woodpecker and weasel
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:48 am
Through the BBC, this picture shows a woodpecker and weasel encounter
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31711446
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31711446
NatureScapes.net Forums
NatureScapes.net Nature Photography Resource - Photo Galleries, Discussion Forums, Nature and Wildlife Photography Articles and Tips
https://www.naturescapes.net/forums/
woodpecker and weasel
Page 1 of 1
Re: woodpecker and weasel
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 12:00 pm
Now that is a great photo. Quite amazing to see. Who would have believed it if not for the photo?
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 1:37 pm
Thats amazing
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 9:28 pm
The image is not that sharp. It is a heavy crop. None of that matters. It's gone viral because of the unique moment captured. The content is what has gotten everyone's attention.
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 9:53 pm
It does show a nice BG though
Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2015 8:11 am
If the video shows the lens and camera he was using, it was a Canon 300 f/2.8 and a crop body (pop-up flash, perhaps a 7d2?).
It just goes to show that content trumps technical perfection. And this image is not bad. He says in the video that it was at about 50 meters--a long way for a small bird.
Nice job given the spontaneous nature. And given the small target and complex background, I bet it was a 7d2 as other crop bodies are probably not up to that task.
Roger
It just goes to show that content trumps technical perfection. And this image is not bad. He says in the video that it was at about 50 meters--a long way for a small bird.
Nice job given the spontaneous nature. And given the small target and complex background, I bet it was a 7d2 as other crop bodies are probably not up to that task.
Roger
Re:
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 9:55 pm
rnclark wrote:If the video shows the lens and camera he was using, it was a Canon 300 f/2.8 and a crop body (pop-up flash, perhaps a 7d2?).
It just goes to show that content trumps technical perfection. And this image is not bad. He says in the video that it was at about 50 meters--a long way for a small bird.
Roger
I remember this snippet from a National Geographic photographer, Jim Richardson.
"The real criteria for picking pictures is information and viewer reaction. (In other words, technique is nice, but if necessary technique be damned.) Very often, for the purposes of visual communication, sharpness is way overrated. Put another way, really good technique will not get you published. Great content gets you published. Technically perfect eagle pictures? We've seen way too many of them. Eagles in their environment doing some part of their life with dramatic action? Might be interested. The first pictures showing that eagles carry MagLites to attract fish to the surface so they can catch salmon at night? We'd publish it even if it was absolutely full of noise and only vaguely in focus. (Just kidding about the Eagles carrying MagLites, I think.)" - extracted from a thread here at NS.
Re:
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 9:59 pm
Mike in O wrote:It does show a nice BG though
True. I noticed that too. He was using good gear
