Saved

We got this little "White Eye" away from a cat and put him in a hanging basket before to much damage was done. Pleased to say he flew away after a few minutes. I just had time to get this photo. No post editing
Model NIKON D5100
Shutter Speed 1/400 s
F-Number f/5.6
ISO ISO 800
Exposure Bias Value 0.00 eV
Metering Mode Pattern
Flash Flash did not fire
Focal Length 200 mm
White Balance Auto white balance
Date/Time Original 18/05/2012 8:43:52 a.m.

Phil- Using the new critique guidelines I would rate this as follows:

Total score = 9/12

-1 Technical
-1 Composition
-1 Lighting

I really like the story behind the shot, although the shot does not really tell it. The basket makes a fantastic setting, love the different colors and textures!

As far as the points- I think the bottom right corner should be cropped out, a bit more space in front of the bird would have been nice (but maybe not possible). You do have some blown out highlights on the breast of the bird due to lighting. Depending on your distance I'm wondering if some fill flash would have helped with the darker areas and balance out the overall brightness.

This is a great capture and always difficult when you don't know how much time you have! The basket really makes this unique!

cnyram said:

Phil- Using the new critique guidelines I would rate this as follows:

Total score = 9/12

-1 Technical
-1 Composition
-1 Lighting

Click to expand...

I will echo Rick's comments above. This is a cool story, followed up by a nice shot. It's a neat looking bird, and you got close enough to show a lot of detail, which is a big one for me with wildlife photography. The big minus on this one is the lighting. I'm assuming this hanging basket has quite a bit of shade above it, and since this was taking on the fly, you didn't have much to work with.

Some flash would've went a long way here, especially if you could've bounced it off the overhang. The ISO could've then been dialed up to 200 and made this one really shine.

With a bit of pp work and a "re-frame of story" this could be an 11/12. For an unprocessed, unprepared shot it's terrific however.

8/12
-1 Impact
-1 Technical
-1 Center of Interest
-1 Story telling

I really like a lot about the shot. It has a good story. I understand that circumstances may have prevented that story being told in this single shot - but was it possible to have caught nature taking it's course ie. the cat ravaging the bird followed up by the saved bird? That would have brought it closer to editorial and evoked more emotion.

Completely appreciate that there were only seconds to operate here so available light was what it was - post production can even up the light and kill the blow out on the chest feathers and it would look nice as a square crop in my opinion, chop off the basket.
Seeing as the "saviour" is not told in the image story, I'd consider a couple of hours editing here and turn it into a pristine shot of a sweet little bird in a square crop and fully natural environment (only the plants). That would involve tidying up all the stray feathers as well.

Then the -1 for story telling would go (you didn't catch the rescue, so story changes to tranquility), the -1 for tech would go (editing can fix this up beautifully), the center of interest would go (all about the beauty of the bird in a square crop), and even possibly the -1 for impact would go depending on the retouch.

You've got a really good bit of candid RAW work here, unfortunately the great story isn't told in the image so I'd personally recommend fixing it up into the stunning image it can be.

I understand that circumstances may have prevented that story being told in this single shot - but was it possible to have caught nature taking it's course ie. the cat ravaging the bird followed up by the saved bird? That would have brought it closer to editorial and evoked more emotion.

Click to expand...

Really excellent critique, Julian!

As a side note, I'm guessing that a lot of photojournalists find them in this kind of situation: get the shot or rescue the animal (or human, for that matter).

I know the answer to that one: get the shot. No excuses, every time.

But then again, Editors are sub-humans with intelligence levels somewhere near that gritty stuff that accumulates in the corner of your eye.

ohkphoto said:

Really excellent critique, Julian!

As a side note, I'm guessing that a lot of photojournalists find them in this kind of situation: get the shot or rescue the animal (or human, for that matter).

Click to expand...

Thanks Helene,

Interesting question but unfortunately as Browncoat indicated, the answer isn't very pretty. Photojournalists aren't in the business of saving - they're paid to capture the story, the few I've known have all said they've practically had to detach from empathy for a living. But of course, the type of events; oil spills, natural disasters, war etc. that they cover are usually teaming with rescue services anyway. And a photojournalist might of course actually shoot the rescue teams as they go about their duties, that's always compelling material.

