The general tone is encouraging, as following extracts indicate:
"I have noticed a continual development in the approach to, and quality of your work...".;
"You prepared well for this assignment, researching and analyzing the work of wildlife photographers, and thinking carefully about the equipment required.";
"The captions work well and complement each image with interesting information and context."
...while I don’t want to detract from the creative vision and technical expertise that you demonstrate here, there is always a need to look for different ‘angles’ on any narrative subject to demonstrate and promote a distinct or personal ‘voice’, and consider opportunities for exposure (publication or exhibition) beyond the norm.
I do not disagree with this. I have admitted before that my main weakness as a photographer is doing the different, actually just being a little bolder. Assignment 4 did bring some of this out, but this Assignment was perhaps slightly more "technical" - good images but absence of pizzazz. In mitigation:
1. I was clear in the assignment that this is meant as material for a promotional brochure. In a way the comment demonstrates the tension between photography as art as opposed to photography as a commercial tool. From experience, the vast majority of game tourists judge their stay on what they see: they want to see animals, lots of them, and big 5 (especially lions). I have been very fortunate to go on several safaris; most visitors get only one opportunity. I therefore used images that I thought would show the park to the best effect: "look, the animals are here and you can see them too.";
2. As tutor points out, there are technical difficulties in getting shots from different angles. Getting out of vehicles is just not done, so opportunities for low shots is zero; Hluhluwe-Umfolozi is scrubland so "the animals in their environment" type image is challenging - you just end up with a lot of distracting vegetation in the shots. There are few water holes and it was wrong time of year for their use.
3. The result did provide "creative vision and technical expertise" in words of tutor, so let's not be too self critical;
4. As mentioned in the blog, I am going to explore some more ambitious shots in time. I like Brandt's work, and can see some possibilities to follow his lead.
In the meantime, perhaps the following images help to provide some context and going beyond the norm in very different ways:
This is the Hluhuwe-Umfolozi landscape (an HDR image). It does set the scene, as does this panoramic taken from Hilltops camp:
As mentioned above, animals in environment was not easy, but this image of two impalas nearly made the portfolio:
Had the light worked a little better and/or we could see a little more of left hand impala, this would have been used in the set. It is a nice picture to include the feel of the hilly terrain but does I think demonstrate the practical difficulty mentioned above.
Perhaps a bolder approach would have included this:
Again, this might give a different flavour to the safari experience; cars stuck behind a grazing bull elephant.
I did take several images from different angles during the day. Here are a couple of examples:
The whole point of including this image is to focus on the horn - the part that nearly cost us the entire species due to hunting.
The aim here was to focus on the swishing tails but perhaps the backside dominates too much.
Lastly, I did prepare a triptych that would have been included in the set had I had time to prepare before submission:
This resulted from taking three images of a cheetah that stood stock still for a while looking around. The middle image is used in the set but I think the triptych works even better.
Moving on to specific images, I comment on Tutor notes as set out below (NB metadata included only for images not included in Assignment):
Cover shot
Tutor sees "very good detail". It was technically a good shot to maintain sharpness. Compositionally tutor sees weakness in the cheetahs merging in the image. Ironically this is due partly to the natural body camouflage; for me the fact that heads and tails are distinct probably suffices. As an image to promote my reserve, I would be content with this given the rareness of cheetahs.
Rhino
Tutor notices rim lighting and the framing effect of nearside vegetation.
Lion
"Strong detail captured". Tutor notes texture, which is something I like to capture in wildlife images.
Queries whether highlight in eyes can be lifted in Photoshop. Good idea, here is before and after:
I think the brightening the eyes does help.
Elephants
Tutor agrees with my positive comments on the sense of movement and of the texture. Asks whether a wider shot was taken. Yes it was, as below:
This would have been an alternative image had I got any more than elephant backsides. I considered the action better in the selected image but this is a nice image of a herd crowding round one of the few water holes.
Zebra
"Nicely defined in the savanna", adding that "it is a shame that the foal is hidden...". As he points out, this is the hostage to fortune that is part of wildlife photography. I am less sure it is a problem as the viewer is left to do some imagination work himself.
Cheetah
Favourable comment on the slim portrait mode. Wonders "if subject could be lifted a little by processing". Agree - see the triptych above. Applied to this image only we have before and after:
A distinct improvement with some Levels adjustment applied in right hand image. It slightly detracts from the camouflage effect more apparent in the original image on the left, but this is outweighed by the greater clarity and punchiness of the post processed image on the right.
Hippos
The use of the polarizing filter is noted as working well. Tutor comments that might benefit from a little more context, some surrounding landscape. In response to that, this is a river image and the surrounding landscape was uninteresting. There is a dilemma here: adding context means your subject becomes small in the frame. My experience is that viewers like their animals big in the frame not least because plenty of folk take wildlife with 50mm point and shoot cameras and thereby include a great deal of "context", but the subject is difficult to appreciate. I have commented on the generality of the context point above.
Nyala
I thought this to be the weakest image - included because need to have a nyala in this set - but tutor is more complimentary - notes dappled light, and that texture and colour captured well. On reflection, perhaps I was being hard on this one.
Buffalo
At one with tutor on this one - "the best of the set". Buffalo are not difficult to take as they are big, move slowly and are fairly common. Flip side of this is the difficulty of getting a good, different image and this shot achieved that goal. I was very pleased with the expression of the male, "looking over" to use tutor's phrase and the texture and detail, both noted by tutor.
Giraffe
I have found giraffe to be a difficult subject, eventually taking something a little different. As tutor points out, the merging of the two heads that is supposed to be the focus (pointing in different directions) then becomes a problem.
Baboons
I view this as one of the best shots and tutor agrees: "a strong shot...backlight [helps] define the animals.
