A fantail flitting around as it chases its breakfast in this insect hatch.
My second image submitted for critique.
http://www.photography.ca/Forums/mem...1-2000-sec.jpg
Printable View
A fantail flitting around as it chases its breakfast in this insect hatch.
My second image submitted for critique.
http://www.photography.ca/Forums/mem...1-2000-sec.jpg
Here is my critique. IMO, the shot shows nothing, it looks like dead bird lying on it's back on concrete. The bird is too far off the focal point of the shot and the insects just look like specks. I know the bird doesn't have to be center of the frame, but I feel it is not placed well.
The shot does nothing for me. Maybe just concentrating on the bird, using a little faster speed for better definition of the bird. The sky is lost as well. I am guessing it is a very cloudy day.
As a newbie antiquetiger, i think you should restrain your critiques somewhat and make them friendlier. Saying that a shot shows nothing attacks the poster and does not help the poster. This forum is a FRIENDLY forum and friendly critiques are welcome and appreciated.
I disagree with this critique 100%. I find the perspective here quite intriguing and I like the composition a lot. In no way did i think this was a dead bird on the sidewalk because it's clear to me the bird is in flight. The shot is soft though and it may be because the focus is missed OR the shot was uploaded at greater than 275K and is compressed by the forum software. Hope that helps- Marko
I agree with Marko. Your critique was not encouraging antiquetiger. All of us, amateur or pro are continuing to learn all the time and when we post our critiques we're choosing words with care to help and not to hinder..
As for the pic, I have no problem with it. It's an interesting perspective and draw's your attention. A little sharpness could have worked better but otherwise I like it.
BW,
NorthStone
FWIW I don't find theantiquetiger's critique harsh, just honest. Continuing in that vein I'm sort of meh about this one, too. It's underexposed and out of focus. However exciting the moment was, it didn't translate into a technically good image. It is fun though in a sort of 'would you look at that' sort of way. And if this image was presented with no commentary, would you know what you were looking at? It would take me a bit to connect with it for sure.
I also think antiquetiger's critique was blunt, but not unfair. The photo doesn't work for me on several levels. It's much too soft (in fact I'd say it was simply out of focus, and not merely soft). I also couldn't tell the bird was flying at first, I thought it was sitting/standing on some kind of clear glass which had a load of dead bugs on it :) There also seems to be image quality issues (noise, and/or jpeg artefacts), most noticeable in the yellow part of the bird's torso.
The bird has been captured in a nice pose though, I like the symmetry in the wings and tail. Composition seems okay to me, perhaps slightly too much space at the top.
I don't mean to sound rude or unfriendly, just honest and helpful. That is a big problem with forums (I am a admin of one myself), people read with what they think is the emotion of the poster. I've had to break up many on line fights because of the way something was read.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marko
TBond, take my critique with a grain of salt because I am a novice (sub-novice actually) as well.
I feel the shot missed what TBond saw with his naked eye. This is the first time I've seen the shot on a big screen (I was posting from my phone last night), and I still think it was missed. The gray background is what's taking away from the shot. The bird does not look like its inflight to me. It looks like it has been positioned somehow (like dead on its back).
If I was shooting this, I would have taken as many shoots as possible at different speeds, setting, and angles (maybe TBond did), to get the right shot.
I don't mind when critiques are honest, I just like them to be friendly.
Even when people think shots are crap, there are friendlier ways to say so.
This friendlier way more easily fosters the learning environment imo, and yup, it may at times be too sickly sweet for the personal tastes of some members. Every forum is different, but as Admin, if I see something that i feel is too rough, I won't let it pass.
Mods and I are on the same page about this and we will continue to encourage friendlier comments/critiques.
I respect your feelings on this and will try to tone it down but I would like to add that a couple other posters on this thread did not read my critique as rude, just honest. It is pretty hard to be honest and friendly on a critique that is written on a forum (no verbal tones or body language, etc). Like I said before, people read forums with what they THINK is the emotion of the poster, and this causes problems (mostly for the admin).Quote:
Originally Posted by Marko
When I wrote that first critique on this shot, there was no intent in my mind of harm or putting down the artist. I just said how I felt about the shot. I refrained from negative words (crap, junk, etc).
The only crappy shots I've seen on this forum so far are mine!!!!
(edit: I deleted what I was gonna write here because it needs to be discussed in a topic, not on TBold's post)
I still maintain it wasn't rude. And of course when a mod or admin deems it so everyone else agrees, too. You maintain you want critique, but I don't know how it can be honest feedback if laced with false sentiment just to preserve an illusion. I don't think there should be a free-for-all either, but I fail to see the rude.
just to weigh in here- a critique can be blunt and honest but it needs to be helpful. IMHO it's okay to point out what's wrong as long as you can point the person in the direction to do what's right.
