Snowy Egret in flight ... What do you think is wrong with this picture?

[PhotoLover]

So, there are some things I really like about this shot. But it has issues. Before I mention what I think the issues are, I'd be interested in feedback on the shot.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[NorthernFocus]

It's an awkward angle on the bird. Good look at the eye. Beyond that the beak is aligned with the wing, wings aren't very visible either top or bottom, and the feet are obscured.

 

[Whiskeyman]

The highlights are blown. The three tiered background is distracting, with the background segmentation running through the subject. And as stated by Dan, certain elements of the subject don't stand out in the photo.

You've got the focus correct, and the background can be altered with post-processing.

BTW, is this photo cropped?

 

[raptor photo]

There could be more detail in the highlights, the wing position isn't ideal, the background layers are kinda distracting. Biggest issue IMO is that the head is aligned with the wing, so your focus doesn't easily go to the head when viewing it.

 

[DRwyoming]

In line with the posts above, the background is a bit distracting but to me what Dan pointed out above is more distracting. IOW, the way the beak lines up with the wing edge and just disappears is a bit tough. Just bad luck on that one but the shooting angle alignment there is unfortunate.

 

[PhotoLover]

Great comments folks, keep them coming. A few responses now, and I'll post some revised edits a bit later.

1. Actually I blew focus on this shot. I couldn't believe it .. using group autofocus, the bird is not moving that fast, nor is it that close ... I don't blow focus on that many of those easy shots! Exif thinks the bird was 20 meters away. Squinting at the original image, it looks like the trailing edge of the lower wing is in focus ... maybe. So I used Topaz Sharpen AI, thought it came out pretty good, and I was wondering if anybody felt the image looked too sharpened/etc. but I haven't so far gotten that input.
2. I actually liked the 3 color background, and in fact extended the light color at the bottom a bit, thinking the multiple colors were interesting and unusual behind the white bird. Apparently, everybody else thinks it is interesting and bad
3. I don't *think* the highlights are necessarily blown in the RAW image, I'll look at making sure what detail on the upper wings exists is displayed.
4. Probably what I didn't like about the picture but couldn't put my finger on it for some reason .. as several of you pointed out, the way the beak blends into the wing and the feet are cut off looks poor.

Interestingly, I didn't find the overall angle of the bird itself or the even the wing angle that bad, though a couple of you did, other than how the wing/beak/feet problem exists.

Obviously there is nothing to be done about 4. but I can tweak the image to address the other comments and will do so, just as an experiment.

 

[Woodyg3]

For what it's worth, the background is not at all distracting to me. It just looks like a natural, smoothly out of focus background to me. The whites don't look blown out on my monitor, but you might be able to get a bit more detail with local adjustments. The bill of the bird being right in line with the dark underwing is a huge problem in my opinion. For me, this would be a shot I would toss for that reason. Did you have some more shots before and after this one?

Anyway, as always, just one person's opinion. Snowy Egrets are really hard to get good shots of because of their highly reflective white wings and long, thin anatomy. Everyone has plenty of shots of these birds that go into the trash bin.

 

[PhotoLover]

For what it's worth, the background is not at all distracting to me. It just looks like a natural, smoothly out of focus background to me. The whites don't look blown out on my monitor, but you might be able to get a bit more detail with local adjustments. The bill of the bird being right in line with the dark underwing is a huge problem in my opinion. For me, this would be a shot I would toss for that reason. Did you have some more shots before and after this one?

Anyway, as always, just one person's opinion. Snowy Egrets are really hard to get good shots of because of their highly reflective white wings and long, thin anatomy. Everyone has plenty of shots of these birds that go into the trash bin.

No other interesting shots from that sequence. I think I'll just quit messing with this image ... I think the problem with the bill in line with the wing is ... the more I look at it ... a killer issue. I did like the background better than most in this thread, though your reaction was more neutral.

Edited to add -- the background was natural. Marsh grass at the bottom, trees in the middle, sky of course the top half. I used context sensitive healing to get rid of a couple of bright spots in the trees, and extended down the grassy area in photoshop to give more space to the grass area (versus cropping it all out which some might prefer .. I may recrop doing that to look at the overall impact again). I thought the background kinda cool, but clearly a background with differing colors and brightness like this seems off/distracting to some observers.

Thanks again to all for the comments.

 

[Anjin San]

No other interesting shots from that sequence. I think I'll just quit messing with this image ... I think the problem with the bill in line with the wing is ... the more I look at it ... a killer issue. I did like the background better than most in this thread, though your reaction was more neutral.

