Sometimes I should be much more careful when choosing a single image from a series to post on Feathered Photography.
1/3200, f/7.1, ISO 400, Canon 7D Mark II, Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS II USM, not baited, set up or called in
On May 21 of this year I photographed a Willet taking off from sagebrush on Antelope Island. Nine days later I posted this single image of the bird on my blog. It was well received by viewers but dammit, I now believe I didn’t choose the best image from the series to post and I wasn’t aware of my error until last night.
1/3200, f/7.1, ISO 400, Canon 7D Mark II, Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS II USM, not baited, set up or called in
This is the photo, the next one in the burst, I wish I’d posted. The two images are remarkably similar, almost unbelievably so. That happens occasionally when the wing-stroke speed of the bird matches that of my camera burst rate (10 frames/sec.). I probably chose the previous photo to post because the willet was already slightly past me and without thinking much about it I just figured that issue should be slightly less noticeable if I posted the earliest one in the series.
But in looking at both images more carefully (as I should have the first time) I like this one significantly better for three reasons:
- The bird is better separated from the sagebrush in the second photo.
- One of my concerns with the first photo was how little of the head was showing. We can actually see more of it in this shot and the right wing isn’t so close to the bill.
- But the primary reason I like the second one more is because the feet and legs can be seen better and I really like their extended, pushing-off posture. For me that makes a big positive difference.
In bird photography little things matter and I’m surprised and more than a little disappointed in myself for not choosing more carefully the first time.
What say ye – am I finally on the right track? Or not…
Ron
Note: Some may wonder why I didn’t include both images in the original post. They’re so similar I guess I just thought doing so would be redundant…
Yes, you’re finally on the right track…HEHEHE!! Oh how I’ve missed seeing/reading your posts.
Look on the bright side–at least you didn’t put the second image in a) the trash or b) in that SAFE place…LOL!
I will be an outlier. I like the first image. I shows (I imagine) that the bird was sitting in sagebrush and is taking off from the bush, because of the foot still buried in the foliage. Not a place I would expect to see this bird since I only see it as a migrant/winter resident in South Florida.
Nothing wrong with being an outlier, Kathryn.
I’m guessing that more than half of my willet photos show them perched on sagebrush. They love perching on sage around the Great Salt Lake.
Yes! Love the 2nd shot. But I’d be proud to have captured either 🙂
Thank you, Joanne.
Second photo for me too, though I would be ecstatic to have taken either.
This is why so many of your regular readers would LOVE to have the chance to go dumpster diving in your discard pile.
I’ll have to admit it, EC – maybe you do have a slight point there. I’ve certainly provided the evidence, haven’t I? 🙂
I love Willets with that beautiful black-and-white pattern displayed when the wings are open and their frequent habit of raising their wings high above their back upon landing. They also have a wonderful call.
Both are wonderful shots, but I like the second photo better for the reasons you give and one other reason – the wings are better separated. In the first photo, my brain can easily flip the image to make the left wing tip look as though it is the right and closer wing, creating a very odd effect with respect to the head. (Like craters of the moon reversing themselves in your mind.) This doesn’t happen for me in the second image. Perhaps mine is the only brain to be affected this way so it’s not much of a concern.
Thanks for sharing both photos. It helps us see more about the bird’s action and it helps us see why your self-criticism makes you such an excellent bird photographer.
I tried to see what you see but failed, Dan. However, I’ve certainly had craters on the moon reverse on me. It throws my brain for a loop when that happens.
Thank you for the very kind words.
I agree that the 2nd is better. 😀 Both are fabulous. And stop being so hard on yourself. 😀 What would you say to Mia (Mya?) if she had posted this post about her own work?
Mia probably wouldn’t make the mistake in the first place, Arwen… But if she did I’d probably tell her “sh** happens”, get over it. 🙂
Hi Ron, I think the second photo is preferable, but that is just one persons view. As a video editor I notice I sometimes change my mind about my initial choices after an interval and review as well, so I think that is normal human brain processing.