The story of this picture got me thinking of the second scenario because Phil said "We" got this little bird away from a cat. Perhaps one could have achieved that (perhaps not), while the other shot the struggle and rescue. Maybe a set of 3 shots, only the last one would have needed to be beautifully captured (or edited so). The first 2 could/would have been great even if shaky, blurry and not well lit just as long as we got the urgency and story. Food for thought for the next time I hope.

As it is, I'd love to see the single shot after a detailed retouch. So much is good about it.

JulianK said:

Thanks Helene,

Interesting question but unfortunately as Browncoat indicated, the answer isn't very pretty. Photojournalists aren't in the business of saving - they're paid to capture the story, the few I've known have all said they've practically had to detach from empathy for a living. But of course, the type of events; oil spills, natural disasters, war etc. that they cover are usually teaming with rescue services anyway. And a photojournalist might of course actually shoot the rescue teams as they go about their duties, that's always compelling material.

The story of this picture got me thinking of the second scenario because Phil said "We" got this little bird away from a cat. Perhaps one could have achieved that (perhaps not), while the other shot the struggle and rescue. Maybe a set of 3 shots, only the last one would have needed to be beautifully captured (or edited so). The first 2 could/would have been great even if shaky, blurry and not well lit just as long as we got the urgency and story. Food for thought for the next time I hope.

As it is, I'd love to see the single shot after a detailed retouch. So much is good about it.

Click to expand...

Feel free to do what you wish with it I only have simple software with ltd editing. But should we not stay on topic?

Philnz said:

Feel free to do what you wish with it I only have simple software with ltd editing. But should we not stay on topic?

Click to expand...

I'd love to if only I had the extra time.
We've drifted into photojournalism a bit, but respective of the story behind your shot I think it's interesting and perhaps could help people with their approach to shooting rescues.
But sure, let's pull it back...enough said on journalism (it's all Helene's fault!) I jest...

I really like the picture and agree with the other comments. Life is told through pictures and sometimes it's not pretty. However even when we view pictures of tragedy there always seems to be those pictures that give us HOPE..... the story of this bird (vs cat) could have been tragic for the bird. Although that was not captured in images, this photo shows Hope.

Chris

JulianK said:

Interesting question but unfortunately as Browncoat indicated, the answer isn't very pretty. Photojournalists aren't in the business of saving - they're paid to capture the story, the few I've known have all said they've practically had to detach from empathy for a living.

Click to expand...

That's definitely true. During my stint as a photojournalist, there was of course the boring: bake sales, handshake photo ops, award ceremonies, and just the normal ho-mum everyday life stuff. The interesting: sports, the many faces of the county fair, the rock concerts. And then, there was the rude awakenings: the fires and accident/crime scenes.

I remember the first time I got that 2am phone call from the editor. There was a fire, and the staff photographer was out of town on vacation. There was this feeling of exhilaration as I leapt out of bed, grabbed my gear, and raced off in my car. The drive was about 15 minutes long, and the whole time I just kept wishing that the fire would really be blazing when I got there. What a cool shot that would be, burning orange and red flames rising 5 stories into the night sky. Maybe even get lucky and catch a firefighter pulling someone out of the house....one could hope.

But then as I put my car in park and flashed my media badge to the emergency personnel, it hit me. People's lives are ruined. Someone could be dead, they could all be dead. What's worse is that after reality hits you, and you have that sick feeling in your stomach, you have to get the shot anyway, no matter how you feel about it. And it's all news, no matter who died or didn't die. No matter how much destruction was caused, everyone wants to read about it the next morning.

Thank you all for your input and Critique on my photo "Saved"
Regards Phil

Philnz said:

Thank you all for your input and Critique on my photo "Saved"
Regards Phil

Click to expand...

You're certainly welcome Phil. This is my living so I'm busy but if editing isn't your strong point please feel free to PM me or email me and I'd be more than happy to respond with tips and techniques on Photoshop use.