Fortnightly Challenge Feb. 16 - March 1 :: Nature in Unexpected Places

[Designer Dale]

Welcome to the Fortnightly Challenge Photo Thread

The purpose of the Challenge is to provide a venue where photographers of all skill levels can work to improve their craft by shooting along a common topic for two weeks - one fortnight. Helpful comments and critiques are key to reaching the intended goal - better photography.

About Your Photos

Shoot for the topics listed on the schedule. You may shoot for upcoming topics, but post photos only to their matching Challenges.

You may post as many photos as you wish for any one Challenge.

About Your Comments

Comments are critical to the success of the Challenge. If you post a photo, add a comment to another one. If you are only viewing, please add your comments, too.

Comments should be meaningful, something that the photographer can use to improve his/her work. Explain why you like or dislike a photo. Spend a moment looking at a photo before commenting on it. Try to answer the question "I like this photo because…" It really helps the photographer.

The Topic Schedule is:

Nature in Unexpected Places -- February 16 - March 1

Upcoming Topics:
Contrasts (March 2 - 15)
Beauty in Unexpected Places (March 16 - 29)


Have fun!

 

[Waybo]

Caught in the act!

This is a "squirrel-proof bird" feeder, which gives a shock when the contacts are met. We didn't expect to find a squirrel on it, much less IN it! Looks like it is time to replace the battery!

Nikon D3100, Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3.
ISO 400, 130mm, 0 ev, f/6, 1/500.
Tripod was set up on deck, with a remote release.
Tweaked with Nikon ViewNX 2.

C&C most appreciated for this newbie! Thank you.

 

[compuwar]

This is a "squirrel-proof bird" feeder, which gives a shock when the contacts are met. We didn't expect to find a squirrel on it, much less IN it! Looks like it is time to replace the battery!

Nikon D3100, Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3.
ISO 400, 130mm, 0 ev, f/6, 1/500.
Tripod was set up on deck, with a remote release.
Tweaked with Nikon ViewNX 2.

C&C most appreciated for this newbie! Thank you.

A little tighter framing would help a lot- there's nothing above or below the feeder of interest and IMO the space is wasted there, plus it's bright enough to draw the eyes off a bit and make the overall exposure brighter than the subject. I'd also probably have a tiny bit less space on the right side of the picture than the left to put a bit of space behind the tail and make it just off-center, but only by a small bit. I'd probably bump up the saturation a bit too, but that's more personal taste than anything.

Paul

 

[Waybo]

Caught in the Act - Quadtych

Nikon D3100, Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3.
ISO 400, 130mm, 0 ev, f/6, 1/500.
Tripod was set up on deck, with a remote release.
Tweaked with Nikon ViewNX 2.
Resized and made into a quadtych in PS Elements 8.
I think I'm right: This is a quadtych?
And is this the right expression: "Made into a Quadtych?"

Thank you, Paul, for your C&C on the single shot.
I was working on this when you wrote your comments.
I'll try redoing that one now.

 

[Designer Dale]

Nikon D3100, Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3.
ISO 400, 130mm, 0 ev, f/6, 1/500.
Tripod was set up on deck, with a remote release.
Tweaked with Nikon ViewNX 2.
Resized and made into a quadtych in PS Elements 8.
I think I'm right: This is a quadtych?
And is this the right expression: "Made into a Quadtych?"

Thank you, Paul, for your C&C on the single shot.
I was working on this when you wrote your comments.
I'll try redoing that one now.

I'm not sure that's a word. Four-panel works for me.

I'm not sure you need the last one on the right. It seem a bit redundant. The first two show the squirrel's approach and entry, and the expression on the third is sort of "Now what?" or 'Hi, there!"

I agree with Paul on the cropping. There is too much on the bottom in your original post, so take some off and a bit less off the top.

Another thing that I noticed is that it seems a bit flat. The background is light enough to start to blend in with the subject. I messed with it and made it a bit darker and the squirrel seemed to stand out better. If you can raise the saturation in PSE, that will add a bit more color to it.

Edit: If you want to keep them as a set of three or four, be sure to crop the same off the top and bottom of each photo. Display the Rulers if PSE has them and write down the amount you crop off the top and bottom of your main shot (the first post) and use that as a guide for the others.

Thanks for getting this going.

Dale

 

[Waybo]

Caught in the Act V. 2 or V. 3?