Yes, I’m sure you’ve had many similar experiences, Brett. I often change my mind too but usually it’s before I post and not three months after the fact… 🙂
I like both of them and have no problems. Just happy to see all the beautiful birds and your information about the details of taken them on your travels. I am by no means a expert on taking pictures. Happy Labor Day
Thank you, Trudy.
In my opinion, the second one is a far better photo, because the bird is separated from the sagebrush and its details are more easily observed. In the first one the legs are very much the same color as the twigs, so it’s much harder to find them. In a way I’m surprised that you chose the first photo for the original post. But then again, it shows you are human, and I’m glad to know that, given how perfect as your photos tend to be… 🙂
I’m surprised too, Susan but obviously I shouldn’t be. Believe me, I have more than my share of human foibles.
They are both outstanding shots! Thanks for sharing.
Charlotte
Thanks, Charlotte.
In addition to the other good reasons you gave for preferring #2, I like it because the smooth, unobscured back and tail best point up those gorgeously chevron-marked
feathers on the wing bases near the body—JUST BEAUTIFUL !
Good point, Kris.
Aesthetically, the second shot all the way. However, from a biology/biomechanics standpoint, I think the first shot is more interesting because it shows just how close to the sagebrush that the bird can be and still clear it with the wings a little more forward for the wing stroke. Plus, he’s in the middle of the push off and I think those leg angles are neat. So, put me in the “post ’em both” camp. 😉
“So, put me in the “post ’em both” camp”
Which is exactly what I should have done in the first place, Marty.
Ron, good morning, and a good Labor Day to all. I remember really liking the first one when originally shown. I agree with every one of your reasons for now choosing number two, but I don’t think I am a critically enough viewer to have really noticed the differences unless pointed out. Excellent photos both.
Everett Sanborn
Prescott AZ
Thank you, Everett.
Yes, the 2nd photo does give a clearer “picture” of the whole bird – sometimes hard when one gets bipping along through a ton of photos to notice slight differences making one a “bit” better than the other – just a “bit” 😉 The first photo does show the push off from the sage better so………….
Judy, I was surprised by how many differences there were between the two photos when I looked more carefully.
Yes Ron, we believe you are on the right track for sure, no finally about it. Perhaps you were suffering from image mesmerization from all of the viewing, editing and considering.
Thanks for the great shots and the great way to start the day.
“Perhaps you were suffering from image mesmerization from all of the viewing, editing and considering”
Sometimes I do get a little numbed by it all, Dave – especially when I’m culling images. Thanks for providing the excuse! 🙂
You are correct…the second is better for the reasons you stated. I also like the wee bit more separation from the ‘sage’ if that is what it is. The Willet has more definition. That is a lovely color mix for that background…❤️
Ha, you and I are two peas in a pod, Kathy. Just before you posted your comment I edited my text and added a “third reason” – the very separation you mention.
Now that I’m trained to look for all the nit-picky details, I came up with my own 3 reasons for a birder. The rump and tail patterns show more clearly in the second photo. The white patterns connecting wing stripe and white rump rump is obvious and a good flight ID point. I also think that the tail and legs are clearer (or maybe less soft) in the second photo. More head shows was my third reason, which matches what Ron describes.
(I’m trying to write with new glasses this morning and everything looks different. I hope I caught all the mistakes.)
Thanks for sharing the reasons for your preference, Pam. I think your new glasses must be working just fine. Wish I could find some that help my vision more than these reading glasses do…
Ron, I like the 2nd photo for the reasons you stated. One can only wonder why you did not post both.
Both of these are great shots but the 2nd is better because you can see the head better along with the feet.
It is hard to know why we do or don’t do certain things. I would not worry about this at all.
Thanks for the beautiful posting, Ron
Thanks for the feedback, Alice. The only thing I’m “worried” about is my lapse in judgment. I hope I don’t often miss things like that…