Another Day, Another Deer

[MagikTrik]

Here's another deer from one of my drives through the local park (I do this just about every morning on my way home from work or on my way to work, depending on my schedule). This one I captured today around 11:00am. Please let me know what you think & what could have been better or what I may try to do netter next time. The more specific & honest (and yes if necessary, honest may mean brutal) you are the more it will help me on the road to photography fame :wink:
I seem to be leaning more & more to wildlife photography & since this is a very, very new genre for me I could use all of the help & critiquing that I can get.
Thank you for your time.

Too much space on the top? Too many specular highlights or too much general brightness in the background, too much color? Too Centered, not centered enough? Anything will help & also be greatly appreciated.
Again, even if all you do is look & not comment, thank you for your time.

She is a pretty one though, huh?

Capture Information:
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM @ 185mm on a Canon 40D.
1/1000 @ f/2.8 & ISO400 w/ Auto WB
EV +1.05 & Light adjustments in Lightroom


http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y242/MagikTrik1000/POTN/Web_Export-001.jpg

[chauncey]

My only compaint is that it is very little bit soft in spite of it being a good picture.
Next time try to shoot at f/4 or f/5.6, boosting the ISO a little and keeping SS at 1/1000.

How much have you cropped, would like to see it all or just a "trophy" image.

[MagikTrik]

This one isn't cropped at all, I have some full body images though since I had a good 45 seconds, maybe I'll put up a few different ones for yins to choose from. I normally wouldn't shoot this subject/situation in portrait orientation but like I said I was shooting for probably 45 seconds so I figured I'd try a different angle. I wasn't quite close enough to get a fill-the-frame "trophy head" but I'll crop one of those & put it up to.
Thank alot for your comment.

[MagikTrik]

Here ya go, here's the full-length portrait ;)
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y242/MagikTrik1000/POTN/Web_Export-003.jpg

&

Here's the Trophy Shot (cut from original image):
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y242/MagikTrik1000/POTN/Web_Export-004.jpg

**Edit:** Ewwwww, you'll have to excuse me on the last one, I have no idea what the hell happened. Maybe Lightroom upsized it or just sharpened it more than once but I'll replace it just as soon as I get back (one foot out the door, on-call). I just didn't want anyone to think that I don't realize how hideous that IQ is :)

[chauncey]

I sure am glad that I came back and looked again as it gives me a chance to say that I was completely full of $hit.
There is no softness to the cropped image, where one should check for that sort of thing. IMHO

It could however, benefit from some judicious PP. Contrast, Vibrancy, that sort of thing.
I do hope that you shoot in RAW, gives you a lot more range in PP work.

Ya done good, keep it up. ;)

[freakeystyley34]

I think the biggest problem with the first photo is that as soon as i look at it i can see that the face is dead centre and just leaves it looking off balance. At 185mm (from exif) you won't risk sharpness by focussing on the face and recomposing to fill the frame a bit more.

[MagikTrik]

I think the biggest problem with the first photo is that as soon as i look at it i can see that the face is dead centre and just leaves it looking off balance. At 185mm (from exif) you won't risk sharpness by focussing on the face and recomposing to fill the frame a bit more.

I'm actually really glad you said that because I've been having a bit of a hard time deciding how to shoot wildlife. Normally when shooting anything I'd focus on the eyes & then recompose (I always use the center AF point one One Shot AF Mode so I can do this easily) but since I just started shooting wildlife it just seemed a bit weird to me when the subject isn't centered (here was my first real "wildlife" post as an example, as you can see I used the standard rule of thirds but wasn't too sure about the end composition http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=586049&highlight=Deer). I am very, very new to this genre so I could use all the help I could get. Is it still "common practice" to use the rule of thirds here?
Thanks a lot for the replies, it's very helpful because as I've said I really am brand new to this kind of image & just am not quite sure how to compose.

[gooble]

The subject is not well lit. The plant overlapping the deer is annoying. The background bokeh is not that pleasing. Generally unremarkable.

[chauncey]

Yeah, next time take it into your studio to get proper lighting. :lol:

[MagikTrik]

Yeah, next time take it into your studio to get proper lighting. :lol:
:lol:

That is actually along the line of C&C I hope for though. Even if it is something like the lighting on the animal's face that I can't exactly control, It's still better to shoot for perfect so if you fall short of your mark, your still above average.
When I was a kid my pastor once told me that his goal was to be "sainted" after he passed & although he knew this was impossible he figured that if your goal was so incredibly high as to be unattainable you would never have the luxury of resting & saying "well I'm good enough" or "I've done all that I can do".

[tonydee]

#1: eye seems pretty central, and having the body and legs lead the eye out of the picture's a problem. I think having the body side on doesn't suit a portrait image composed like this - a deer facing more (but not exactly) towards you might be better, although having the head turned in the direction you captured is good. The plant over the deer takes time to distinguish from a blemish or scarring. There is a thin reedy plant leading so close to the deer's mouth that for a moment I was wondering if it was chewing on something. Just so much noise generally - would work better if you were lucky enough to find a time when the background was more shadowed but the deer was catching some light through the trees. Takes patience and luck. The top 15 or 20 percent of the image doesn't have as nice a bokeh as the rest. The other two posts both work better for me, although the full-body capture is very central and doesn't have anything particularly striking about it... a solid picture but not "magical". Cheers, Tony

[chauncey]

Brad, you are correct in saying that one should never be content, the journey is more enjoyable than is the destination.

