Pelicano I

I like it, You have so many great photos 7/7.

7/7

Nothing more to say but perfect!!!!!

What a great, dramatic photo. Pardon my ignorance, but did you punch out the subject to get the black background or is this some sort of technique you used while shooting?

Brilliant! I can't imagine the amount of times I would have to try and get one as good as this. 6\7

Speechless..

This image has been selected for discussion. It is not necessarily the "best" picture the Elves have seen this week, nor is it a contest. It is simply an image that the Elves found interesting and worthy of discussion. Discussion of photo.net policy, including the choice of Photograph of the Week should not take place here, but in the Site Feedback forum.

When including images, please make sure they are relevant to the discussion, not more than 511 pixels wide, sufficiently compressed and make sure to enter a caption when uploading.

This is an extraordinary photograph principally because of the lighting - I would love to get more detail on how the lighting was done (it does not look like natural light to me). The fact that you've got a series of five photos, most almost as strong and one, in my view, as strong or even better (with the fish half in his beak), is amazing to me.

Eeehhhh! Genial! Thanks a lot! I'm very happy, because this is a special photography for me. Sam, It was taken under natural light, cross-light. I work after in Ps to get dark more the background.

Thanks again.

I like this image. It is technically very well done. I wonder, who of you would put it on your living-room wall?

Well deserved, the whole portfolio of Marina is trully inspiring. Is not the first time I see her highlighting beautifully the subject and the necesary accesories (such as the drops) and darkening the rest of the background with excellent skills while keeping the photo looking natural and fresh.

 

Enhorabuena...

Just gorgeous. The entire portfolio is so impressive. Your compositions are brilliant and your processing and color management are bold and satisfying.

 

I don't have any criticisms.

Ya era hora!! 8^), tienes muchas fotos que bien podrian estar seleccionadas como esta, no son fruto de la casualidad ni de un momento glorioso, son fruto del buen hacer y las cualidades que demuestras en cada una de las fotos que tienes publicadas, merecida enhorabuenisima artista

 

Finally! 8^), you have a lot of photos that well could be selected as this one, they are not because casuality or a glorious moment, they are beacuase the great process and the qualitiy that you show in each one of the photos you have published, well deserved congrrrratulations artist

In the context of the numerous fowl and insect pics currently de rigeur on photo.net I don't find it particularly outstanding or interesting. Its barely a step away of a picture of your favorite pet. With the type of equipment used, it is almost a foregone conclusion that the exposure will be correct. So we have some composure and stop motion. The black background has also become quite common. In an image of this type I look for something more interesting and less imitative, with a clear indication of a "driven intent to be different" The true driver of this image is that its in color. So the COLOR perhaps, and not THE CONTENT might make it interesting.

I have read all the comments and questions about this image. I like it: the colours, the composition, and the " moment " are all well captured and documented. I know we, as photographers, all have our secrets but I think you should answer the questions posed by your critics about how this was done (besides your comment about the natural light). What is the location, zoo, natural environment, etc.? How close were you to the subject? How much manipulation? A fine effort!

There is no doubt, that this is a beautiful picture. Nice light and colors, and I

like very much that we see the fish through the "bag", and the tail of it coming

out.

 

That said, I think there is an even better picture in this series - here goes:

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3600245

 

I find it better in terms of what's happening, and as good in terms of aesthetics.

 

Now is this to say, that I have * only * positive things to say about this

picture...? No. What I am questionning, as far as I am concerned, is this kind of

"trendy cliche" of the black background for such nature photos.

 

Why should a natural background be as trite and neutral and perfect as a

studio background ? I think, this question opens a very interesting debate.

Should nature always be "studio-like" ?

 

I see another picture in this series (framed larger) with a bit of water

background. The picture I'm refering to is not as beautiful as the present POW

or the picture I posted a link to, just above, but the background is natural, at

least.

 

I would also like to say, that generally speaking, I find John F.'s comment

about the ease of the equipment used irrelevant - but...

 

Are we going to say that Michael Jordan didn't really win his races because

his shoes were tooo good ? Makes no sense to me... Yet, I would of course

admit that a D20 or the digital camera I just bought a couple of months back

are - obviously ! - easier to use than my Linhof body born in 1954...:-) But

what's more of a concern to me is that Photoshop has made such pictures

really * too easy * to produce.

 

Capturing a nice animal as it performs such a spectacular action is one thing,

but to record it * in front of a beautiful natural background * is a MUCH more

difficult task. You must then be at the right PLACE as much as you need to

pick the right time.

 

To achieve a picture like this POW, you just need the right time. Right place

doesn't matter. For all we know, there could have been a huge fence and a

"Zoo" sign board right behind the pelican's head...:-)

 

In short, this is a great result indeed, but I regret the trendy stereotyped black

background, because the picture is not really fully natural anymore. It's surely

much easier to take a picture like this and darken the background. This sort of

nature photography is a lesser hunt imo, but still, you won't get the shot unless

you happen to be in front of a pelican having lunch, and timing remains a key

issue. Credit must still be given to the photographer for a nice subject matter,

with nice lighting, and very good timing.

