Backyard Poultry Forum • View topic - your help on the photo, not the bird please

Backyard Poultry Forum

Chickens, waterfowl & all poultry - home of exhibition & backyard poultry in Australia & New Zealand
Login with a social network:
It is currently Thu Dec 13, 2018 10:24 pm

All times are UTC + 10 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:16 pm 
i have 3 photos of indian roosters here. now please disregard the breed, not how bad or good you think the photo is if you think you know anything about them. what i want to know how do you like the rooster to look, what makes you like the photo, how could it be better in a exhibition way or/and looks good in an appealing way and if you can, why? do you like the stance, does it look too out of proportion or not? or do you like it out of proportion any how. i am using a wide angle lens and remember one day it might be your bird i am photographing so be honest and tell me what you like:

Image

the next TWO cockerels are the same bird.

A:

Image

B:

Image

here is a hen, the last 3 photos i have not fiddled with but this one i have lightened it:

Image

here she is before i lightened the photo:

Image

thanks heaps for all comments as it will help me improve my photography of not just show birds but birds in the yard.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:24 pm 
Offline
Fiesty Fowl
Fiesty Fowl
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:02 pm
Posts: 1192
Location: Rosewood Qld
I would be voting for the bottom male and the top hen. The thing is that as far as stance every breed requires different stance as I know you are well aware Ruff. Now if only our feathered models would co-operate.

With light I also like the setup you have done on those two shots as well. I dream of one day having a good SLR but right now I have a simple point and shoot Canon Automatic

_________________
Geoff
http://www.qagppbp.yolasite.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:30 pm 
thanks geoff. here i used natural light as the door was open behind me, however it was a very dull day and this was a brighter moment.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:37 pm 
Offline
Champion Bird
Champion Bird

Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 9:34 pm
Posts: 943
Location: Western Vic
I prefer the picture of the hen before it was lightened. I think by lightening the picture, you have lost some of the clarity and colour. The lacing is a lot easier to see in the lighter picture, but the face has lost it's 'crispness' and the true colour has been distorted, including its eye colour.

I like the third pic of the roo, it is how I would want my wyandottes or 'lorps to be photographed. However, since it is a picture of an Indian, perhaps the angle of the first pic is appropriate, as it shows the breadth of the chest better. However I don't like the craned stance in the first pic.

This is not from an exhibition perspective, just my personal preference.

_________________
Cheers, Michelle
slightly obsessed with wyandottes..must stop hatching chickens!
http://shellspoultry.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:38 pm 
Offline
Golden Brush Turkey
Golden Brush Turkey
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 1:07 am
Posts: 22909
Location: toodyay, WA
i like the implied action of the crowing bird, and the more natural look of the bottom hen.

_________________
Anconas, Silkies and Pekins :) Caladenia Cottage
Silkies
Wonderful Silkies


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:44 pm 
Offline
Old Mother Goose
Old Mother Goose

Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 6769
Are you looking only for exhibitor comments?

Or would you like some comments on aesthetics from a non-exhibitor, too?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:50 pm 
winglet non exhibitors are just as important if not more so as i have this dream of doing a calander one day, if only, and they are bought by everyday ordinary people who far exceed the show people, but i want to do is please both.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:12 pm 
Offline
Old Mother Goose
Old Mother Goose

Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 6769
Cool. I currently have a chook calendar hanging on the wall, too... so I'd be one of your potential customers.

In the rooster ones, the most appealing one for me is the third photo. My reasons are several;
  • He looks 'alive' with that slight tilt to his head where he's looking at us.
  • He looks 'proud' in that stance, whilst being completely in control & looking quite comfortable.
  • It shows his plumage in detail, both from a colour perspective & from a glossiness perspective

In the hen ones, the most appealing one for me is the second one. Oddly, the thing that draws my attention in the hen photo/s is the damage to the wall on the left, the dirty floor (where there are no shavings) and the bit of shaving hanging off her. The reasons I prefer the second photo over the first (although I would prefer one part-way between the two, but closer to the second) are:
  • She looks more like velvet in the second one.
  • She looks more 'solid' in the darker one, and that reinforces my ideas of a heavy breed.
  • I tend to favour darker birds over lighter ones... I love the blackness of her, rather than the lacing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:14 pm 
Offline
Fiesty Fowl
Fiesty Fowl
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:02 pm
Posts: 1192
Location: Rosewood Qld
I guess it is the showman in me but I always look for the perfect stance. Yes the action of crowing is great and in it's place is excellent. I am not saying it is in anyway wrong just when you take photos of my birds Ruff I hope he behaves for you. :biggrin:

_________________
Geoff
http://www.qagppbp.yolasite.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:19 pm 
Offline
Champion Bird
Champion Bird

Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 9:34 pm
Posts: 943
Location: Western Vic
In a calendar I would also like a crowing rooster.. natural action shots are appealing when done correctly.

I would love to get a snap of one of mine standing on a hay bale or fence etc crowing his heart out as the sun comes up. Unfortunately my coop is on the wrong side of the house to get the sun rise.

