Critique this photo

[zen_man]

Jim, I think I've got it serving it somewhere else:

 

[Jim Ernst]

Thanks Buck !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Here it is finally Alcina!

This is the untoched just as it was shot out of the camera picture.

[/QUOTE]

 

[Cacia]

I ask people if they mind when I take photos....

I think the rastas taught me that.

Yes, I just thought it a bit dark also, easy to fix.

 

[alcina]

Yeah, that shooting people in candids thing is tough...especially kids. I'm a chick and I don't do it very often coz I'd be freaky about it if I had little ones.

Looking at it I'd say get down lower next time, too. That'd be cool, I think.

You've got a tough exposure scene here with the dark birds on the water and the white birds in the air. I think you've got room to open up those shadows without blowing the highlights, though. And I'd sacrifice a teensy bit of flashing red (in lightroom you can have it show you the blown bits) on the highlights if I had to so I could get more detail on the Canada Geese & whatever those other black birds are.

 

[bladephotog]

Generally you don't want to shoot down on birds. And there is too much going on IMO without a strong focal point. Good job stopping action.

It is a tough contrast situation. White birds are always difficult to expose correctly but you're not far off here. You did about as good as you can exposing this, just might need to tweak the RAW file if you shot RAW.

I'm pretty used to shooting strangers. And when I shoot strangers for stock, especially kids, I always offer to send them a print if they don't mind my shooting them. What might have been fun is to put the camera on a tripod, use a slower shutter speed and shoot the kid with the birds swirling around.

Not a bad shot though.

 

[redrover]

Thanks Buck !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Here it is finally Alcina!

This is the untoched just as it was shot out of the camera picture.

[/quote]
This is on the first – I like it better, except the composition….after the second and before the third.
The second has more room to crop for composition but less interest for me – looks like a family picture to show Grandma. Not bad for that, just not remarkable – sorry. Alcina though is some fine photog and I’d be listin’ to his opinion.

I saw the first as a story being told – I liked that. It had depth, lot going on there and wondered, what was going on there? I looked further and longer than my first glance thought I was going to.

The water surface showing up in detail, a cool and dark background setting off the lighter points. By cool, I could feel a crisper air – and I’m sitting in 82 degree HI. I like to feel a landscape shot, give me a physical feeling, feel the air.
The ducks(?) so dark but with a little detail and those little white beaks, they draw my eye into them, I look at the shot longer.
The goose I saw last, what the heck was he looking at? But I kept ducking my head under the backside gull wing, not good IMO. I blew it up and then realized all those more ducks – heck it looked like everybody had some one thing they were focused on, very good IMO, great story focus. I laughed and thought it too bad the gull blocked what the point of the story was. Suspense is good, but it was like some big guy annoyingly blocking my view.
Now the three topmost gulls were great – sorta Lord of the Rings melodrama going on there.

So, with all that, I thought it a shame the low angle sun(?) with amber reflection of goose was not captured as well as plain old, more foreground. I think I could take the birds, if it was mine and I really liked it, I’d mess with removing them and see if it worked. Another foreground reason and more of the L frame and lower L corner is to put the plot up diagonally within the frame. Still off set, just higher and more to the point. As it is, my eye on the total shot just slides right off the lower L corner (and why my initial ho hum thought) then the two top little white beaks kept pulling them up to see the gulls looking at the same thing – what, what?

The second shot cuts off the girl in bright contrast jacket and has none of the gull melodrama and central focus, just a bunch of birds milling around.

With the timing of the first shot of the gulls flying in it would be nip and tuck once realizing the potential but I’d be bobbing up and down, twisting, dancing left and right, back and forth - looking for a clear line of sight angle to keep all the parts in. I’d probably stop short of elbowing the little girl away. From here, post game quarterbacking mind you, I’d have been heading smack up next to her for the first look see thru the viewfinder. And, it could have screwed up the gulls angle. Some times it just doesn’t work out no matter how I dance around, crouch or lay down for one thing or another. The joy of digital – no paying and waiting for a whole roll to come back and see if any are any good. With action, I’d be setting to as repetitive I could.

