Normally a clear background is the way to go when photographing wildlife. However, I feel that these pictures extract the main subject from its environment. Your opinions are welcome.
In the pictures below I have left the dense background to emphasize the surroundings in which these egrets and anhinga build their nests. Taken at the Venice rookery, FL with a Nikkor 800mm setup.
Saba, one of the difficulties to tell a story is including the habitat w/o becoming a clutter or a distraction from the subject. It also depends on the way you see your subject and how you want to tell the story.
In your particular case I believe the shots are too close to give a sense of the environment. If that is your intent than you should open up the image to include more of the habitat, still with the subject being significant enough in the frame.
If your intent was to tell about the birds, especially in their breeding plumage, than a nice separation from the bg would have worked better creating a powerful image and a better connection with the viewer. Generally speaking the simpler the composition, the stronger the image.
I'm a fan of frame-filling wildlife images that tells you something about the subject, but I'm not opposed to a shot that includes the environment. This is actually a good way to shoot when you can't isolate the subject.
However, at the end all what it matters is your personal taste and the message you want to send across
Socrate
OldProf wrote:
Hello Socrate,
Glad to hear from you again. Your comments are most useful and you are exactly right. One has to make a decision about what one wants to portray. Is it the overall environment or the details of the subject (bird in this case)?
Some times it is difficult to find a compromise. In this particular case, the picture below may do the job.
Further comments are always welcome.
Hello Bruce,
Thank you! I appreciate your input.
Cheers
Saba
Yes, that will do it and can be improved by placing the subject (the bird) off center.
This is the way I see it. I like to include the water so I turned the birds head around in the direction of the water but I hope it will give you an idea of a type of composition that includes the environment.
To reduce the impact of the environment you can reduce its brightness and the Saturation which will help the bird standing out a bit more.
I will delete my awful demo once you'll see it, but I hope this helps.
Socrate
Just to add something to Socrate's comments, when you include habitat in the shot you want it to be in full focus along with your subject. To my eye the egret was OK until I got to the OOF birds on the right. They're sitting in a "hole" in your image.
Hi Socrate,
I agree with you totally. Great advice. Yes desaturation of the leaves will certainly help. But I'll have to take another picture of the egret tomorrow to make her face the water. If I attempt to twist its neck in this picture I will probably kill her.
Thanks
Saba
Hi Conrad,
I am sure you know the spot. Sometimes one can even recognize the bird. For example at Ding Darling there are two reddish egrets that at the first lagoon. They have been photographed so many times you can make them out right away
Saba,
Maybe us old Profs see things a bit differently . The photos that mean the most to me are the ones that show a natural view of the animal as a part of its habitat, doing things they do naturally and undisturbed by the photographer.
When I see an animal in its habitat, I don't see it against a blurred, out of focus background. The blurred background is what a camera records. I also prefer to photograph an undisturbed animal. If it is alert and staring at me, about to flee, I have disturbed it. That doesn't mean I prefer static, cud-chewing, docile shots. Wildlife critters do lots of interesting thing normally and that is what I prefer to record. If it has a naturally cluttered background, so be it.
I realize that my preferences are not the standard, but for me it's the"norm."
Norm
Thank you Roberta for your kind remarks However, the picture of the anhinga you posted a couple of days ago was, in my opinion, much sharper and clearer than the one I posted here.
A lot has already been said about backgrounds so I won't parrot any of the opinions already expressed. Suffice to say there are different ways to treat the background for different effects. I think it's great you used this post to bring up an interesting discussion Saba