_________________
Cheers, Michelle
slightly obsessed with wyandottes..must stop hatching chickens!
http://shellspoultry.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:34 pm 
thanks everyone, keep the commentscoming, i want to get photoshop sometime as i have one photo i love of my crossbreds with the late afternoon sun on him but it is daggy old cages in the bachground and i want to blurr them.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 11:47 pm 
Offline
Junior Champion Bird
Junior Champion Bird
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:49 am
Posts: 674
Location: VIC
Well Ruff, I like the 2nd picture of the cockerel as it seems to be still a natural stance but the legs are spread, which I think looks better, and he looks like he has something to say about himself. With the hen, very easy, I like the last shot, as said the true colour of the bird seems to get lost with the lightened one, and I like the colours to be as strong as possibe unless going for a more artisic shot with shadows, sunsets, rainbows, mist etc etc..
Just some thoughts,
Barrabool


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 11:53 pm 
Offline
Clever Cockerel
Clever Cockerel

Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 10:52 am
Posts: 1554
Location: Southern Highlands NSW
Really like the second rooster. Love the stance, very down to earth, nice head, the sheen on the hackles, the strong body, beautiful tail feathers. He looks at ease with himself.

On balance the lighter hen, could be a little bit darker but the texture in the black of the body and neck and in the red of the face should still be visible.
The black in the second hen is too stark, no texture, rather lifeless.

_________________
Richness is when you need no more..... author unknown


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 2:27 am 
Offline
Superior Bird
Superior Bird
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 3:13 am
Posts: 3059
Location: Bendigo
Hi ruff;
I have seen a lot of the wonderful photo's that you have taken in the past, fantastic photos that you never give yourself enough credit for.
All these photo's could benefit from a bit of work in photoshop or similar because you had to shoot in less than adequate light conditions. There is so much detail in these photo's that we can't see because it is buried under the dark cast over it.

This is your original photo.
Image

Now my photo program has an "Enhance Image " menu. One of these functions within is called "One Step Photo Fix". You just press this button and the software does what it thinks the photo needs. I used it on the photo above and it lightened it a bit. I pressed it again and it lightened it a bit more. Those two pushes of the button gave me pretty much the same result as your effort, shown below. Which is pretty neat considering I didn't have to think about anything, just push the button and decide whether it was better than it was before or not.

Image

Now I still believed there to be a lot of detail missing, so I pushed that button a third (or maybe fourth) time and got this.
Image

To be honest I think it might have gone a little too far, but we can see a lot more of the lacing.
So with just 3 or 4 clicks of the mouse we have got this far, about 90 per cent of photo's I see on this forum would be greatly improved using this feature.

But very quickly someone like you ruff would find it these discrete steps annoying, i.e what you were really after was something between what 2 clicks produces and what 3 clicks produces and the software won't do it all for you automatically. So you have to do a bit of the work yourself.
But it isn't that daunting at all. Also on the "Enhance Photo" menu is another function called "Smart Photo Fix".
If you use that function you get this screen
Image

All you do is slide those buttons and see what happens and when you have it exactly as you want, press OK and it is done. You aren't just looking at those little before and after thumbnails you also see it previewed in the main image.
I've used it on the image below, I'm not saying it is more what you would like but if it was you ruff adjusting those little sliders you could get it exactly as you like. Little bit more work than the One Step function but not really any more knowledge needed.

Image


When you look at your images there is a LOT of detail missing. We haven't made it appear by magic, all that information was captured by the camera it just wasn't presented in a way our eyes can see it.
Think of a greyscale image, Black and white photo whatever you want to call it. A digital image might store that info as 255 shades of grey. Starting at zero for dead black all the way up to 255 for white. Now each individual pixel in the image is stored as a number between 0 and 255. And it is shown on your monitor as a very particular shade of grey and even printed as such.
But the human eye can only differentiate about 20 or so shades of grey. So if your image has areas in it where the difference in pixel value is only about 10 or less your eyes will think it is all one uniform color. Take the roosters for example, Most of their body is just one big dark inkspot but there is information there we can't see. Say for example an area on the rooster where all the pixel values are between 230 and 240. Shown on our screens as their true value we can't tell them apart.
But if we display 230 as 140,
231 as 150,
232 as 160 .... 239 as 230 and 240 as 240 then we spread that information out so that our eyes can resolve the differences and all of a sudden there is detail there, like feathers and what not.

With colors it is very similar, a photo with the dark cast over it that poor lighting produces just squashes everything up the dark end so much we can't tell them apart. In these photo's the poor lighting has pushed them all up the dark end so much we can't even tell black from gold.

ruff;
Whilst there is no substitute for good lighting (you know so much more about photography than i can even guess at) learning how to use a photoshop program is well worth it because so often you have no control over the conditions when you are taking the photo. Lots of stuff in these programs you can do without really knowing what you doing, slide a few settings and just look and see if you like what is happening.

My original background in digital images was actually a subject at uni called Scientific Photography. Some of it was about extracting information from an images you get from a Scanning Electron Microscope etc. Whilst not actually photographs the images themselves are stored and manipulated exactly the same as ordinary pictures.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 9:32 am 
Offline
Champion Bird
Champion Bird

Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 11:08 am
Posts: 763
I like the third roo - for one fact - he is actualy looking at the camera. I hate eyes of an animal or person in a photo that is looking to the camera direction but not down the lens. To me it looks a bit creepy. The crowing one - while nice action wise- the eyes are creeping me out. I wouldn't buy a calendar with him on the front. With the hens - both are ok - but I would still prefer the bird to have eyes focused on the camera. I like the body better lighter so feather design can be seen easily but i like the head an dneck of the darker one as it looks more glossy.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Brandwatch and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
©2004-2014 Backyardpoultry.com. Content rights reserved
freestone