 

A postcard kind of picture, but a picture of a higher aesthetical standard imo,

than the usual TRP first place landscape or wildlife winners...

Excellent image and interesting discussion. I agree with comments og Mark. I like images with less manipulation in ps.Best wishes to Marina Cano for sharing such beautiful images.

I'll have to agree with Marc G above, the black background becomes kind of clichéed, and sure makes the task easier to capture a successful image... but Marc, one question to you (and it is not intended to be provocative or anything else, I just want to know)... Let's say you're in the zoo, see this action develop, see the light, walk to the correct spot to capture it, and the background found in that position is awful (lets say the fence with the large zoo sign). Would you leave the background in, or would you try to get rid of it? lets assume for the purpose of discussion that no matter what position you stand, the background will always be horrible in that particular zoo...

I know I sure would try to get rid of it, either by blackening it out (which somehow appeals more to my asthetic senses), or by blurring it away beyond recognition (which will give me a no less artificial looking image, but probably not as beatiful)... what would be your choice?

Beautifully timed and taken shot. The luminosity through the bag and being able to see the fish it's just caught. Someone above mentioned the black backround being cliche. I don't think it really matters. The entire shot is the pelican

For those of us less informed (i.e. me), could someone please explain how you get the black background? I've done it using flash and a higher sync, but not in post-processing.

 

Thanks,

Bill

very beautiful Marina, like bill I would like to know, (how this is done in PS) .does the dark background give it an artsy look ? fancy ? a step above the next photo, I think so .Should Zoo photo's be less appreciated because the animal or bird was captive ,I don't think so, after all ,the photographer still must use his skills to capture the picture and the moment .And ,will the best pro photographers use the best equipment possible to achive the highest standard for there photo's ? of course !!! excellent photo Marina 7/7 ~ GT

What does "artsy" mean?

 

The cynic in me wonders if it means little more than using a photographic or software process that you're not familiar with. The moment and the light get full marks, but it seems so sad that an elvis-on-black-velvet treatment somehow increases its appeal to so many photographers who have made it clear that they no longer view nature photography as being a subject captured that includes place. Sorry, but this goes in the same folder as the ersatz reflections, heavy handed frames, and the oversaturations.

Your question was: "Let's say you're in the zoo, see this action develop, see

the light, walk to the correct spot to capture it, and the background found in

that position is awful (lets say the fence with the large zoo sign). Would you

leave the background in, or would you try to get rid of it? lets assume for the

purpose of discussion that no matter what position you stand, the background

will always be horrible in that particular zoo..."

 

Answer: I would go to Photoshop and make the background black, like most

people. Or perhaps, IF I can and if I feel it fits better, I'd try to find a natural

background in my own collection, and to strip it in. And for a client, in a case

like this, I'd strip just anything in - anywhere... :-) Why ? Well, because I have

kids to feed, but also because I see no harm making the background black in

order to save a shot.

 

And by the way, what I would do in such a case is not very important. What

matters to a professionnal is simply what the market demands - and,

sometimes, ethics...

 

Here is imo what matters.

 

1) I would just be more proud of my shot if I had gotten it right without PS.

 

2) If I were a wildlife magazine editor, I would never hire a photographer who

comes with a portfolio where backgrounds are all either "so-so", either black.

And that's because I'd know, that this photographer would not have what it

takes to get beautiful natural background just right. (I'm speaking generally

here, not speaking about Marina's abilities.)

 

3) As a wildlife magazine editor, I would also really try to have as many

natural background as possible, as little PS as possible, and as little black

backgrounds as possible.

 

But then again I am not a wildlife magazine editor...:-)

I'm curious as to the original background - Marina, care to share on this?

 

Carl, along the way I've even learned to enjoy the occassional black velvet Elvis. Sometimes we have to appreciate the lesser things in life. That having been said, I think the background certainly doesn't add anything and may well subtract something. This is a very simple image, and the black background emphasizes that simplicity - good or bad? I'm not sure. We have to see what she was trying to save or improve to understand the choice she made. While I agree with Marc that such a shot would not make a wildlife editor happy, one with a zoo in the background probably would not either.

 

Marc, I've looked harder at the other shot, with the fish half in the pouch, and agree that is a better shot - I'd give two reasons: first, it has a better composition, with more of the neck in the shot and with more overall complexity to the image; second, having the fish half in the pouch does just what many people here want the background to do - it puts the photo in context, in place, as a pelican catching a fish. Of course, the fact that the pelican is not diving into the water to do so suggests to me that it is feeding time at the zoo, and perhaps a full background would just bear this out.

 

Sam

There are places for a black background - like Dave Nitsche's "glasses" series where there is clearly no attempt to replicate the real world. But I assure you that nature magazines are now going to great lengths to make sure that what they publish is authentic and unadulterated according to traditional standards of incamera manipulation (film choice, exposure, grad filter, etc.). So the concept of putting in a fake background to save a shot to please a client simply doesn't apply here.

 

This shot is meant for consumption on photo sites like this one. At least I've never seen this style anywhere else. If this image gets a million views on this site alone, maybe that's sufficient justification.