sammm

By the way, I agree on the frame. Much better without it.

It sounds like it is the sense of place you are missing. I think we can get some sense of place here from the droplets of water and the feeding, but a background would add more. But is there also some benefit from the simplicity?

A question -- is what you are saying that the background in Chris' photo is richer than the background in Marina's, and that Marina should have left hers dark but not black? I will confess that I can't see the difference in background, but it may just be the portable computer I'm on at work, and certainly I could see near black as more interesting to the eyes than flat black. Or is it the lack of "place" you are missing, so you want enough detail in the background to make out the water?

Thanks, Marina.

 

Looking at the photo you pointed to (which is the same one where Marc had noted the watery background), I'm guessing that the adjustments made took out very little other than some generally flat blackish water. I think Chris is right in terms of the background already having blacked out.

 

So the manipulation of darkening the background really has no effect on the overall quality of the photograph for me; it doesn't seem like a significant artistic choice in light of all the strengths of this photograph. The only question might be whether there was a way to take a somewhat different photograph lighting the background more fully, and whether that would have been preferable. Ironically, that would advocate a more "artificial" approach to get the more natural look that several people want here.

Thanks, Marina.

 

Looking at the photo you pointed to (which is the same one where Marc had noted the watery background), I'm guessing that the adjustments made took out very little other than some generally flat blackish water. I think Chris is right in terms of the background already having blacked out.

 

So the manipulation of darkening the background really has no effect on the overall quality of the photograph for me; it doesn't seem like a significant artistic choice in light of all the strengths of this photograph. The only question might be whether there was a way to take a somewhat different photograph lighting the background more fully, and whether that would have been preferable. Ironically, that would advocate a more "artificial" approach to get the more natural look that several people want here.

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

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.

Great colors. I find the rock in the background slightly distracting, but still a wonderful photograph.

Thanks for the comments; I've been trying to scan again to pull out detail in the shadows and lighten up their faces, but can't do so without losing the detail on the flowers and really blowing out the backlight. I haven't successfully merged two scans in layers, though I understand that can be done. I'll be having a print run with dodging at the bottom and burning in the back lighting.

 

Galina, I will play with the toning a bit as well; this is pretty close to the negative, but you may be right about the yellow and red.

What I really like about this is the brightest light being off the main subject; I think that's partof what conveys the feeling of darkness. Nice composition.

I love the water spots on the road near the front, and the cowboy hat on the observer in the middle of the foreground. Those are the kinds of details that make shots like this come alive.

Nice lighting, and the hand motion is great.

Thanks - this is a home scan, and I think I need to learn the art of scanning separately for shadow detail and merging the scans together. I've just spent some frustrating time not getting it right.

 

I've always found that kids photograph best when they are ignoring you, and that's the case with two of the three here. This was taken in evening in the old city of Montreal, and I wanted to get across the time of day and "historic" feel. I think I'm going to need to burn in the blown out exposure to really drive home evening time. This is another of my ultra-fast film shots, shot at 1600 using HP5. I may have pushed the film just a bit beyond where it was ready to go.

What do you think of the exposure values on this one?

The framing is eye-catching. Did you consider a square crop on this, cutting through the underbrush? It would be nice to simplify the image a bit. I think leaving the detail in the background is the right thing, but think you either needed a bit more or a bit less exposure on the tree.

I love the blues. Great colors to back up an interesting scene.

First thing I checked was whether this one was large format. Great detail; I love the subtle reeds and grasses. There's a lot in her that really comes together. Congratulations.

Good stuff here! This is one of those shots that deserves to be blown up really large, and would have been great in large format. I agree that I can't find a better crop; I wonder if you have other shots from the same time, and whether there are any alternate framings that are broader. I debate a bit about the reeds in the bottom right, but ultimately think they add depth to the shot. And that boater on the right in the reeds is great.

I like this a lot, and think the glint of sun off her hair is great as well as those wonderful eyes. The only negative is that the background strikes me as too busy and not great bokeh - even though I like the composition, you might consider trimming on the right so there's less of that background. Still, this one would get blown up big and put on a wall at my house.

 

 

Let me speak for Tiago's original composition.

 

I prefer the original over the square. Why? Because the top, while it continues the theme of the bottom, varies it some, with a bit more space between the water, a bit broader sprays, and I find the variation interesting. Also, I think the balance in the original directs us to the water, where in the square composition I find my eye having more of a fight between the water and the tubes.

 

This is a great abstract, and I think in part because it is, after a fashion, a recognizable one (at least we recognize the water and the tubes, not that we understand what they're doing arranged like this). It gives me a different perspective, focusing on form, color and line, on a real life object.

On the one hand, I really liked the crop when I first looked at it; on the other, looking at the full photo, I feel like the cross and the earrings convey something that is missed in the tighter crop, especially the cut-off half cross.

I just want to point out to all that there is another photograph of the same rock in Leigh's portfolio where I think the rock itself is shown in a much more interesting way - because the action of wave and sand has created a circular pattern around the rock and there are some odd colors caught in it.

 

On colors, I think Leigh's saturation balance is excellent, and avoids the candy sweetness of many oversaturated sunsets. The saturation balance is part of what I like here - even if I can't get the composition to work for me. And I like that saturation balance more in some of Leigh's other shots.

Wonderful, and nicely lit.

I can only imagine how many times you shot this. Perfect timing, and wonderful technically all around.

Beautiful. Maybe it's just me, but with the foreground rocks and the transparent waters, I'd be happy to just step in. No need to go rock to rock. It's the transparent waters easing into that soft yellow that make it for me, though.