Relaxed Lion: Taken at a Zoo. Should I have cropped the paw more or less. This was taken in camera without external PP on cropping. The intent was the expression of the lions face.

deej

Taken at a Zoo. Should I have cropped the paw more or less. This was taken in camera without external PP on cropping. The intent was the expression of the lions face.

Country's Mama Loc: Michigan

Your doing a great job with the focus and clarity on these. I like the way you have processed this one. I would have tried not to clip the ends of the paws, but your composition is better in this one.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Zooming in can give you "intimate", but it can also give you "claustrophobic". My personal preference would be to give the subject a bit more space. I would have shot it to include all of the paws and a bit more space round the ear tips.

Bmac Loc: Long Island, NY

deej wrote:

The intent was the expression of the lions face.

You may wish to be more careful with sharpness in the right place for your intent to be more successful. It appears that the focus is not on the subject's face where it should be but nearly everywhere else. The cat's eye area, nose and tongue seem out of focus in my opinion. Try using one focus point for this type of photograph, focus on the eyes or vicinity, then recompose without changing that focus.

An interesting subject with good exposure. 8-)

Nightski

It is okay to have motion blur in a tongue, but it must be intended motion blur, and the eyes must be in sharp focus.

deej

Bmac wrote:

You may wish to be more careful with sharpness in the right place for your intent to be more successful. It appears that the focus is not on the subject's face where it should be but nearly everywhere else. The cat's eye area, nose and tongue seem out of focus in my opinion. Try using one focus point for this type of photograph, focus on the eyes or vicinity, then recompose without changing that focus.

An interesting subject with good exposure. 8-)

Very good suggestion, I will have to try harder next time. Thanks for the tips.

deej

R.G. wrote:

Zooming in can give you "intimate", but it can also give you "claustrophobic". My personal preference would be to give the subject a bit more space. I would have shot it to include all of the paws and a bit more space round the ear tips.

I agree on the claustrophobic effect for this image. My intention was attempting to not have to crop but, alas, it seems as I cut it too close.

deej

Nightski wrote:

It is okay to have motion blur in a tongue, but it must be intended motion blur, and the eyes must be in sharp focus.

Great tip Nightski. Thanks for the reply.

Country's Mama Loc: Michigan

deej wrote:

I agree on the claustrophobic effect for this image. My intention was attempting to not have to crop but, alas, it seems as I cut it too close.

It never hurts to leave a little room to crop. You can always go tighter, but seldom can you open it up once it is shot.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

Its close, but I don't like the motion blur in the head (especially the lions right side of face).
I know its a zoo shot but I would also prefer it with the black line disappeared.
I would also prefer the tips of the toes left in.
Having said all that, as long as it wasn't blown up too far, its quite an acceptable image.

deej

lighthouse wrote:

Its close, but I don't like the motion blur in the head (especially the lions right side of face).
I know its a zoo shot but I would also prefer it with the black line disappeared.
I would also prefer the tips of the toes left in.
Having said all that, as long as it wasn't blown up too far, its quite an acceptable image.

Thanks lighthouse, allowing more room for cropping is necessary and one I am learning. I believe I did over-sharpened this image or I needed to adjust the smoothness slightly since the glass wall behind the lion has some random artifacts in it. And as you suggested more shutter speed or better hand-holding would have been better.

deej

As ABC1234 PM'd me and asked about a statement that I had made on no PP work done on this image. He is fully correct. I did not crop but I did some PP work. I apologize any confusion this may have caused and will watch my wording more closely. :thumbup:
May I thank ABC1234 for pointing this out. :thumbup:

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

Here is what prompted my private exchange with deej.

I use a web-based exif viewer, Jeffrey's Exif Viewer, that reveals much more information than usual. One of the helpful things is depth-of-field.

"At 6.7m, with a depth of field of about 12cm, (from about 5.9cm before the focus point to about 6.0cm after)"
Translated, the camera was 22' from the lion and the depth-of-field was 5"

"28-300 mm f/3.5-5.6
Shot at 300 mm
Auto exposure, Shutter priority AE, 1/160 sec, f/6.3, ISO 200, Compensation: -1/3"

Too bad we cannot have a depth-of-field table built-in into our cameras because in this instance, focusing on anything other than eyes as has been pointed out will cause the face, the center of interest, to be out of focus. Knowing this, I would have stopped down further and been more careful as to where I focused. This would have been at the expense of a longer exposure or higher ISO. When shooting a moving object, we usually do not have the time to think this through.

Deej, I hope this helps you and keep shooting those lions.

deej

abc1234 wrote:

Here is what prompted my private exchange with dee... (show quote)

Thanks a lot for the information. Grasping and using DOF scales or at least the knowledge of how to apply them is very crucial for many images. I have learned a lot from all who posted. Bmac and Lighthouse mentioned it and ABC1234 confirmed it by using the scale and his knowledge of photography. That's the great thing about this forum that Nightski and Countrymama monitor. Many thanks for what they do too! Believe me, I will be using and applying DOF scales in the near future.

naturepics43 Loc: Hocking Co. Ohio - USA

deej wrote:

Thanks a lot for the information. Grasping and using DOF scales or at least the knowledge of how to apply them is very crucial for many images. I have learned a lot from all who posted. Bmac and Lighthouse mentioned it and ABC1234 confirmed it by using the scale and his knowledge of photography. That's the great thing about this forum that Nightski and Countrymama monitor. Many thanks for what they do too! Believe me, I will be using and applying DOF scales in the near future.

You might also consider a faster shutter speed. At 1/160, unless your using flash, you will get blur from any movement of an animal. Just more food for thought.
You seem to have an eye for your vision but always remember, you can always take a little off.