# C&C my wild life shots (Gorrillas, meerkats, and more...)



## ArA (May 4, 2010)

Thanks for looking!
1. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




2. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



3. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



4. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



5. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



6.


----------



## ArA (May 6, 2010)

none?


----------



## The Historian (May 6, 2010)

I love #3 but it would be better is the top of his head wasn't chopped off.


----------



## AndreaB (May 6, 2010)

The Parot shot is a stand out to me.  Nice work


----------



## LaFoto (May 7, 2010)

That first bird ... erm ... yes, he's of the kind (as to his looks) that makes you think "Only a mother can love this face" . Sharp photo ... unfortunately too little headroom for his pretty (cough-cough) head. 

The parrot is VERY colourful. Focus on the eye, good. Too little headroom ... erm: NO headroom for him AT ALL. Awww . 

Meerkat and deer lack in focus, or focus is on the nose, not the eyes. Gorilla photo was taken in unfavourable light, his eyes don't spark, look all black and hollow, but I know that flash is not allowed as not to spook the animals, only here fill flash would have been helpful. 

As to the photo of the child petting the deer ... that deer's head looks like it doesn't belong into the photo. Somehow... don't know why. Is it its size? It's blurriness. Can't tell. But that photo looks kind of "wrong".


----------



## dab_20 (May 7, 2010)

Some diverse and interesting compositions here. Although #2 seems a bit off like mentioned above. Many of these lack any point of focus. I especially like #3 I just wish the eyes were in sharp focus. Unfortunately you can't do much about the lighting, you just gotta use what is available. Try going on a bit of an overcast day or early morning to avoid the harsh shadows. Good start :thumbup:


----------



## HoboSyke (May 7, 2010)

The meercat is cool. I want some for pets..


----------



## bigtwinky (May 7, 2010)

I assume these were in a zoo?
1- the beak is in focus and I think you should have the eye in focus.  The composition isnt too interesting, he is very tight in the frame

2- Looks like you missed the focus and got the deer's fur behind his head in focus.  The blurryness kind of breaks the image.

3- Lovely colours and good composition but again, the missed focus really kills it

Actually, I find pretty all the shots have missed focus and ok compositions.  If anything, they seem a bit tight in the frame, you might want to zoom out just a little bit.


----------



## ArA (May 7, 2010)

LaFoto said:


> That first bird ... erm ... yes, he's of the kind (as to his looks) that makes you think "Only a mother can love this face" . Sharp photo ... unfortunately too little headroom for his pretty (cough-cough) head.
> 
> The parrot is VERY colourful. Focus on the eye, good. Too little headroom ... erm: NO headroom for him AT ALL. Awww .
> 
> ...



Yea, I feel ya, that first bird is a beast! You think I should leave more headroom there? Cause I think I cropped it that way, so I can go back and fix that.

I agree with the parrot, it does need more headroom, unfortunately I shot it like that...

As far as the deer, I should have focused on the eyes? 

Thanks for your critique.


----------



## ArA (May 7, 2010)

bigtwinky said:


> I assume these were in a zoo?
> 1- the beak is in focus and I think you should have the eye in focus.  The composition isnt too interesting, he is very tight in the frame
> 
> 2- Looks like you missed the focus and got the deer's fur behind his head in focus.  The blurryness kind of breaks the image.
> ...



You are saying that the beak is in focus in the first shot? Cause I am not seeing it that way.?

I did miss the focus with the deer, I will have to check the others photos from this set, to see if i have any others with better focus.

For the parrot I wanted the focus on the eye, with very little depth of field, and I was happy with the result, other than the lack of head room.

Thanks for your time and critique!


----------



## ArA (May 7, 2010)

dab_20 said:


> Some diverse and interesting compositions here. Although #2 seems a bit off like mentioned above. Many of these lack any point of focus. I especially like #3 I just wish the eyes were in sharp focus. Unfortunately you can't do much about the lighting, you just gotta use what is available. Try going on a bit of an overcast day or early morning to avoid the harsh shadows. Good start :thumbup:



Thank you. I had gotten there at about 10:00 a.m. and I really enjoyed the lighting, then midday came, and things changed. haha.

What would you recommend for sharper points of focus?

Thank you!