But getting good wildlife shots in the "wild" is an exercise in "planned luck" and often you take what can you get.

Beyond that, must agree with tonydee.

[ThomGascoigne]

Gee I wish we had deer in Australia instead of Kangaroo's

[MagikTrik]

#1: eye seems pretty central, and having the body and legs lead the eye out of the picture's a problem. I think having the body side on doesn't suit a portrait image composed like this - a deer facing more (but not exactly) towards you might be better, although having the head turned in the direction you captured is good. The plant over the deer takes time to distinguish from a blemish or scarring. There is a thin reedy plant leading so close to the deer's mouth that for a moment I was wondering if it was chewing on something. Just so much noise generally - would work better if you were lucky enough to find a time when the background was more shadowed but the deer was catching some light through the trees. Takes patience and luck. The top 15 or 20 percent of the image doesn't have as nice a bokeh as the rest. The other two posts both work better for me, although the full-body capture is very central and doesn't have anything particularly striking about it... a solid picture but not "magical". Cheers, Tony
Thank you very much, that is extremely helpful for someone just starting to get an interest in wildlife.

Brad, you are correct in saying that one should never be content, the journey is more enjoyable than is the destination.

But getting good wildlife shots in the "wild" is an exercise in "planned luck" and often you take what can you get.

Beyond that, must agree with tonydee.
Yes, I definitely see what you mean. Thank you for taking the time to look & respond.
**Edit:** Just out of curiosity, where'd you get my name? I mean I don't care, I use it online all the time but I didn't think it was on POTN anywhere :)

Brad, you are correct in saying that one should never be content, the journey is more enjoyable than is the destination.

But getting good wildlife shots in the "wild" is an exercise in "planned luck" and often you take what can you get.

Beyond that, must agree with tonydee.
and you..... Are you serious? Or just trying to rub it in a bit?
Hey if you are serious though, anytime you wanna switch up I'd be glad to come to Australia in place of Pittsburgh, PA (it'd be kinda weird leaving my armory behind but I'm sure I'd get over it).

[freakeystyley34]

I'm actually really glad you said that because I've been having a bit of a hard time deciding how to shoot wildlife. Normally when shooting anything I'd focus on the eyes & then recompose (I always use the center AF point one One Shot AF Mode so I can do this easily) but since I just started shooting wildlife it just seemed a bit weird to me when the subject isn't centered (here was my first real "wildlife" post as an example, as you can see I used the standard rule of thirds but wasn't too sure about the end composition http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=586049&highlight=Deer). I am very, very new to this genre so I could use all the help I could get. Is it still "common practice" to use the rule of thirds here?
Thanks a lot for the replies, it's very helpful because as I've said I really am brand new to this kind of image & just am not quite sure how to compose.

The linked one is very nice imo. I don't think the rule of thirds necessarily needs to be adhered to, i think maybe just being off centre enough to look intentional is usually ok. I think its important to look at what the space gives you as well.

With something like this where you don't want to waste the opportunity i'm sure it becomes harder to concentrate on the finer points of composition, but i'm sure that'll come with practice.

[gooble]

The problem that I've had shooting birds and trying to use AF to get eyes in focus is that the eyes are usually quite small in the frame. Even your deer has small eyes in the frame. Given that, you are as likely to focus on the forehead or behind the eye because the AF point is not precise enough to focus on such a small feature. I've found that manually focusing works best. I use AF to get in the neighborhood and the fine tune it by hand. It also keeps you from having to focus and recompose which introduces problems of its own.

Also, I hope I didn't come off as harsh in my critique. I was just trying to be helpful.

I've taken my share of really dull pictures of birds, which at the time I was kind of proud of but as time went on and I improved I realized that the previous shots were pretty average in many ways. Eventually my shots improved.

Besides, if you think criticism is bad here try going to naturescapes.net . They'll send you home crying. :)

[-g-]

where'd you get my name?

It's in the EXIF. So's your last name and middle initial.

[MagikTrik]

It's in the EXIF. So's your last name and middle initial.
:oops:
ya.... i totally knew that...

The problem that I've had shooting birds and trying to use AF to get eyes in focus is that the eyes are usually quite small in the frame. Even your deer has small eyes in the frame. Given that, you are as likely to focus on the forehead or behind the eye because the AF point is not precise enough to focus on such a small feature. I've found that manually focusing works best. I use AF to get in the neighborhood and the fine tune it by hand. It also keeps you from having to focus and recompose which introduces problems of its own.

Also, I hope I didn't come off as harsh in my critique. I was just trying to be helpful.

I've taken my share of really dull pictures of birds, which at the time I was kind of proud of but as time went on and I improved I realized that the previous shots were pretty average in many ways. Eventually my shots improved.

Besides, if you think criticism is bad here try going to naturescapes.net . They'll send you home crying. :)

Oh no, as you can see by my response to the next post, my sig & my requests when I post for C&C I think the harsh line of critiquing works best, at least for me, maybe not everyone else. While comments like "that's pretty" may be nice for the ego (well maybe not something that simple but you get the idea), they don't do anything to help me grow or improve & on the other hand the more honest, maybe even "harsher" critiques pop[ up in my mind when I'm out shooting the next time.

Thanks again everyone, this has been rather helpful.