Edited to add -- the background was natural. Marsh grass at the bottom, trees in the middle, sky of course the top half. I used context sensitive healing to get rid of a couple of bright spots in the trees, and extended down the grassy area in photoshop to give more space to the grass area (versus cropping it all out which some might prefer .. I may recrop doing that to look at the overall impact again). I thought the background kinda cool, but clearly a background with differing colors and brightness like this seems off/distracting to some observers.

Thanks again to all for the comments.

It isn’t an excellent shot..but it is pretty good and I would use it on the blog…but I would pick another snowy shot to print and hang or if somebody wanted to see my best snowy shot.

 

[JimmySchoster]

I love IT!

 

[PhotoLover]

It isn’t an excellent shot..but it is pretty good and I would use it on the vlog…but I would pick another snowy shot to print and hang or if somebody wanted to see my best snowy shot.

Thanks for the comment; all have been welcome and useful.

I think *my* final take on the shot, after thinking about the comments (which helps one to take a fresh look at an image) is that *I* still like the overall composition and colors (not all do, but that's fine) but the nagging problem of the bill in line with the wing, and to a lesser extent, the feet being cropped a bit awkwardly, ultimately sabotage the picture.

 

[PhotoLover]

I love IT!

Appreciate the vote of confidence!

 

[Tiago C]

Great photo, I prefer some extra contrast between background and subject. In this case, the bright sky behind the bright subject doesn't help much. Also, I would be tempted to crop a bit of the sky at the top.

 

[PhotoLover]

Great photo, I prefer some extra contrast between background and subject. In this case, the bright sky behind the bright subject doesn't help much. Also, I would be tempted to crop a bit of the sky at the top.

Glad you liked the overall look! Yes, sky is usually not a great backdrop. I really should -- just for grins -- try different crop options here, like getting rid entirely of the grass at the bottom, or as you suggest, some of the sky. The reason I did not crop the sky here is that I liked the overall composition/placement of the bird; here it is about the middle which I liked for this particular image - whatever the particular merits or demerits of this shot, I liked the overall spacing and size of the bird in the frame.

 

[Flyboy]

Maybe I'm just not as persnickety as many folks here, but I think it is an amazingly beautiful photo! Birds have beaks, everyone knows that, and the "disappearance" into the dark underwing tones is a non-issue to me. You can still tell what and where the beak is! Perhaps minor cropping of the sky would help, but not much from my quick attempt.
Birds do not take direction well, so "Hey, you! Fly (higher, lower, in front of a better background will not "fly") pun intended! A person could full auto the subject and hope go get better wing position, angle of view, etc, etc., but some days, in my never humble opinion...it is better to be lucky than good. Excellent effort and photograph!

 

[PhotoLover]

Maybe I'm just not as persnickety as many folks here, but I think it is an amazingly beautiful photo! Birds have beaks, everyone knows that, and the "disappearance" into the dark underwing tones is a non-issue to me. You can still tell what and where the beak is! Perhaps minor cropping of the sky would help, but not much from my quick attempt.
Birds do not take direction well, so "Hey, you! Fly (higher, lower, in front of a better background will not "fly") pun intended! A person could full auto the subject and hope go get better wing position, angle of view, etc, etc., but some days, in my never humble opinion...it is better to be lucky than good. Excellent effort and photograph!

Well thanks for the vote of confidence! It's a picture I still like, because I did think the background was kinda different and worked nicely with the Egret, though I have come around to agreeing that a couple of details don't work as you study the image a bit, even if you like the overall look.

I've asked for critiques on a couple of pictures where the background was controversial, and one thing I've learned is that people can differ wildly in how said backgrounds are viewed! Which I find useful to know. I still like the overall composition (bird positioning in relation to the background) and such, but a couple of details are less than ideal.

 

[bleirer]

Maybe I'm just not as persnickety as many folks here, but I think it is an amazingly beautiful photo! Birds have beaks, everyone knows that, and the "disappearance" into the dark underwing tones is a non-issue to me. You can still tell what and where the beak is! Perhaps minor cropping of the sky would help, but not much from my quick attempt.
Birds do not take direction well, so "Hey, you! Fly (higher, lower, in front of a better background will not "fly") pun intended! A person could full auto the subject and hope go get better wing position, angle of view, etc, etc., but some days, in my never humble opinion...it is better to be lucky than good. Excellent effort and photograph!

This is the critique department. It would be a disservice to the people who post asking for critique to sugar coat the cons. Of course it helps to mention some pros too.