouche are mentioned that the branch is not in DOF range and a bit distracting,

that right and I wish the brach was like in my other photo here:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3950369

But as I said we cant get all in one!

 

Thanks for looking

Helmut, I don't think anybody here is "nagging." It's called a critique forum, not a kiss the photographer's butt forum. This is a great, great photograph and I rated it a 6/7, which places it somewhere in the top 50 of all photos I've rate. BTW, I would rate about ... um .... one of my pictures that highly. I respect Ilia and think that this is a remarkable picture but, we are here to discuss how it could be better. If we all just wrote, "this is perfect," it would be a pretty boring discussion, wouldn't it? Even Ilia admits that the light could have been better. Compare the light in the other kingfisher pic Ilia mentioned to this one. There is a qualitative difference. It's not the photographer's fault. You do what you can with what you have and Ilia did a great job here. RAW processing and the shadow/highlight tool can do some remarkable things, but the light does make the colors less vibrant and it is unfortunate that the head is the least vibrant part. The branch IS out of focus and, although I'm not an art director, I imagine that would be an issue for some editors who wished to publish this. If I were running a nature magazine, I'd certainly publish this, but I might look for a way to put a caption over the branch. With the color losing vibrancy as you go up, and the branch being at the bottom, the two together kind of pull you away from the head of the fish. If the photo were perfect, you would be drawn there. This is a very, very good piture and the photographer should be very, very happy. I know I would be. But, it's not perfect.

The head of the bird being less vibrant actually helps the photo for me. It draws my attention

from the branch up past the bird to the fish ﾗ the fish being more vibrant than the bird's

head and being the hero of the shot. In that way it sort of accomplishes what the person who

cropped out the bird did without cropping out the bird. The only thing I would do is lessen

the heat on the branch a little. Great shot.

this is simple for me. It was a quite mundane shot of a bird.. crop, color, all nice ... detail really good, but we see shots like this all the time...

 

but then I clicked on it and saw the expression on the fish's face. and I laughed!

 

THAT's what makes the shot! and it's great.

 

"OOOHHH NOOOOO!!" said the fish.

 

;o)