It's only their personal opinion, I have seen amature work I love and professional work that I find both bland and questionable. For me, when we post we lay ourselves open to others views. I take what is valuable to learn from and disregard the rest as subjective view.
I usually only post on the groups that I am a member and have received lots of valuable comments and critiques. I disregard ratings like the one received by this photo. Someone went through my portfolio and "1 Starred" many of my photos. I posted the photo because I felt the pose was very different from most heron poses.
In all honesty, I would have given this a 1 or a 2. I feel like it's very cropped in, a bit low resolution or perhaps slightly out of focus, the sharpness just isn't there. Then there is no action or nice pose, it's the resting position of the bird. The background is busy, distracting from the main subject and the composition overall isn't striking. Also, there doesn't seem to be amazing light.
These are all pretty difficult things to hit with wildlife photography as you are often not in control of pose, light or distance to the subject. Look up Jan Wegener on Youtube, he has some great tips on what makes a good (bird) image.
I hope this helps, I just mean this as constructive criticism and not to put you down. Just keep practicing and practicing! Wildlife photography is hard, and takes many hours, many shots and often a whole lot of effort to get that good one....
Thanks for you thoughts. I agree with what you said about the background and lighting. Unfortunately when converting from RAW the sharpness was lost. The main reason I posted was because of the unusual pose and the intense look in the bird's eye. Since I was shooting at eye level with the bird. The bird had turned it's head and was staring intensely.
Ah alright. I personally don't see the unusual pose and intense look. Regarding the sharpness, if it's sharp in raw, there shouldn't be any reason not to have it sharp after conversion. Just my two cents. Cheers
I think that's what happens when people woh don't photograph wildlife rate a wildlife photo. Most likely, they are judging it according to the same standards that they judge other genres by.
The problem with that is that when photographers photograph people for fashion, glamour, and portrait photography, the subjects cooperate, and they are able to control everything about the shoot.
They control where the people stand, what they wear, what the background will be, they use artificial lighting to light it exactly how they want, they get the subjects to pose any way they want them to, and they get to keep shooting them for a long time as they experiment with many different poses, lighting set-ups, and backdrops. Then they go through hundreds, or even thousands, of carefully controlled images, and select the ones that are the very, very best.
This is all great for photographing those genres where such control is possible. The problem arises when people who do that kind of photography see wildlife photos, and judge them by the same standards that they judge fashion, portraiture, and glamour photos by.
As wildlife and wild bird photographers, we work our asses off all day, or maybe even all week or all year, just to finally get ourselves in position to fill the frame with our uncooperative subject, and then hope to have a second or three in which to rip off a few quick frames before the critter takes off like a bat out of hell.
Perhaps in some ways, by some standards, it is "just a snapshot". But even if that is true, the viewer needs to understand just how much time and planning and effort it took in order to get one's self in position to take that snapshot ... which then means that it really isn't a snapshot at all.
Exactly. And the herons around here have not been "habituated to people" as the biologist would say. They are skidish . I was surprised that it let me move around to get a clear shot I was 200+ from it. I have tried approaching from a kayak but they it didn't make a difference. So waders and boots . Luckily gators aren't numerous around here. LOL
I agree with you - mostly. In a wildlife venue, the viewer might take the difficulty or rareness of the shot into consideration. I'm a ecologist (botanist really) and i might look at this and think "nice shot. good catch". But in a photography arena, the same shot will be judged differently, on composition and technique as well, even in the case of wildlife images. This image can be an A+ in a 'documentation' style, less in overall photography style. No dig meant on the image. It sounds like documenting the sigting was the goal - success!
The way I understand Fstoppers rating system, 5 stars means that the image is truly world class. So I think that to give any image 5 stars, one would need to compare it to the best images in the world that feature the same subject matter, and see that it is right there with the best in the world.
This means that if rating this image 5 stars, you would Google "Great Blue Heron" images, spend a good long while closely viewing all of the hundreds and hundreds of images that come up in the search results, and then - if you think this image is right there with the very best heron images that you can find anywhere in the world - then it deserves a 5 star rating.
Hence, giving a 5 star rating is a very, very big deal. It truly means that you think the image is one of the best in the entire world. Is that what you think of this heron photo? If so, then your 5 star rating is justified, and well deserved.
Tafford, thanks for the high praise. I agree with Tom on reviewing other heron photos. A search on Fstopper photos returns 210 photos of herons. Tom's "Wood Duck" is an "Editor's Choice" and received a 3.6 rating. Jake VanderHoeven has some remarkable bird shots.
Thanks for agreeing. One can't legitimately rate a photo as "world class" until one has seen the world's best photos of that particular subject matter. Otherwise, how would you even know what "world class" is for that specific subject?
I wouldn't give anyone a 1 rating. That said, the best this would get from me is a 2. The photo is too dark, over saturated, lacks feather detail, and cropped a little tight.
Although you feel the pose is unique, I don't feel it is.
I have a few with the same pose, just not the same angle as this.
I understand all to well about the troubles that a person goes through to get the shot, but that doesn't automatically make the shot great.
Dave is already there. His work is well beyond that which you have rated as "world class".
Earlier you said, "put up or shut up". Well, Dave put up by starting a thread with his Heron photos.
I can't find any fault with what Dave has said in this thread. His comments are accurate and insightful, and show a personal understanding of the subject matter being discussed, which comes from his own personal experiences photographing Herons.
It is an unusual pose, which I find quite interesting. Many people don't understand or appreciate the difficulty of obtaining a shot like this.
