Gallery: WildlifePosted January 9, 2011106 views8 comments
Lion Cubs in Lewa Conservancy, Kenya.
Nikon D300
Nikkor AF-S VR 300 mm f/2,8
ISO 400
f/3,2
1/1600
Comments
8 comments
Comment posted by Richard Teller on January 9, 2011 at 3:44 PM
The comp and light of the image are very good. The out of focus lioness is to distracting though. My eye had a hard time getting to the cub.
Registered on August 23, 2010, 1162 Posts, 6692 Comments
Comment posted by Brad Hill on January 9, 2011 at 3:54 PM
Hi Ingrid,
I like the concept here (and always like when folks try things that "outside the box") but tend to think that this would work better if the "big out of focus thing" was a tree or rock - too easy to think this is simply an out-of-focus shot at first glance. One other thing - I'm super familiar with the characteristics of that lens, and to me this doesn't look like its typical bokeh/DOF characteristics (beautifully smooth transition from tack-sharp in-focus zones to almost buttery out-of-focus zones) - I'm guessing a little blurring went on in post-processing (like a Guassian blur or some other similar "de-focusing")? This is ABSOLUTELY not a problem or a criticism, just an observation of how the image looks to me.
Cheers...thanks for sharing this creative image...
Brad
Registered on May 29, 2007, 431 Posts, 6061 Comments
Comment posted by Ingrid Vekemans on January 9, 2011 at 4:02 PM
:-(( The photo was meant like this and not an accidental out of focus shot - no post processing apart from adjusting a bit of color and contrast. Thanks for your comments...
Grtz, Ingrid.
Registered on August 2, 2010, 138 Posts, 780 Comments
Comment posted by Brad Hill on January 9, 2011 at 4:18 PM
Hi Ingrid,
Didn't mean to offend - I never thought it was an accidental out-of-focus shot. But I think that because the upright and out-of-focus lion is still so clearly a lion one's eye is drawn there quite quickly and it's easy to think at first glance that the image is out of focus (which likely wouldn't happen if the big out-of-focus object didn't have an eye or ears, i.e., if it were an inanimate object). Your image instantly reminds me of Jim Brandenburg's famous "Brother Wolf" image - the cover image on his book by the same name (and this is where my thinking that it would work better if the out-of-focus object was not an eye-drawing animal like a lion cub).
Go here to see what I mean (sorry, couldn't find a direct link to the image I'm referring to - only as a book cover):
A larger version of Jim's image is also available on his website (http://www.jimbrandenburg.com/ but because it's in his Wolves gallery and the site is driven by Adobe Flash it's not possible to give you a direct link (you'll have to hunt around a little).
Cheers...
Brad
Registered on May 29, 2007, 431 Posts, 6061 Comments
Comment posted by Gary Gulash on January 9, 2011 at 9:13 PM
Hi Ingrid. The expression of the cub hiding behind mom is precious. Problem is, the mother's expression is also very interesting and leaves me wanting to see her more clearly as well; they really are an inseparable unit in my mind at least. I'm not too sure about the crop, would like more room on the left I think - would be interesting to see the original full frame version. Good on you for taking the road less travelled and putting it out there for us to appreciate. I would love to just get to Kenya some day, I'll post gopher photos for now..
Registered on January 28, 2005, 879 Posts, 12098 Comments
Comment posted by Ingrid Vekemans on January 10, 2011 at 1:31 AM
@Brad - I wasn't offendend, maybe just feeling a bit misunderstood
I know Jim Brandenburg's image all too well - and totally see what you mean - unfortunately there was only grass around in this place, but I'll dig for a 'hiding behind grass' shot in my archive ;-)
@Gary and Richard - thanks for your comments - the OOF lion in front is also a cub, not the mother.
Registered on August 2, 2010, 138 Posts, 780 Comments
Comment posted by Vincent Grafhorst on January 10, 2011 at 1:03 PM
Great out of the box thinking Ingrid! I do understand the point raised about the OOF subject being another lion instead of another object, but then again you have created something unique here!
Registered on February 24, 2006, 504 Posts, 7203 Comments
Comment posted by Marsel van Oosten on January 12, 2011 at 8:41 AM
Nice one Ingrid. The shallow dof works well for me. I agree with Brad though that in this case it does look a bit confusing, as in unintentional. A rather drastic alternative could be to crop a large slice off the top, just beneath the eyes of the oof cub. Then you could also crop a large slice off the left side to get a more vertical aspect ratio, shifting the emphasis in the shot more towards the in focus cub. I wanted to give my mother and baby macaque shot as an example (although not exactly the same idea), but for some reason it is no longer in my gallery.
Registered on March 9, 2004, 285 Posts, 2277 Comments
Comments
8 commentsI like the concept here (and always like when folks try things that "outside the box") but tend to think that this would work better if the "big out of focus thing" was a tree or rock - too easy to think this is simply an out-of-focus shot at first glance. One other thing - I'm super familiar with the characteristics of that lens, and to me this doesn't look like its typical bokeh/DOF characteristics (beautifully smooth transition from tack-sharp in-focus zones to almost buttery out-of-focus zones) - I'm guessing a little blurring went on in post-processing (like a Guassian blur or some other similar "de-focusing")? This is ABSOLUTELY not a problem or a criticism, just an observation of how the image looks to me.
Cheers...thanks for sharing this creative image...
Brad
Grtz, Ingrid.
Didn't mean to offend - I never thought it was an accidental out-of-focus shot. But I think that because the upright and out-of-focus lion is still so clearly a lion one's eye is drawn there quite quickly and it's easy to think at first glance that the image is out of focus (which likely wouldn't happen if the big out-of-focus object didn't have an eye or ears, i.e., if it were an inanimate object). Your image instantly reminds me of Jim Brandenburg's famous "Brother Wolf" image - the cover image on his book by the same name (and this is where my thinking that it would work better if the out-of-focus object was not an eye-drawing animal like a lion cub).
Go here to see what I mean (sorry, couldn't find a direct link to the image I'm referring to - only as a book cover):
http://cgi.ebay.com/Brother-Wolf-Forgotten-Promise-Hardcover-1998-/110632409987?pt=US_Nonfiction_Book&hash=item19c2349b83&x=45&y=6.
A larger version of Jim's image is also available on his website (http://www.jimbrandenburg.com/ but because it's in his Wolves gallery and the site is driven by Adobe Flash it's not possible to give you a direct link (you'll have to hunt around a little).
Cheers...
Brad
I know Jim Brandenburg's image all too well - and totally see what you mean - unfortunately there was only grass around in this place, but I'll dig for a 'hiding behind grass' shot in my archive ;-)
@Gary and Richard - thanks for your comments - the OOF lion in front is also a cub, not the mother.