* Wednesday C&C "No Theme" Thread #781 / Revived #002 on 2023 04 12 *

I rest my case. Let admin resolve it. Tx

I'm usually not much of a fan of tall/narrow vertical framing. But in this case, it works perfectly. I can't imagine this shot with any other crop. you have perfectly aligned the boy with the art until they have become one. If you were going for a menacing look, I wonder if it might look even more menacing were you to tone down the whites and highlights. Just a thought...

I certainly think the technique is worth exploring but I don't feel that we are seeing its potential with this image. I can't see what the technique is adding to the particular subject matter of the shot. Lunchtime in a bar with the image split into two. The one interpretive direction I can find is linking "Maker's Mark" with a statement about lunchtimes. This feels too tenous. I can imagine the technique adding movement and impact to something like a high energy dancefloor however.

Jim, you sure enjoy playing with a camera. Another shot that has me asking "how" as much as "what."
Let's stay with the "what."
To me, the image visualizes music. Notation lines swirl. They get louder and they diminish. They cross and create harmonies.
This would make a great album cover for a string quartet.

I do like it just as it is yes, exactly how it is. After contemplating the suggestion and seeing the cropped version again I feel like that would have ruined the image for me. I'm glad you see it the same way as I do as I consider myself to be kinda prejudiced about it, the image my own and having more affinity with it because of the memory.

Thanks for your input, appreciate it!

Thanks for the feedback!

To me the image feels like it has been overprocessed, an experiment gone wrong if you will. I am curious about the original image though, perhaps to discover the incentive for altering it like this.

A single hardhead duck (Aythya australis) came over to see what was hiding behind the reeds...

I can't read his body language but is he just having a stretch of his wings, showing off or giving a warning...

Superb abstract. Love the lines against black background.

It would be a bit stupid to remark that the reeds obstruct a clear view of the duck because obviously you know that.

Even for the casual viewer, it is clear that you did not use autofocus here, because I can't see a way how the camera would not have focused on the nearby screen of reeds. You deliberately focused manually (or with a pinpoint small autofocus point, that is also a possibility) on the duck whose behaviour interests you. (I am not enough of a duckologist to know if this kind of duck is a rare species).

So this has me guessing.

Either there really was no way to step aside a little bit and avoid the reeds getting in the way.
In that case, it is clear that you were so focused on the duck (and so is your camera), that the obstruction does not bother you enough to discard these images as "would have been nice but unfortunately the reeds spoil the view". This must mean that this kind of duck, or its behaviour is indeed quite special.

Or you could have easily avoided the obstruction by taking another vantage point, but you chose not to.
In that case, the obstruction would have been a deliberate choice.
And in that case, I would like to know why you did that.
The aperture kind of blurs the reeds, but not enough to turn them into a desirable feature. At least not for me.

In no particular order:
These ducks, as for most native ducks in Australia are very wary. I am not into any particular wildlife, whatever I can find here. This dam is about 100m across. When they see me they fly or swim to the other side, way out of my 600mm zoom range. After walking up the dam wall so they wouldn't see me, I hid behind a bush to see if any might be close by. One duck swam over but kept his distance. The bush was too thick to shoot through. I crept over behind the reeds and found a place where they weren't too thick. I knew he knew I was there, so there was my interest in his behaviour. I was using auto focus but not pinpoint just a small rectangle. If I had of moved into the open to avoid the reeds, he would have fled. If you look at the exif data you will see I was at max zoom and already f/5.6 so I was never going to get (nor wanted to) get the reeds in focus. I guess I could have reduced ISO and closed aperture to blur the reeds more but then maybe not so obvious what they were. For me this all a learning experience with an entry level compact (Pana FZ300). I was happy to get the shot because he came over to investigate. Unusual for them...

Thank you. That explains the whole situation to me.
Under the circumstances and with that zoom etc, you did well.
And while the shot may not win any National Geographic prizes, it does constitute a valuable learning experience.
Not only for yourself, but also for me.

Thanks, it has been a learning curve to get some even half decent shots at higher zoom.

Trust me, we are all on a constant learning curve.
Participating in this kind of conversations is a great tool in that respect.