----------



## bigtwinky (May 7, 2010)

Might want to check your gear / lenses as I am seriously not seeing that parrot in focus anywhere.  Or maybe I should go get my eyes checked?


----------



## LaFoto (May 7, 2010)

Well, getting one's eyes checked might be a good idea for everyone    (got my appointment for 3 June ... being one and a half years overdue - cough-cough). 

Out of the photos, the parrot is still the sharpest, but to my mind it has traces of camera shake. And yes, now that you've mentioned it several times, also I see that the eye is NOT totally sharp. The feathers closest to the beak might be, if it weren't for those traces of shake... but all in all it is a very COLOURFUL photo, and I like that. I think I photographed a very similar lori (I guess it is a lori) in January !?!?


----------



## ArA (May 7, 2010)

bigtwinky said:


> Might want to check your gear / lenses as I am seriously not seeing that parrot in focus anywhere.  Or maybe I should go get my eyes checked?



Ahh, I thought you were talking about the first bird photo, not the parrot. Yea, I wish the eye was the main point of focus, something I will have to remember next time I shoot. I was close though. haha.


----------



## ArA (May 7, 2010)

HoboSyke said:


> The meercat is cool. I want some for pets..



Im with you, I love how they fall over all the time. Should have stuck around and got a picture of that.


----------



## dab_20 (May 8, 2010)

ArA said:


> dab_20 said:
> 
> 
> > What would you recommend for sharper points of focus?
> ...


----------



## Sw1tchFX (May 8, 2010)

I don't know if i would call animals the zoo "wildlife". 

They're not domesticated like cats, horses, dogs, or many birds, but they're definitely not in anything that even slightly resembles their natural environment and they don't hunt for food anymore. 

i dunno... I have a thing for people who shoot pictures of caged animals and pawn it off for wildlife photography. It's cheap and tacky and about as bad as going to one of those hunting reserves where the customer pays for whatever size of animal they want to shoot than drive them up in a land rover 20 feet from the animal and say "go for it". 

Where's the sport in that?


----------



## Fraginator3000 (May 8, 2010)

The parrot is absolutely awesome :thumbup:


----------



## Phranquey (May 8, 2010)

dab_20 said:


> ArA said:
> 
> 
> > dab_20 said:
> ...


----------



## ArA (May 10, 2010)

Sw1tchFX said:


> I don't know if i would call animals the zoo "wildlife".
> 
> They're not domesticated like cats, horses, dogs, or many birds, but they're definitely not in anything that even slightly resembles their natural environment and they don't hunt for food anymore.
> 
> ...



If I could go out in a field and capture a shot of a meerkat or ape, I would. But since I live in california, and those animals are not wandering around, I had to travel to the wild animal park. I got shots of animals I probably will never see in the wild. I would rather not take pictures of housecats or dogs, ya know what I mean? Photography is not a sport, more like art, and I was just practicing. No harm in that.


----------



## ArA (May 10, 2010)

dab_20 said:


> ArA said:
> 
> 
> > dab_20 said:
> ...


----------



## ArA (May 10, 2010)

Here is a shot of the parrot, with a sharper focus on the eye.


----------



## ArA (May 10, 2010)

Fraginator3000 said:


> The parrot is absolutely awesome :thumbup:



Thank you very much.


----------



## ArA (May 10, 2010)

Here is another from the day...


----------



## deggimatt (May 10, 2010)

they are soft


----------



## ArA (May 10, 2010)

And another...


----------



## HikinMike (May 10, 2010)

Sw1tchFX said:


> I don't know if i would call animals the zoo "wildlife".
> 
> They're not domesticated like cats, horses, dogs, or many birds, but they're definitely not in anything that even slightly resembles their natural environment and they don't hunt for food anymore.
> 
> ...



I agree.


For the OP, focus on the eyes......ALWAYS.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (May 10, 2010)

ArA said:


> Sw1tchFX said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know if i would call animals the zoo "wildlife".
> ...


I understand completely, and there's nothing wrong with taking pictures at the zoo, it's just not _wild_life.


----------



## ArA (May 10, 2010)

Sw1tchFX said:


> ArA said:
> 
> 
> > Sw1tchFX said:
> ...



I feel ya, I was thinking the same thing while I was there.


----------