So here I go:
I like the comp and the translucent quality to the wings and tail. I think the focus was missed, probably because getting a good shot of a bird in flight is damn hard. a faster shutter speed may have helped if that's the reason. Some exif data would help a lot in giving you advice for next time. :)
Maybe not rude but definitely short on tact or empathy for an unknown audience. I would have seen more benefit had the first critique offered any sense of knowledgeable methods to improve the photograph. The original poster would have been able to take away constructive comments, applied the concepts and possibly learned a bit. I doubt that happened in this case. Just as the antique guy has found, I too learned not to be too pointed on this forum because there is no tone of voice or appearance transferred with the comments and in some cases the abruptness can be taken as being harsher than intended. As a result I no longer offer input on photographs that don't appeal to me and only do so on a few that reach out and grab me. There is more than enough good input from others here that I can select only the ones that I can possibly add positive suggestions or reinforcement.
I don't know about rude or harsh, but I do think this critique is WRONG. I like the photo. I think better definition would be good, but the shot works as is. I have seen a LOT of dead birds, and this photo does not look like that at all. It looks fairly interesting, and it works on a more abstract level. I don't gauge shots of animals by whether or not they belong in National Geographic.Quote:
Originally Posted by theantiquetiger
oh no, an opinion is wrong! well that settles it.
Our forum is simply growing. No forum on earth can please all members at all times.
Given that every forum has an Admin, and Admins/Mods shape the pulse of the forum, this forum has a pulse as well......and I as the Admin work hard to maintain that pulse and that pulse will not change for the foreseeable future.
Be honest with shots you find crap, just be nicer about it is all I ask.
Hi
i think its got a rather different perspective especially for wings...Not seen many pics with such nicely fanned out wings and tail..Reminds of Egyptian hylographics (sorry if i spelled it wrong!) :)
Anuj
Thanks to ALL contributors. I value the range of comments.
The NZ Fantail is a highly manouverable small bird (about 4-5 inches long including tail). It flits around catching and eating insects on the wing.
I had huge problems capturing the bird in viewfinder, and with a narrow depth of field gaining precise focus at the same time was more than difficult. I agaree that the focus has missed the mark. I wish it hadn't, would have been a wodnerful shot if the focus was spot on!
It was a dull grey day and I hadn't edited any colour into the sky as I understood that extensive editing was acceptable in Nature category shots.
The camera settings for the shot were... ISO: 320, F/stop: f6.3, Exposure: 1:2000 sec.
Given that the focus is not fixable... I do have leeway with the original to alter the cropping.
So my questions would be...
What could I have done better with the camera settings to better capture such a shot?
How could it be better cropped to make a more engaging shot?
Thanks again.
Well, I'm a little late to the game on this one. Based on your description, tbond, I would have closed down to f9 to f11 or so and manually focused to give yourself a larger depth of field thereby allowing more "focus room" for the shot. 1/2000 sounds like it would have given you lots of room to play.
The problem, for me, and possibly others, is that I cannot see the bird's head. All I see are wings and a tail so it's hard to identify it as anything more than just a bunch of feathers. Possibly, since the background is quite plain you could consider moving the composition around a bit. I can't put my finger on it but there's some thing just missing for me and I think it may be that a different composition might improve it.
And last, since the file on the site is 31KB I am assuming you uploaded a very small image or the image was compressed by the board which may have made it much softer than the original. Try making the largest size image you can make that is less than 1025 pixels and 275KB before uploading.
Hi, just browsing
The photos and found yours,I'm also trying to get a good shot of "small bird "in flight,big birds are easier ,although I haven't a shot of one of those either.Have you tried setting your camera to 3 or 6 frames per.sec.for several shots, If you can?,. I'm guessing when you fired the shot the bird moved it's head to get an insect,the next shot you might have got him right where you want him with his head in view?.
But nice try of shooting something that's moving all over the place,I like the shot, artsy .
I took 6 shots rapid fire, and the bird was only in one of them, completely missed him with the other 5!!!!!
I've seen NZ fantails and it's an effort just to catch one in flight at all. This may not be a technically good shot due to focus etc but I give it a load of 'cool' points for that unusual moment/pose and the fact we can see what it's chasing. The crop looks fine to me as well.
At 1/2000 and f6.3 you've made a good effort to capture the bird. But if you are having trouble ramp it up more if your camera will go higher. Drop the f-stop and add some more ISO if necessary. It takes practice though, with those little birds you still have to get your camera moving as close to in sync with the bird as possible.
Critiques - They do need to be honest if the recipient is to learn from them. But, if someone has put up a photo that falls way short of great, perhaps they are a learner. Whether child or adult, learners need encouragement and explanation. They need to know what they did right as well as wrong. Few of us respond positively to harsh critique, most will respond better if guided, not humiliated.
I'm sure antiquetiger is just finding his feet here. Remember that many (read that as 'most') other photography forums tend to be much more aggressive/direct in nature than here at ph.ca. However, I've never seen so many people learn so much, so quickly as I have here in this forum. The 'system' works here.
Well said MA.