The exchange between you and Roel helped me to formulate my response. I'm by no means an expert bird photographer, but from my many many failed attempts I might be able to offer some suggestions. (By the way, I don't know how to view EXIF data on this platform.)

In my opinion, the amount of blur is a personal choice. If I were taking these, I would be willing to allow quite a bit more blur in the reeds. But again, that's up to you. Maybe your f/5.6 was already wide open? Then the only thing I could suggest would have been to find a spot where the reeds were closer to your position - getting more separation between the reeds and the duck would throw the reeds more out of focus.

In my experience, patience - a willingness to wait, sometimes hours - is one of the most important things that a wildlife photographer must have. Sometimes with skittish critters, simply settling into a good spot and holding fairly still can allow time for them to feel comfortable with your presence. Then they might begin to return to more routine activities.

Then again, sometimes nothing helps and you just have to be grateful for an enjoyable outdoor experience.

On the technical side, I've been using manual mode with auto ISO. I want to control shutter speed for movement and aperture for depth of field, and just let ISO go where it must to get the shot I want. If the result looks too noisy in post, I will use Topaz Denoise to clean it up. If, due to lighting issues, ISO bumps up beyond my threshold of pain, then I wouldn't have a decent photo anyway. So I just don't shoot. I obviously don't know if that would work for your style of shooting.

This is my response to those who stopped and critiqued “Lunch” … First of all I thank everyone who stopped to look and especially those who critiqued or commented on the picture …..

As an explanation of something I did a year or more ago and have no real memory of let me make up an explanation for “Lunch.” I don't often take pictures that I consider stand alone pictures that warrant coming to C&C. I mostly take “photo walks” where I take pictures of things that interest me along the way. Normally I will take pictures that I think might fill in the narrative and add to the photo walk set that I might bring to another forum … Here I stopped for lunch and thought the scene was one of those times and pictures …. That's why the picture was taken … I suspect that I was transitioning from Paint Shop Pro to Affinity at the time and dealing with the new tools … I like to play with tools to see what they do normally and at extremes and I suspect that was how this process started … That explains how it came to be …. looking through the files this one made me stop and look at it . I thought it might have some compositional interest and wondered if it might get anyone else to look at it and if so I wondered why .. or why not … And that's why it is here – to get a reaction ..

Looking at it I thought this might play well with evening or indoor activities such as a concert or party. COVID and personal health issues kept me from any night or indoor activities of that kind and I haven't returned to try this again until I was looking back through the files … How was it done? ….. I would guess and start with the Threshold and Curves tool and go from there …. I am occasionally tempted to go there but not often …..

{THis picture is a throw away and NOT for critique}

On those rare occasions where your not getting up at 4am to get to the site to catch the light, sitting with Photoshop trying to make a good image better, or pondering the meaning of ISO perhaps it is of some value to go off on a tangent and just have fun with photography. ...If you're tempted then have fun but with some discipline ….

That's my guess and explanation today …. tomorrow I may have a different thought …..and if this is not what this thread is for then let me know and I'll refrain from sharing future adventures in what I consider fun (I don't actually share these that often .. ) ….

WhyNot

"Flying"

Regarding "Lunch"

When I saw that, I flashed back to my first days in Photoshop. It was fun; it was exciting; it was crazy and unlike anything I had seen before. Mind blowing stuff that stuck around a long time. And as time has moved on, I deeply despise all the things I made at that time because they were so primitive and raw, and visibly showed what someone older and wiser than me, politely, informed me showcased my inexperience. "Lunch" reminds me of that exploration, but it's not something I'd expect to see out of a more experienced hand.

Of course you should share photos like this here. In My Never Humble Opinion (and this is very much strictly only my opinion) we are discussing images. The image is the outcome of the original capture and your fun with it. In this case, I felt that the processing was interesting with plenty of potential but I didn't feel it added to my response to this iparticular mage. I can see that with different subject matter the PP might be highly appropriate. Again, I stress, this is only my response. Others may feel differently. It's what discussion here is all about. Should you choose to play further with the processing, I'll enjoy watching what you do with it. I might think it works, I might not.
Actually, I found your throw away shot, using what I assume is the same PP, to work better. As you note that it isn't for critiquing, I will leave it at that.