Triplefin Photos - Which one is best?
Posted 16 August 2004 - 08:17 AM
Dual Ikelite Strobes
Photo site - www.reefpix.org
Posted 16 August 2004 - 09:09 AM
then 4, 3, 1
I like number 2 because the "subject" of the shot, which I am taking as the expression on the triple-fin's face, is captured the best. The plane of sharp focus is parallel to the plane of the fish's face, the pectoral fins are in the nicest "pose", and the OOF background gives the fish some depth, we can see the fish coming out of the image as it pulls in to focus. I also like the "engagement", the fish is looking at us...
Four loses out with the assymetry over the body of the fish, while 3 is just boring (IMHO :wink: ) ... technically sharper, but a straight down, and hence flat, shot. I like the symmetry of the fish, thus the angled view of the fish in one does not do it for me, although it does have the focal plane nicely positioned across the face of the fish.
Did you find your lens cap??
D300, D200, D70, 12-24 f4 AFS DX, 60mm f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 AF-S VR, 105 f2.8 AF-S VR, Tokina Wunderlens.
Photo galleries @ Ruaux.net
Posted 16 August 2004 - 09:10 AM
Posted 16 August 2004 - 09:20 AM
#2 is pretty cool as well. SOmething different and it works well but i like #1 more
Join us for an Underwater Photography Workshop at NAD Lembeh July/Aug 2016 with Doug Sloss
Blog and Photo Archive/Portfolio Site www.mikeveitchblog.com
Learn underwater photography in the ultimate classroom, Bali! or join us on a trip www.underwatertribe.com and www.baliuwphoto.com
Join us for a trip to Raja Ampat in March 2017 on the Mermaid II
Posted 16 August 2004 - 09:46 AM
Posted 16 August 2004 - 09:53 AM
However, I feel that all four photographs are keepers. Providing a differ impression of the subject for different viewers.
Posted 16 August 2004 - 06:15 PM
and # 3 (because its technically perfect)
Posted 16 August 2004 - 07:02 PM
#3 is a great example of keeping the whole scene on an even plane with the lens. Very even DOF. Nice shot.
Nikon D2X. Subal ND2. 2 Inon Z220S
Posted 16 August 2004 - 09:38 PM
The symmetry of 2 and 4 is "boring, Sydney, boring" (name the film reference) and 3, looking down, just doesn't work for me
Posted 17 August 2004 - 02:46 AM
Number One as it is more dynamic in composition
Posted 17 August 2004 - 05:37 AM
Number 3 for Contrast, however it's a little dark looking, but very nice.
Number 4 for Focus, i like these guys shot lengthways like that so the eyes really stand out when they are sharp compared to the rest of the body which drops out as the DOF diminishes.
composition is a personal opininion of these guys, i'll have to show you what I have been trying with them, but they are so much fun to photograph.
Great job, btw i liked your images in ya gallery too.
Posted 30 August 2004 - 06:18 AM
Posted 30 August 2004 - 06:29 AM
The others are too straight in the frame
Alex, Why not just crop it slightly and reduce the amount of blue space keeping the same proportions.
I have never tried super-macro using dioptres, depth of field must be really difficult and technically challenging
Posted 19 September 2004 - 06:37 PM
1) foca point fo the photo is not in the center of the frame, and is diagonal.
2) all foreground is in focus
3) it complys more with the 'get close, get low, and shoot up' rules. Others are more from on top of the fish
4) more personality!
Posted 04 October 2004 - 03:27 PM
#3 has an appealing s curve that looks very natural but the face and eyes seem more detached than in #1.
Edit: Ok I didn't go on to the second page before posting....I take it back, I like Alex's better. The closeup of the eyes is quite dramatic as is the contrast with the blue background. I still like #1 and it shows the animal in his environment better (from Alex's you can't tell the scale or the shape of the creature) but the personality is more dramatic in Alex's.
UWPhotoNewbie: Not such a newbie to diving and UW photography.
Nikon D70: 60 mm, 11-16mm, 105mm, 15mm, 10.5mm
Ikelite iTTL Housing, dual Ikelite DS125
Nikon D600 topside 14-24, 28-300, 70-200, 35,50,85
Posted 04 October 2004 - 06:25 PM