Fawn in morning light

[Tom Barry]

Three fawns and their moms were in the front yard this morning. Got a bunch of shots with the 70D+Ef 200mm f/2.8L. Here are three I liked:
IMG_4672 by tombarry975, on Flickr
IMG_4692 by tombarry975, on Flickr
IMG_4677 by tombarry975, on Flickr

[Wavelength]

Excellent images

[Tom Barry]

Thanks for the kind words, Nandakumar.

[Shadowman]

Nice series.

[pschlute]

The second image is not doing it for me. The first is much better although could benefit from bringing out the exposure on the shadow side of the face a bit.

But how lucky you are to have such lovely visitors to your garden.

[Tom Barry]

Thanks, Peter. I included the shot of the fawn facing away because it is different from what you usually see in wildlife photos. I opened the shadows on each shot, but wanted to show just how contrasty the light was. It's a matter of taste
and I appreciate your viewpoint. Thanks again for the input.

[Manfred M]

Thanks, Peter. I included the shot of the fawn facing away because it is different from what you usually see in wildlife photos.

Had you considered that there is a reason that this is so?

Generally the back of the head (or the rest of the body) is not particularly interesting. Most people are drawn to the face and especially the eyes of people and animals. That's why we see images like that.

[Tom Barry]

Thanks, Manfred. Yes, I considered that there is a reason this is so. And shouldn't necessarily be so. How many interesting photos has Fernando posted with the subject facing resolutely out to sea? Including one yesterday. I have seen over the decades many well-received photos of humans and animals not looking into the camera. But, to each his (or her) own, say I. I rather like pushing back against the so-called "rules."

[Manfred M]

Thanks, Manfred. Yes, I considered that there is a reason this is so. And shouldn't necessarily be so. How many interesting photos has Fernando posted with the subject facing resolutely out to sea? Including one yesterday. I have seen over the decades many well-received photos of humans and animals not looking into the camera. But, to each his (or her) own, say I. I rather like pushing back against the so-called "rules."

First of all without getting into the merit of Fernando's work, the people in his works would often not be viewed as the subject of the piece. There is a technique where the photographer has the person or people in the scene looking at the subject as a way of directing the viewer's attention in the right direction. I've seen this done quite effectively in some wildlife photos; a herd of impala looking toward a predator, for instance. Again, in that case, the predator is the subject and the impala are directing the viewer to it.

Cartier-Bresson's image taken in India does exactly this. The back of the women direct us to the landscape they are looking at.






There are a few portrait images take from the back and the one that I generally bring up is Karsh's famous image of the cellist Pablo Cassals. In this case it is somewhat fitting because Cassals was all about the music he made so in some ways the face is not as important as him playing the cello.



The image is unusual but is effective.

I too am someone who looks to "break the rules", but one has to understand them (in terms of what they are all about) before one can break them effectively.

Sorry, the second shot of the deer is not working all that well for me.

[Tom Barry]

I studied photography at university. That Karsh photo is one of my favorites. I am not big on rules, but one I try to follow is: never presume.

[FootLoose]

I like the way the light in the second shot picks up the back line of the deer. Nice set, Tom

[billtils]

When an opportunity presents itself - take it! And I like this set - and the more I look the more I like the second one.

Did you think about trying a "portrait" shot (sort of head and shoulders) of the first one?

[Tom Barry]

Thanks, Greg. Bill, thanks for the suggestion. I may well do that. If you or someone else wants to give it a shot, please feel free to do so. Not to whine, but as a friend of mine says, old age ain't for sissies. My wife and I spend a lot of time with health professionals and the next two weeks are full of poking and prodding.

[Manfred M]

I studied photography at university. That Karsh photo is one of my favorites. I am not big on rules, but one I try to follow is: never presume.

While I don't have a degree in photography (mine's in mechanical engineering), I have studied photography formally over the past 12 - 15 years through the extension program at a local college and at the accredited fine art school (which was founded and run by the Karsh brothers's printer).