Maybe because I’m female..but would never think or worry about the girl in the shot. Well maybe a little – you had the feel of the humans, anyone glaring at you? Unless you’re blatantly, repeatedly fixed on a child with out the delightful scenery, as a mom it wouldn’t have bothered me. How do they know she is in the shot off to the side like that? What your zoom in or out is?


Ok, Jim, the last one is a keeper! Crop off the R side to just where you can’t tell the big brown bird is a bird. You’re stuck with the with the gull in the R corner, you need the R side for the gull above framing. With just about all the birds aimed at one spot, you’ve got suspense and the back side gull isn’t nearly as annoying.

Un, :blush: IMHO. :blush:

 

[Jim Ernst]

This is on the first – I like it better, except the composition….after the second and before the third.
The second has more room to crop for composition but less interest for me – looks like a family picture to show Grandma. Not bad for that, just not remarkable – sorry. Alcina though is some fine photog and I’d be listin’ to his opinion.

I saw the first as a story being told – I liked that. It had depth, lot going on there and wondered, what was going on there? I looked further and longer than my first glance thought I was going to.

The water surface showing up in detail, a cool and dark background setting off the lighter points. By cool, I could feel a crisper air – and I’m sitting in 82 degree HI. I like to feel a landscape shot, give me a physical feeling, feel the air.
The ducks(?) so dark but with a little detail and those little white beaks, they draw my eye into them, I look at the shot longer.
The goose I saw last, what the heck was he looking at? But I kept ducking my head under the backside gull wing, not good IMO. I blew it up and then realized all those more ducks – heck it looked like everybody had some one thing they were focused on, very good IMO, great story focus. I laughed and thought it too bad the gull blocked what the point of the story was. Suspense is good, but it was like some big guy annoyingly blocking my view.
Now the three topmost gulls were great – sorta Lord of the Rings melodrama going on there.

So, with all that, I thought it a shame the low angle sun(?) with amber reflection of goose was not captured as well as plain old, more foreground. I think I could take the birds, if it was mine and I really liked it, I’d mess with removing them and see if it worked. Another foreground reason and more of the L frame and lower L corner is to put the plot up diagonally within the frame. Still off set, just higher and more to the point. As it is, my eye on the total shot just slides right off the lower L corner (and why my initial ho hum thought) then the two top little white beaks kept pulling them up to see the gulls looking at the same thing – what, what?

The second shot cuts off the girl in bright contrast jacket and has none of the gull melodrama and central focus, just a bunch of birds milling around.

With the timing of the first shot of the gulls flying in it would be nip and tuck once realizing the potential but I’d be bobbing up and down, twisting, dancing left and right, back and forth - looking for a clear line of sight angle to keep all the parts in. I’d probably stop short of elbowing the little girl away. From here, post game quarterbacking mind you, I’d have been heading smack up next to her for the first look see thru the viewfinder. And, it could have screwed up the gulls angle. Some times it just doesn’t work out no matter how I dance around, crouch or lay down for one thing or another. The joy of digital – no paying and waiting for a whole roll to come back and see if any are any good. With action, I’d be setting to as repetitive I could.

Maybe because I’m female..but would never think or worry about the girl in the shot. Well maybe a little – you had the feel of the humans, anyone glaring at you? Unless you’re blatantly, repeatedly fixed on a child with out the delightful scenery, as a mom it wouldn’t have bothered me. How do they know she is in the shot off to the side like that? What your zoom in or out is?


Ok, Jim, the last one is a keeper! Crop off the R side to just where you can’t tell the big brown bird is a bird. You’re stuck with the with the gull in the R corner, you need the R side for the gull above framing. With just about all the birds aimed at one spot, you’ve got suspense and the back side gull isn’t nearly as annoying.

Un, :blush: IMHO. :blush:[/QUOTE]

Thanks to everyone for the very useful posts on this!!!