Last of the bird shots for today

[ceeboy14]

but I like it...

 

[ceeboy14]

Bumpity-bump-bump-bump

 

[sm4him]

This one just doesn't do much for me, sorry. It seems pretty nicely exposed, and sharp, but it's still just the underside of a seagull.

 

[ceeboy14]

If it was a hawk or eagle would it be more exciting because they are birds of prey? I've always thought a good shot was a good shot regardless...but my thinking in often contrary to the rest of the world.

 

[binga63]

If it was a hawk or eagle would it be more exciting because they are birds of prey? I've always thought a good shot was a good shot regardless...but my thinking in often contrary to the rest of the world.

It is a great shot.. of a common bird but still a great shot.... I like it

 

[WesternGuy]

If it was a hawk or eagle would it be more exciting because they are birds of prey? I've always thought a good shot was a good shot regardless...but my thinking in often contrary to the rest of the world.

It is a good shot, but I wondered when I first saw it, if this was a crop from a larger image. Such close crops of BIFs are not usually as effective compositionally as one that gives the bird some "negative" space to fly into. If this is indeed a crop, maybe you might want to post another version, or the whole picture so that folks could suggest a crop.

WesternGuy

 

[Sarmad]

The bird is sharp, and the sky is quite 'rich'. But one thing makes the photo dull and that's because the bird was at a very bad angle when you shot it. It doesn't show much of the bird!

Regardless of the bird specie, a good photo is a good photo! A good, properly exposed and sharp sparrow would still be better than an out of focus motion blurred Hawk!

 

[sm4him]

I agree, a good photo is a good photo. But for me, personally, there ARE subjects I *like* better than others, and so I guess I'd say that I experience "levels of appreciation" for a good photo. With birds specifically, that means that yeah, I tend to "appreciate" the "cooler" birds more--the hawks, the eagles, the herons, unusual or brightly colored birds. AND I tend to like it better when I can either really see the bird's eye, or if it is doing something interesting.

So, a picture of a gull's underside (and I'm TRULY not knocking it--I have my OWN pictures like this, only not as well done) is not quite as high on my "levels of appreciation" as a GOOD picture of a hawk's or eagle's underside. BUT, a picture of a gull where I could see its eye, or where it is "doing" something interesting--diving, shrieking, something--would be higher on my appreciation levels than a raptor's underside.

That may make sense to absolutely no one but me--but it's the way my little world works. It's complicated being me.

 

[ceeboy14]

It was a significant crop with it's own issue...and that issue because of the sky color can stil be "fixed" in a different crop. The eye is clear and distinct though perhaps his intent is not...but what other intent does a flying gull have other than to scope out a fish and dive down to get it...