I have always pushed the boundaries of the "rules" and when I suggest an image is not working for me, I can generally explain why that is from a technical, compositional and emotional impact standpoint. Sorry, in my view, the second image is not working particularly well for me.

[Tom Barry]

Manfred, I have a degree in journalism, which entailed several courses in photography. I am not suggesting that the photo should work for any particular person. What irks me a bit was your seeming to presume that I was ignorant about photographic history and rules and needed a lecture on things I studied more than 60 years ago. As I wrote earlier, presumption should be avoided. I apologise if I presumed you were lecturing rather than explaining your problems with the photo.

[xpatUSA]

Thanks, Manfred. Yes, I considered that there is a reason this is so. And shouldn't necessarily be so. How many interesting photos has Fernando posted with the subject facing resolutely out to sea? Including one yesterday. I have seen over the decades many well-received photos of humans and animals not looking into the camera. But, to each his (or her) own, say I. I rather like pushing back against the so-called "rules."

I seem to recall that it said somewhere, as a rule of thumb, that animal shots are "better" if the animal is not staring into the camera or at least not directly at the photographer. Anybody?

Tom, what's the attraction of your yard?! I live on 50 ac of woodland and have seen a deer in the yard maybe twice in about 15 years. Tracks, yes, but actual deer, no.

[Tom Barry]

Birdseed. We have window feeders and throw some seed on the ground to keep the squirrels happy. Deer like the sunflower seeds and corn in the seed mix. I also toss the deer a few corn tortillas when I notice them in the yard.
Others in the 'hood go further and I am certain that includes deer corn. Some urban areas prohibit feeding deer, but we are in a semi rural location, and the coyotes, bobcats, occasional mountain lions and foxes keep the deer herd from exploding.

[Manfred M]

Manfred, I have a degree in journalism, which entailed several courses in photography. I am not suggesting that the photo should work for any particular person. What irks me a bit was your seeming to presume that I was ignorant about photographic history and rules and needed a lecture on things I studied more than 60 years ago. As I wrote earlier, presumption should be avoided. I apologise if I presumed you were lecturing rather than explaining your problems with the photo.

Sorry Tom, the problem with this (and most other photography sites) is that there is a vast mix of users. Many have little or no formal photographic training. As a learning site, trying to explain what works and doesn't work is useful to improve photographic skills. Comments I make are directed at the image, not the photographer.

In general, we have no idea of the knowledge and skill level of the photographer, other than what we see posted. You are unusual in your knowledge but until you mentioned it we had no idea that you had any background in photography and no way of knowing it. When I write on this site, I write not only to the poster, but also to anyone who might end up reading the post.

Something I was taught a very long time ago was that one has to make a basic assumption about the audience and craft the approach based on that. As a journalist you know this and your level of language and content will be based on the target audience of the news article. I remember a time in my career where I had to present the same material to four different groups; the general public, city politicians, employees at the company where I worked and corporate executives, I ended up with four very different presentations even though I was essentially talking about the same subject.

[xpatUSA]

Birdseed. We have window feeders and throw some seed on the ground to keep the squirrels happy. Deer like the sunflower seeds and corn in the seed mix. I also toss the deer a few corn tortillas when I notice them in the yard.
Others in the 'hood go further and I am certain that includes deer corn. Some urban areas prohibit feeding deer, but we are in a semi rural location, and the coyotes, bobcats, occasional mountain lions and foxes keep the deer herd from exploding.

Thanks, that explains it. I leave my woodland creatures to their own devices, so my yard is devoid of fodder for them.

[Manfred M]

I seem to recall that it said somewhere, as a rule of thumb, that animal shots are "better" if the animal is not staring into the camera or at least not directly at the photographer. Anybody?

That is certainly not my experience when dealing with this genre. Let me direct you to the images of an award winning wildlife photographer I know fairly well. Lower scores because there was no eye contact and lack of catchlights in they eyes were common comments made by wildlife photographic judges at a competition I attended about a year ago.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/11107124@N02/