Rework
Critique Style Requested: Initial Reaction
Please share your immediate response to the image before reading the photographer’s intent (obscured text below) or other comments. The photographer seeks a genuinely unbiased first impression.
Too tight?
I love it as is. I don’t think it’s too tight.
Hi Bob! This is a beautiful portrait of the fox. Excellent details and light. A little room on the right would help but it is beautiful as is.
Bob: the pose of the fox and the detail you have captured is excellent. Just a bit more room right and left would make a great alternative.
Bob, the rich colors and wonderful warmth is really nice here. I agree that it could use a bit more room to the right and maybe a bit to the bottom. Not much needed though.
I agree some more canvas on the RHS.
I would encourage you to post the techs so that image can be better analyzed.
I guess that this image was shot with a long zoom. I may tone down the whitws in the BG. Somehow it lacks the fine detail.
Hi Bob. This is a lovely image of the fox - and I really like the gesture of its foot - brings it alive! I do feel it’s a tad bit tight on the right, and it would be easy enough to add some canvas to that side.
Thank you all for your kind remarks regarding this image. @brenda_tharp , @Ed_Williams, @Steve_Kennedy , @Richard_Sandor I have reprocessed the image to include some additional canvas on the right and bottom as well as enhancing the shadows in the foreground snow @JRajput . Note the pale shadow of the fox immediately below his body. pretty flat light. The background is mostly white sky that blends inconspicuously with the snow.
There is a field in the submission area that I always populate with the pertinent camera data including camera, lens, exposure etc. Since it was not displayed I will add it to this commentary: Canon EOS 10D; EF 70-200mm + 2x @ 390mm; f/11 @ 1/250 sec, -1 EV, ISO 100; support via bean bag on a widow frame of the Tundra Buggy.
Not too tight. But I would like it with more snow around the top and right hand side too.
After answering your question about the frame being too tight or not, I looked at the full size photo. There is some motion blur in the head, so I think 1/250s was just not enought for this capture. If your 70-200mm is a f/2,8, I wonder why you didn’t use exactly the 2,8 aperture or - if you don’t like the DOF of that - go for f/4? With ISO 100 that would have given you 1/1000s and no chance of motion blur. Do let me know your thoughts on that.
Grt, Ingrid.
PS: lovely pose, exposure and colours!
Thank you @Ingrid_Vekemans for your observations.
I accept all responsibility for any and all defects and other technical errors. I am not offering the following, as any excuse, but as attempt to provide what likely contributed to interpretation of the image. This was my first outing with a digital camera, taken in 2004. I made many errors in capture due to a background with film–exposing to the left; not adapting quickly to atmospheric changes, i.e. a slight breeze, leading to bad f-stop, shutter speed and inappropriate ISO setting. That I was able to capture any acceptable images was purely Divine intervention.
You mentioned that you detected some distractions around the fox’s face and attributed it to movement of the fox. I revisited the original RAW file and looked for signs of blur that would have been caused by movement. I am attaching a higher magnification of the fox’s face. It appears that all the hairs seem to be distinct but a bit soft. What you are seeing may be my inept capture and post-processing, with a slight breeze blowing.
Thanks for your reply, Bob. Nice shot for one of your first!
Is the focus maybe on a different part of the body?
Or maybe it’s the lense quality at f/11? What lense was this photo taken with?
Grt, Ingrid.
That image was made 20 years ago @Ingrid_Vekemans. The lenses I was using for this shot were a Canon 70-200mm + Canon 2x set to 390mm, all good glass. I continue to use those lenses. The in-camera data is limited. No record of the focal distance or location within the frame. My best guess is because the fox was moving across the field I set the focal point to his mid-body. That portion of his pelage appears to be sharp. His face is closer to the camera but even at f/11 there should have been sufficient depth of field. I do see what appears as movement-induced blur on the trailing edge of his right rear paw.
