Sufficient DoF: Straight critical observations please. Is the fading focus on the young Sandhill body/legs too large a flaw or is the shot still compelling as the behavior is captured.

Properframe Loc: US Virginia

Straight critical observations please. Is the fading focus on the young Sandhill body/legs too large a flaw or is the shot still compelling as the behavior is captured. It bugs me but I lean to the harsh side.

(Download)

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Properframe wrote:

Straight critical observations please. Is the fading focus on the young Sandhill body/legs too large a flaw or is the shot still compelling as the behavior is captured. It bugs me but I lean to the harsh side.

The bird moved and your DoF was shallow. You could fix this with Topaz Sharpen AI.

kpmac Loc: Ragley, La

The chick is a little soft but not distractingly so. I like the image.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Some PP should get it to the point where it will be acceptable provided you don't print it too large. That particular behaviour may be difficult or impossible to capture again.

Properframe Loc: US Virginia

Thanks for the input. Will go ahead and pull the RAW for some PP work. Perhaps the chicks legs can be salvaged. The other frames in the series were extended as the male was not bent back over himself. Butt shots etc. My 1.4TC produces some softness that can be fixed. I get better results by cropping but the TC was on the lens in this instance.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

Properframe wrote:

Straight critical observations please. Is the fading focus on the young Sandhill body/legs too large a flaw or is the shot still compelling as the behavior is captured. It bugs me but I lean to the harsh side.

No problem -- great photo. I don't find the DOF fall off objectionable and I see no need to any kind of "fix."

Joe

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

MHO - leave this lovely picture just as it is. I think the shallow DOF helps to highlight the important part of the pic. Treat the peripherals as boket.

Tjohn Loc: Inverness, FL formerly Arivaca, AZ

Still moving to the viewer. The colt was busy moving as well. More depth of field, smaller aperture, longer exposure time, would make the movement even worse.

Don, the 2nd son Loc: Crowded Florida

kpmac wrote:

The chick is a little soft but not distractingly so. I like the image.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I like it like it is. An enlargement could be objectionable for some but not for me.
The face and eyes of the chick are reasonably in focus and that is what matters.
Great shot.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

In download, the little fellow isn’t as fuzzy as it looks in the thumbnail, so not a problem for me.

John Maher Loc: Northern Virginia

I like it as is.

Composition: Your main subject is in-focus and off-center.

If you sharpen the other one, you are expanding your subject, which would by definition, detract from the one.

Rathyatra Loc: Southport, United Kingdom

DOF apart still a very nice engaging image.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

Properframe wrote:

Straight critical observations please. Is the fading focus on the young Sandhill body/legs too large a flaw or is the shot still compelling as the behavior is captured. It bugs me but I lean to the harsh side.

Keep it the way it is. Very nice shot. Never noticed the fading focus until you mentioned it.

flyboy61 Loc: The Great American Desert

Ysarex wrote:

No problem -- great photo. I don't find the DOF fall off objectionable and I see no need to any kind of "fix." Joe

Exactly!