Kudu
"Very good detail" says tutor, and notes the catch light in the eye, which adds a lot to this image.
Impala
Tutor comments on the rhythmn that I alluded to in the assignment, and the nice effect from dappled light.
Lastly, tutor notes a couple of images on one of the exercises do not open - noticed myself and now corrected.
Overall, am pleased with this feedback - "a good set of mostly long lens shots, with strong detail and composition throughout". I enjoyed the day and the challenge of taking images of so much in a restricted time. Possibly could have provided a bit more variety and context, but, to repeat, this does come at a price of losing detail of the subject.
1. I was clear in the assignment that this is meant as material for a promotional brochure. In a way the comment demonstrates the tension between photography as art as opposed to photography as a commercial tool. From experience, the vast majority of game tourists judge their stay on what they see: they want to see animals, lots of them, and big 5 (especially lions). I have been very fortunate to go on several safaris; most visitors get only one opportunity. I therefore used images that I thought would show the park to the best effect: "look, the animals are here and you can see them too.";
2. As tutor points out, there are technical difficulties in getting shots from different angles. Getting out of vehicles is just not done, so opportunities for low shots is zero; Hluhluwe-Umfolozi is scrubland so "the animals in their environment" type image is challenging - you just end up with a lot of distracting vegetation in the shots. There are few water holes and it was wrong time of year for their use.
3. The result did provide "creative vision and technical expertise" in words of tutor, so let's not be too self critical;
4. As mentioned in the blog, I am going to explore some more ambitious shots in time. I like Brandt's work, and can see some possibilities to follow his lead.
In the meantime, perhaps the following images help to provide some context and going beyond the norm in very different ways:
 |
| f5.7 1/250 ISO 200 |
 |
| f22 1/250 ISO 400 |
 |
| f13 1/350 ISO 200 |
Perhaps a bolder approach would have included this:
 |
| f5.6 1/90 ISO 250 |
I did take several images from different angles during the day. Here are a couple of examples:
 |
| f13 1/125 ISO 800 |
 |
| f11 1/250 ISO 200 |
Lastly, I did prepare a triptych that would have been included in the set had I had time to prepare before submission:
 |
| f5.6 1/250 ISO 400 |
This resulted from taking three images of a cheetah that stood stock still for a while looking around. The middle image is used in the set but I think the triptych works even better.
Moving on to specific images, I comment on Tutor notes as set out below (NB metadata included only for images not included in Assignment):
Cover shot
Tutor sees "very good detail". It was technically a good shot to maintain sharpness. Compositionally tutor sees weakness in the cheetahs merging in the image. Ironically this is due partly to the natural body camouflage; for me the fact that heads and tails are distinct probably suffices. As an image to promote my reserve, I would be content with this given the rareness of cheetahs.
Rhino
Tutor notices rim lighting and the framing effect of nearside vegetation.
Lion
"Strong detail captured". Tutor notes texture, which is something I like to capture in wildlife images.
Queries whether highlight in eyes can be lifted in Photoshop. Good idea, here is before and after:
I think the brightening the eyes does help.
Elephants
Tutor agrees with my positive comments on the sense of movement and of the texture. Asks whether a wider shot was taken. Yes it was, as below:
 |
| f8 1/180 ISO 200 |
Zebra
"Nicely defined in the savanna", adding that "it is a shame that the foal is hidden...". As he points out, this is the hostage to fortune that is part of wildlife photography. I am less sure it is a problem as the viewer is left to do some imagination work himself.
Cheetah
Favourable comment on the slim portrait mode. Wonders "if subject could be lifted a little by processing". Agree - see the triptych above. Applied to this image only we have before and after:
A distinct improvement with some Levels adjustment applied in right hand image. It slightly detracts from the camouflage effect more apparent in the original image on the left, but this is outweighed by the greater clarity and punchiness of the post processed image on the right.
Hippos
The use of the polarizing filter is noted as working well. Tutor comments that might benefit from a little more context, some surrounding landscape. In response to that, this is a river image and the surrounding landscape was uninteresting. There is a dilemma here: adding context means your subject becomes small in the frame. My experience is that viewers like their animals big in the frame not least because plenty of folk take wildlife with 50mm point and shoot cameras and thereby include a great deal of "context", but the subject is difficult to appreciate. I have commented on the generality of the context point above.
Nyala
I thought this to be the weakest image - included because need to have a nyala in this set - but tutor is more complimentary - notes dappled light, and that texture and colour captured well. On reflection, perhaps I was being hard on this one.
Buffalo
At one with tutor on this one - "the best of the set". Buffalo are not difficult to take as they are big, move slowly and are fairly common. Flip side of this is the difficulty of getting a good, different image and this shot achieved that goal. I was very pleased with the expression of the male, "looking over" to use tutor's phrase and the texture and detail, both noted by tutor.
Giraffe
I have found giraffe to be a difficult subject, eventually taking something a little different. As tutor points out, the merging of the two heads that is supposed to be the focus (pointing in different directions) then becomes a problem.
Baboons
I view this as one of the best shots and tutor agrees: "a strong shot...backlight [helps] define the animals.
Kudu
"Very good detail" says tutor, and notes the catch light in the eye, which adds a lot to this image.
Impala
Tutor comments on the rhythmn that I alluded to in the assignment, and the nice effect from dappled light.
Lastly, tutor notes a couple of images on one of the exercises do not open - noticed myself and now corrected.
Overall, am pleased with this feedback - "a good set of mostly long lens shots, with strong detail and composition throughout". I enjoyed the day and the challenge of taking images of so much in a restricted time. Possibly could have provided a bit more variety and context, but, to repeat, this does come at a price of losing detail of the subject.
