Like Bruce says, the first is a bit better but they both offer a different perspective on photographing the birds. The sharp eyes and cut off parts add to the impression of being very close. Regards, Bob S.
On 2/27/06, Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Christian, > > First shot is pretty nice. I don't mind the washed out sky. The > cropped tail is too bad, but doesn't ruin the image. I like that you > are presented something a little different in a bird picture. The > image almost gives me a feeling of being close to this bird, more like > a pet or something. > > The second one is good too, but doesn't grab me as much. > > I do appreciate you sharing your efforts. You provide inspiration and > ideas for me that I am thankful for. > > Keep up the good work! > > -- > Best regards, > Bruce > > > Sunday, February 26, 2006, 4:05:34 PM, you wrote: > > C> 2 images from today for your review: > > C> http://photography2.skofteland.net:8080/displayimage.php?pos=-49 > C> (no cropping; basically straight from the RAW conversion; a little web > C> sharpening) > C> Not quite - because I was trying for a nicely back-lit shot of a gull in > C> flight but the sky is a bit washed out and the tail is cut off. > > C> and > C> http://photography2.skofteland.net:8080/displayimage.php?pos=-50 > C> (no cropping; basically straight from the RAW conversion; a little web > C> sharpening) > C> Not quite - because well, I don't like the background and I'm unsure of > C> the composition. > > C> Comments are always welcome > > C> Thanks for looking. > > >