A little tighter framing would help a lot- there's nothing above or below the feeder of interest and IMO the space is wasted there, plus it's bright enough to draw the eyes off a bit and make the overall exposure brighter than the subject. I'd also probably have a tiny bit less space on the right side of the picture than the left to put a bit of space behind the tail and make it just off-center, but only by a small bit. I'd probably bump up the saturation a bit too, but that's more personal taste than anything.

Paul

Thank you, Paul.
I liked the saturation boost. (In Aperture 3, I went to 1.5, plus Vibrancy .5).
Since I was cropping it, I felt I could straighten it by 3.4 degrees. I'm tried cropping it in even more, even thought that left more on the right …
So, how are these?

 

[Designer Dale]

Thank you, Paul.
I liked the saturation boost. (In Aperture 3, I went to 1.5, plus Vibrancy .5).
Since I was cropping it, I felt I could straighten it by 3.4 degrees. I'm tried cropping it in even more, even thought that left more on the right …
So, how are these?

The first one is just a bit too tight for me. The cropping on the top and bottom is fine, but I would like to see more breathing room around the upper dome of the feeder. Excuse my PSE references. I failed to notice you use A3.

Dale

 

[compuwar]

Thank you, Paul.
I liked the saturation boost. (In Aperture 3, I went to 1.5, plus Vibrancy .5).
Since I was cropping it, I felt I could straighten it by 3.4 degrees. I'm tried cropping it in even more, even thought that left more on the right …
So, how are these?

I like the first one- that's the crop I'd go with composition-wise for sure! The second doesn't work as well- - it's a bit too tight. The only other thing I might do is bring down the levels a bit on the background at the top. Just to stop it from drawing the eyes away from the squirrel's face a bit. It looks like you might have lost a bit of sharpness too- does the crop not hold up well sharpness-wise?

Paul

 

[Grey Beard]

I'm not sure that's a word. Four-panel works for me.

Dale

Quadtych is a term for a four panel art work, as is polyptych which is a work of four or more panels.

KGB

 

[Phrasikleia]

Quadtych is a term for a four panel art work, as is poloptych which is a work of four or more panels.

KGB

Actually, the preferable word (if you must designate exactly four panels) is tetraptych. "Quadtych" is a Frankenstein of a word that mashes Latin and Greek forms together, and I've never heard anyone use it. It sounds to me like slang. Polyptych is the most common term for anything of three or more panels (the prefix 'poly' means 'many' in Greek, so it's a nice catch-all term).

 

[Designer Dale]

^^Thanks, P. I was hoping you would be able to properly explain that this isn't a word. It shows up in Flickr and the blogosphere, but none of the honest dictionaries I've consulted. It goes from di (2) to tri (3) and then poly (4 or more). Polyptych is a word.

Dale

 

[Ruahrc]

[super esoteric geek trivia]
In the game Bioshock, you help one of the characters complete a quadtych, and he refers to it as such.
[/super esoteric geek trivia]

Ruahrc

 

[JDDavis]

Nikon D3100, Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3.
ISO 400, 130mm, 0 ev, f/6, 1/500.
Tripod was set up on deck, with a remote release.
Tweaked with Nikon ViewNX 2.
Resized and made into a quadtych in PS Elements 8.
I think I'm right: This is a quadtych?
And is this the right expression: "Made into a Quadtych?"

Thank you, Paul, for your C&C on the single shot.
I was working on this when you wrote your comments.
I'll try redoing that one now.

I like the polyptych idea. It makes it a tad bit more interesting. I wonder how it would look as a square instead of a rectangle. I find the rectangle a bit distracting. Also the Wild Bill logo is a bit distracting to me. I think it would be cleaner without it on each shot. Great capture though and with the 4 shots it, of course, tells a bit more of a story.

 

[JDDavis]

A bit of an effort to get going on this one. I had an idea or two but nothing was working out. Took this one at the park with my daughter. Not really an unexpected place to be honest. Maybe a little unexpected because of the season and weather.

 

[AxisOfBeagles]

Lovely photo ... may I ask a few questions & pose a few observations (sorry to display my naivete);

* Is it better to have that much of the out of focus foreground? My instinct would have been to lop off 20 to 30% of the lower part of the photo ... but maybe that doesn't leave enough negative space there?
* I love the bokeh in the background. What lens is that?
* I rather like the use of selective color here - it helps bring emphasis. When you do that, is it better to tweak the levels a tad to bring out the black value a bit more, or is it better to leave the soil material more in the middle of the gray scale?

I'm impressed that you all already have shots to contribute. All I've done so far is think about it. Hope to get some worthy images underway this weekend.

