Mini Macaws

[Relic123]

Shot with a Canon Mark II N, Lens Canon 135mm F/2 L
Shutter speed 1/400 sec, F/2.5, Exposure Program Aperture Priority, ISO 400.
I personally love the color, subject, and focus of this image. I believe the the rule of thirds hasn't been utilized to it's fullest in this image. Any critique on this would be greatly appreciated.

Also in an act of faith I had this printed at "Mpix.com" to see if there quality was what I had heard. So a 12x18 is on it's way!

 

[meotter]

i agree, the colors are very nice... very vivid... but i'm not sure i see the rule of thirds being used at all. Please explain how you believe it's being used to the fullest, as i must be missing it.

the angle of the image is tough, with the very harsh lighting behind the birds it creates a very strong vignette (is that the right word?) around their heads and the left border of the left macaw.

the left bird is very soft looking, possibly due to movement during the shot. also i'd probably open up the depth of field a bit (more aperture) so that more of both birds is clear. the left bird has a definite lack of detail compared to the right bird. the right birds claw, the branch are sharp as a tack, but the rest is soft.

possibly a little bit more lighting on their fronts and less behind them will make it easier to get more detail as well as less distracting light behind them.

i think i might have shot this portrait, instead of landscape, to include their tails.

 

[Corry]

i agree, the colors are very nice... very vivid... but i'm not sure i see the rule of thirds being used at all. Please explain how you believe it's being used to the fullest, as i must be missing it.

the angle of the image is tough, with the very harsh lighting behind the birds it creates a very strong vignette (is that the right word?) around their heads and the left border of the left macaw.

the left bird is very soft looking, possibly due to movement during the shot. also i'd probably open up the depth of field a bit (more aperture) so that more of both birds is clear. the left bird has a definite lack of detail compared to the right bird. the right birds claw, the branch are sharp as a tack, but the rest is soft.

possibly a little bit more lighting on their fronts and less behind them will make it easier to get more detail as well as less distracting light behind them.

i think i might have shot this portrait, instead of landscape, to include their tails.

That's exactly what he said...that it has NOT been used to it's fullest.

 

[meotter]

oops, my apologies... see? i knew i was missing it

 

[craig]

Beautiful shot!!!!!! Love how these guys are playing. I think the shallow depth of field is on point. For me the pure white highlights give the photo a painterly quality.

Love & Playa

 

[Relic123]

Well thanks. I agree I also like the highlights and the focus.

 

[The Phototron]

The bokeh looks unnatural, especially on the left. It makes the birds look like lousy photoshop extraction.