On The Fence By Deon Hamilton™

[yahgiggle]

Interesting comments i think there's two sides to this image the side i was going for and thats a bird and a fence, and the other side the bird, that been said i was always wanting it to be a bird on the fence that's why i liked my last edit the most because you could still see it was a fence, i keeped it this way round because it showed more of the fence, with the first image i liked alot but wanted your guys help to see if it could be improved hence the edits.

 

[sashbar]

Interesting comments i think there's two sides to this image the side i was going for and thats a bird and a fence, and the other side the bird, that been said i was always wanting it to be a bird on the fence that's why i liked my last edit the most because you could still see it was a fence, i keeped it this way round because it showed more of the fence, with the first image i liked alot but wanted your guys help to see if it could be improved hence the edits.

Sure, there are always two sides. But the point is - you have to take one side. Sitting between two chairs is not good. The first image is definately on the artistic side. I guess you took the shot intuitively and had the composition spot on originaly, not because you were aware of it, but because you have a natural feel for it. Then you started to "improve" upon it, started to think, and because you never learned composition etc, you were just wandering in the dark, trying this and that and as a result ended up between two chairs. The edits 2 and 3 artistically are much weaker, and as a documentary are not there also. Do you know what I mean ?

Note the first responce, it was "cute". You know why? Because the little bird does look cute on this solid fence. You cut the fence, made the bird look bigger, and it is not cute anymore. Contrast. Proportions. These are all so important in a photo.

 

[yahgiggle]

Interesting comments i think there's two sides to this image the side i was going for and thats a bird and a fence, and the other side the bird, that been said i was always wanting it to be a bird on the fence that's why i liked my last edit the most because you could still see it was a fence, i keeped it this way round because it showed more of the fence, with the first image i liked alot but wanted your guys help to see if it could be improved hence the edits.

Sure, there are always two sides. But the point is - you have to take one side. Sitting between two chairs is not good. The first image is definately on the artistic side. I guess you took the shot intuitively and had the composition spot on originaly, not because you were aware of it, but because you have a natural feel for it. Then you started to "improve" upon it, and because you never learned composition etc, you were just wandering in the dark, trying this and that and as a result ended up between two chairs. The edits 2 and 3 artistically are much weaker, and as a documentary are not there also. Do you know what I mean ?

lol i did learn composition also was told it was not 100% in Stone but in saying this just because you learn how to shot photos does not mean you become an expert over night.

 

[sashbar]

Interesting comments i think there's two sides to this image the side i was going for and thats a bird and a fence, and the other side the bird, that been said i was always wanting it to be a bird on the fence that's why i liked my last edit the most because you could still see it was a fence, i keeped it this way round because it showed more of the fence, with the first image i liked alot but wanted your guys help to see if it could be improved hence the edits.

Sure, there are always two sides. But the point is - you have to take one side. Sitting between two chairs is not good. The first image is definately on the artistic side. I guess you took the shot intuitively and had the composition spot on originaly, not because you were aware of it, but because you have a natural feel for it. Then you started to "improve" upon it, and because you never learned composition etc, you were just wandering in the dark, trying this and that and as a result ended up between two chairs. The edits 2 and 3 artistically are much weaker, and as a documentary are not there also. Do you know what I mean ?

lol i did learn composition also was told it was not 100% in Stone but in saying this just because you learn how to shot photos does not mean you become an expert over night.

I think in this particular image, being so simple, it is set in Stone. Whatever.

Speaking about the artistic side of it, we mere mortals think in terms of "the bird on the fence". The artist thinks "the bird AND the fence". Often "the FENCE and the bird". We see the main subject and think about the fence as a secondary subject. The artist thinks about the interaction between two subjects. We think "let's show the beauty of the bird". The artist thinks "let's show the beauty of a bird and the fence". Or maybe even "let's show the beauty of the fence". That is what I like about the original image - the fence is not secondary there, it is as important as the bird. It makes the image. That's what good photography is often about to me - showing things that we do not usually see, or see differently.

 

[gsgary]

I would have shot it portrait leaving the bird in the top 1/3

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2

 

[PaulWog]

Hope you like my edit of the photo. This is at least my opinion for how you can salvage what you have. A little bit of different composition in the first place might've helped if it was possible, but I think re-angling on the crop (might have made it overly crooked but you get the point) & going vertical is best.

To add to it, I sharpened the bird up a bit, denoised the bokeh, and shifted the exposure of the fence a little bit.