 

[JDDavis]

Lovely photo ... may I ask a few questions & pose a few observations (sorry to display my naivete);

* Is it better to have that much of the out of focus foreground? My instinct would have been to lop off 20 to 30% of the lower part of the photo ... but maybe that doesn't leave enough negative space there?
* I love the bokeh in the background. What lens is that?
* I rather like the use of selective color here - it helps bring emphasis. When you do that, is it better to tweak the levels a tad to bring out the black value a bit more, or is it better to leave the soil material more in the middle of the gray scale?

I'm impressed that you all already have shots to contribute. All I've done so far is think about it. Hope to get some worthy images underway this weekend.

I debated alot about the foreground. I think it's too much honestly. When I cropped it down to where I thought it should be foreground wise I felt it brought the grass too close in. I'll probably go back and get rid of some of the foreground though.

This was the 50mm 1.8 on my D90. it's probably the best $150 (or less) you can spend on a lens. There is no real excuse not to have one.

I messed with the levels a bit to darken up the darks and I also added a bit of vignetting to try to de-emphasize everything but the grass.

Thanks.

 

[Waybo]

Rule of thirds

I love the way the green pops out ... fits todays warm temp ... there is hope for spring! Is the foreground blurred on your camera or your computer? The amount of foreground blurriness throws me off. I think it's too much of a distraction, and there seems to be an abrupt transition from blurred to crisp. But, as I understand it, without cropping, this is a textbook example of rule of thirds!

 

[JDDavis]

I love the way the green pops out ... fits todays warm temp ... there is hope for spring! Is the foreground blurred on your camera or your computer? The amount of foreground blurriness throws me off. I think it's too much of a distraction, and there seems to be an abrupt transition from blurred to crisp. But, as I understand it, without cropping, this is a textbook example of rule of thirds!

The blurring is all from the lens. (f4.5 on my 50mm). The bokeh is a bit abrupt in the foreground. I've noticed that sometimes the transition in the foreground seems abrupt while the background transition is always smooth. Not sure why, there is probably a technical reason for that. Some of it has to do with the ground too. There is a slight rise in the foreground that may play a part in that.

 

[HBOC]

The blurring is all from the lens. (f4.5 on my 50mm). The bokeh is a bit abrupt in the foreground. I've noticed that sometimes the transition in the foreground seems abrupt while the background transition is always smooth. Not sure why, there is probably a technical reason for that. Some of it has to do with the ground too. There is a slight rise in the foreground that may play a part in that.

A larger aperture will cause more of the image to be OOF (out of focus). It is because of the depth of field. You are focused on the mid-ground, so you will get this affect. The larger the aperture the lens has (meaning smaller f/stop and heavier lenses ), the more ability the lens has to produce this depth of field..shallow that is. Also the bokeh will be better.

 

[JDDavis]

A larger aperture will cause more of the image to be OOF (out of focus). It is because of the depth of field. You are focused on the mid-ground, so you will get this affect. The larger the aperture the lens has (meaning smaller f/stop and heavier lenses ), the more ability the lens has to produce this depth of field..shallow that is. Also the bokeh will be better.

Thanks HBOC. I think what Waybo was referring to was the abrupt transition in the foreground from out of focus to in focus. I've noticed it before in some shots. I think in the case of my photo it seems abrupt because there was a slight rise in the ground right where the photo starts to come back into focus.

 

[JDDavis]

OK. I cropped out a little bit of the foreground, tried to smooth out the foreground transition a bit and added a tiny bit of sepia tone. Thanks for the feedback.

 

[AxisOfBeagles]

Nature in an unexpected place

Canon 40D
EF24-70 f/2.8L USM
ISO 400
f/2.8 @ 1/45
basic post in Aperture 3
selective coloring in Photoshop Elements 8

 

[compuwar]

Canon 40D
EF24-70 f/2.8L USM
ISO 400
f/2.8 @ 1/45
basic post in Aperture 3
selective coloring in Photoshop Elements 8

I think it'd be better under the physics book, that's where my eye is led by the horizontal books on the left.

Paul

 

[rebby]

I think it'd be better under the physics book, that's where my eye is led by the horizontal books on the left.

Paul

I went straight to Physics as well. Had to look twice to find the "nature".

 

[fcortese]

Canon 40D
EF24-70 f/2.8L USM
ISO 400
f/2.8 @ 1/45
basic post in Aperture 3
selective coloring in Photoshop Elements 8

Very clever. I agree with compuwar, my eye went straight to the Physics book first, but I love that all the other covers are b&w, while nature is in color. Very nicely done.