It's only their personal opinion, I have seen amature work I love and professional work that I find both bland and questionable. For me, when we post we lay ourselves open to others views. I take what is valuable to learn from and disregard the rest as subjective view.
I usually only post on the groups that I am a member and have received lots of valuable comments and critiques. I disregard ratings like the one received by this photo. Someone went through my portfolio and "1 Starred" many of my photos. I posted the photo because I felt the pose was very different from most heron poses.
In all honesty, I would have given this a 1 or a 2. I feel like it's very cropped in, a bit low resolution or perhaps slightly out of focus, the sharpness just isn't there. Then there is no action or nice pose, it's the resting position of the bird. The background is busy, distracting from the main subject and the composition overall isn't striking. Also, there doesn't seem to be amazing light.
These are all pretty difficult things to hit with wildlife photography as you are often not in control of pose, light or distance to the subject. Look up Jan Wegener on Youtube, he has some great tips on what makes a good (bird) image.
I hope this helps, I just mean this as constructive criticism and not to put you down. Just keep practicing and practicing! Wildlife photography is hard, and takes many hours, many shots and often a whole lot of effort to get that good one....
Thanks for you thoughts. I agree with what you said about the background and lighting. Unfortunately when converting from RAW the sharpness was lost. The main reason I posted was because of the unusual pose and the intense look in the bird's eye. Since I was shooting at eye level with the bird. The bird had turned it's head and was staring intensely.
Ah alright. I personally don't see the unusual pose and intense look. Regarding the sharpness, if it's sharp in raw, there shouldn't be any reason not to have it sharp after conversion. Just my two cents. Cheers
Daniel, thanks for commenting. A search on Fstopper photos returns 210 photos of herons. None are in this pose. That is why I feel it is unusual.
I think that's what happens when people woh don't photograph wildlife rate a wildlife photo. Most likely, they are judging it according to the same standards that they judge other genres by.
The problem with that is that when photographers photograph people for fashion, glamour, and portrait photography, the subjects cooperate, and they are able to control everything about the shoot.
They control where the people stand, what they wear, what the background will be, they use artificial lighting to light it exactly how they want, they get the subjects to pose any way they want them to, and they get to keep shooting them for a long time as they experiment with many different poses, lighting set-ups, and backdrops. Then they go through hundreds, or even thousands, of carefully controlled images, and select the ones that are the very, very best.
This is all great for photographing those genres where such control is possible. The problem arises when people who do that kind of photography see wildlife photos, and judge them by the same standards that they judge fashion, portraiture, and glamour photos by.
As wildlife and wild bird photographers, we work our asses off all day, or maybe even all week or all year, just to finally get ourselves in position to fill the frame with our uncooperative subject, and then hope to have a second or three in which to rip off a few quick frames before the critter takes off like a bat out of hell.
Perhaps in some ways, by some standards, it is "just a snapshot". But even if that is true, the viewer needs to understand just how much time and planning and effort it took in order to get one's self in position to take that snapshot ... which then means that it really isn't a snapshot at all.
Exactly. And the herons around here have not been "habituated to people" as the biologist would say. They are skidish . I was surprised that it let me move around to get a clear shot I was 200+ from it. I have tried approaching from a kayak but they it didn't make a difference. So waders and boots . Luckily gators aren't numerous around here. LOL
I agree with you - mostly. In a wildlife venue, the viewer might take the difficulty or rareness of the shot into consideration. I'm a ecologist (botanist really) and i might look at this and think "nice shot. good catch". But in a photography arena, the same shot will be judged differently, on composition and technique as well, even in the case of wildlife images. This image can be an A+ in a 'documentation' style, less in overall photography style. No dig meant on the image. It sounds like documenting the sigting was the goal - success!
Sure wish I could get snapshots like that!
Wow, Trafford - that is high praise indeed!
The way I understand Fstoppers rating system, 5 stars means that the image is truly world class. So I think that to give any image 5 stars, one would need to compare it to the best images in the world that feature the same subject matter, and see that it is right there with the best in the world.
This means that if rating this image 5 stars, you would Google "Great Blue Heron" images, spend a good long while closely viewing all of the hundreds and hundreds of images that come up in the search results, and then - if you think this image is right there with the very best heron images that you can find anywhere in the world - then it deserves a 5 star rating.
Hence, giving a 5 star rating is a very, very big deal. It truly means that you think the image is one of the best in the entire world. Is that what you think of this heron photo? If so, then your 5 star rating is justified, and well deserved.
Tafford, thanks for the high praise. I agree with Tom on reviewing other heron photos. A search on Fstopper photos returns 210 photos of herons. Tom's "Wood Duck" is an "Editor's Choice" and received a 3.6 rating. Jake VanderHoeven has some remarkable bird shots.
Thanks for agreeing. One can't legitimately rate a photo as "world class" until one has seen the world's best photos of that particular subject matter. Otherwise, how would you even know what "world class" is for that specific subject?
I wouldn't give anyone a 1 rating. That said, the best this would get from me is a 2. The photo is too dark, over saturated, lacks feather detail, and cropped a little tight.
Although you feel the pose is unique, I don't feel it is.
I have a few with the same pose, just not the same angle as this.
I understand all to well about the troubles that a person goes through to get the shot, but that doesn't automatically make the shot great.
Go to my GBH thread for a few of my heron shots.
Dave is already there. His work is well beyond that which you have rated as "world class".
Earlier you said, "put up or shut up". Well, Dave put up by starting a thread with his Heron photos.
I can't find any fault with what Dave has said in this thread. His comments are accurate and insightful, and show a personal understanding of the subject matter being discussed, which comes from his own personal experiences photographing Herons.
Thanks Tom.