Owl

Printable View

  • 05-02-2007, 07:31 PM
    afdlips
    Owl
    They are back and this time with babies.
    <img src = "http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a392/afdlips/owl.jpg">
  • 05-02-2007, 07:36 PM
    ZL4life
    Re: Owl
    he looks like he's ready to unleash a fleet of pigeons on you.
  • 05-02-2007, 07:52 PM
    jkriminger
    Re: Owl
    really nice picture...good DOF..nice framing with the tree branches. Did you try and straighten it..?
  • 05-03-2007, 04:58 PM
    Ronnoco
    Re: Owl
    A lot of postprocessing is necessary.

    Ronnoco
  • 05-03-2007, 05:52 PM
    afdlips
    Re: Owl
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ronnoco
    A lot of postprocessing is necessary.

    Ronnoco
    What does that mean?
  • 05-03-2007, 06:51 PM
    Hickeroar
    Re: Owl
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ronnoco
    A lot of postprocessing is necessary.

    Ronnoco
    Is that what you call a critique? Geeez.

    I think the shot is great. I'd certainly frame it pp or not. I love the angle. It really makes it look like he's staring DOWN at you. The lighting is perfect. The bokeh is attractive. I see no problems at all. I'd even call it "exceptional" compared to many others.
  • 05-03-2007, 10:09 PM
    Didache
    Re: Owl
    I'm not Ronocco so I can't say what was in his mind, but the two issues that stand out for me are: the thick branches could use lightening just a tad, and the small branch that goes right over the owl's head could be cloned out. Easy and minor things though - it's a good capture.

    Cheers
    Mike
  • 05-04-2007, 04:08 PM
    afdlips
    Re: Owl
    I re-tweaked it.
    <img src = "http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a392/afdlips/owledit-1.jpg">
  • 05-05-2007, 12:24 AM
    Hickeroar
    Re: Owl
    I'd have to say I liked the first one better. I'm really into the deep contrasts and shadows...
  • 05-05-2007, 05:34 AM
    KenB
    Re: Owl
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hickeroar
    I'd have to say I liked the first one better. I'm really into the deep contrasts and shadows...
    I agree. I also liked that it wasn't "level". It gave me the feeling like I was actually looking up at it. Also liked the vignetting.
  • 05-05-2007, 06:05 AM
    Jaedon
    Re: Owl
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KenB
    I agree. I also liked that it wasn't "level". It gave me the feeling like I was actually looking up at it. Also liked the vignetting.

    I like the first one better but I also like th eedit. I think if it landed somewhere in between brightness wise with the vignetting still there it would be perfect. I also liked the angle being askew a little. It gave it more of a natural feel.
  • 05-06-2007, 10:16 PM
    Loupey
    Re: Owl
    I'll have to go against the grain and say that I much prefer the 2nd image. It still rather evident that one is "looking up" at it. Colors and lighting look much more natural. And I feel that the burning in the corners are over-the-top and unneccessary.

    Now the 2nd image tilted may still work.
  • 05-08-2007, 10:54 PM
    cgarrard
    Re: Owl
    Love your Tool reference on your tagline :) And your Owl shot. Truely I am jealous. We have very few owl's out here, in the 7 years i've lived here, i've seen only one at dusk and I didn't have a camera. Good job!

    Carl
  • 05-08-2007, 11:08 PM
    Tangletamergirl65
    Re: Owl
    AHHHH Carl beat me to it!!! Love the Tool Quote as well....I think as far as this picture goes, it is a matter of preference. With an image this crisp and colorful how can you complain about something nature isn't going to make perfectly straight lile a limb. I liked both pictures equally well.
  • 05-09-2007, 02:28 PM
    afdlips
    Re: Owl
    Since there are so many comments, Im just gonna save myself some time and thank all of you at one time. lol. THANKS! your comments were very helpful.

    and as for Tool, they are here in denver tonight and I GET TO STAY HOME! i cant believe it lol. I went to their last show here and i couldnt wait for them to come back, but i couldnt get tickets in time. LAME!
  • 05-09-2007, 02:55 PM
    jkriminger
    Re: Owl
    i think in straightening the picture you are trying to correct the angle at which you took the shot, and not the natural state of the owl..which sits upright. I like them both.
  • 05-09-2007, 04:10 PM
    Ronnoco
    Re: Owl
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Didache
    I'm not Ronocco so I can't say what was in his mind, but the two issues that stand out for me are: the thick branches could use lightening just a tad, and the small branch that goes right over the owl's head could be cloned out. Easy and minor things though - it's a good capture.

    Cheers
    Mike
    Pretty good, Mike. Actually some of the branches interfere and distract from the centre of interest and should be cloned out. Also in any animal or person shot the eyes are most important and in this shot the area around the eyes is way too dark, and that requires some work in postprocessing as in Photoshop for one person who seemed to have no idea what postprocessing was all about. (a newbie).

    Ronnoco
  • 05-09-2007, 08:29 PM
    afdlips
    Re: Owl
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ronnoco
    Pretty good, Mike. Actually some of the branches interfere and distract from the centre of interest and should be cloned out. Also in any animal or person shot the eyes are most important and in this shot the area around the eyes is way too dark, and that requires some work in postprocessing as in Photoshop for one person who seemed to have no idea what postprocessing was all about. (a newbie).

    Ronnoco
    what are you saying?
  • 05-09-2007, 10:40 PM
    livin4lax09
    Re: Owl
    I like the first shot, just brighten the owl up a bit with a simple curves tweak and masks. hardly qualifies as a lot.
  • 05-10-2007, 04:20 PM
    Ronnoco
    Re: Owl
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by afdlips
    what are you saying?
    OK, let's back up. Do you have a computer program such as Photoshop or Paint Shop Pro to edit and improve your digital photos and if you do, are you familiar with how to use it?

    Ronnoco
  • 05-10-2007, 04:34 PM
    Greg McCary
    Re: Owl
    I think the eyes of any animal shot are the most important. I think Ron got me on this one a long time ago. Most of the animal could even be in the shadows as long as the eyes are very visable. I just makes for a better picture. The eyes are to dark in the first one. Your camera exposed for the brighter background. Did you shot in RAW format?
    Greg
  • 05-10-2007, 10:01 PM
    afdlips
    Re: Owl
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ronnoco
    OK, let's back up. Do you have a computer program such as Photoshop or Paint Shop Pro to edit and improve your digital photos and if you do, are you familiar with how to use it?

    Ronnoco
    yes. I have photoshop and photomatix. I know what Im doing. but when you say something like "a lot of pp necessary", i think you should elaborate and enlighten me on what you are trying to get across. I thought this was a critique forum, and I was, as strange as it sounds, looking for some advice on what to correct or what works in the shot. Im not a pro or anything. in fact im only in High school. I mean, come on man.
  • 05-10-2007, 10:02 PM
    afdlips
    Re: Owl
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Greg McCary
    I think the eyes of any animal shot are the most important. I think Ron got me on this one a long time ago. Most of the animal could even be in the shadows as long as the eyes are very visable. I just makes for a better picture. The eyes are to dark in the first one. Your camera exposed for the brighter background. Did you shot in RAW format?
    Greg
    Yeah, I shot in RAW. I was trying to fix that on the latter photo. I thought i got it, but I guess not.