Quoting Christian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Jostein wrote: > > > > Portraying animals in the wild is one type that comes to mind. It > > usually needs both prediction and reflexes. > > I'll disagree here. Right place right time (prediction) combined with > anticipating the animal's behavior (prediction) accounts for 99% of my > good bird pictures. Quick reflexes have provided more out-of focus or > poorly composed pictures than I care to think about. :-) I know exactly what you mean. Cotty has said to me several times: "If you see the picture, you'll miss it", and I think he means that one has to be either prepared or have some sort of a premonition about what's going to happen. In my book, the latter translates to predicting behaviour regardless of species.
However, with small birds especially, I find that their movements are less predictable when you're working at portrait compositions. Their head movements especially so. Reflex kick in when the critter suddenly turn its head to a more favourable position. At black grouse lekking sites I find reflexes necessary to capture the cockfights when they happen. I think there may be different opinions on this list about what a "reflex" actually is. I also think that Shel has a point about reflexes being important in some circumstances. It just seemed a bit exaggerated from his post; considering that we were talking about David Mann's landscapes. After all, he usually works with a 6x7 camera on a sturdy tripod...:-) Jostein ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
