Swan or Sky?

[rasputin]

Which is better:

Natural(ish) - more trees, sky and reflection


Crop - more swan, less weeds


Or any other suggestions for crops? I like the original, but I just feel the swan looks a little bit "lost"

[Nick M]

Using the first picture, try chopping off the right hand 1/4 of the picture (might make it about a 8 x 10 ratio picture) and see what that looks like.

Try to leave a bit of the sky though if you can.

[Gemm]

I'd also make the swan face the other way.

[Simpo Two]

I prefer the top one, but the sky looks fake and the swan is a bit grubby. However the perfect landscape is a holy grail, so don't worry

[LukeBird]

Gemm said:

I'd also make the swan face the other way.

I reckon you should 'shop in a Golden Eagle!

[GetCarter]

Feel free to shoot me dead. Way too much HDR.

...but composition wise, number 1 is much better IMHO. If only you'd never discovered photomatix, it'd be great

Edited by GetCarter on Wednesday 18th November 18:36

[Nurburgsingh]

i'd go for a panoramic view cropped just above the swans head....

you've got the makings of a few decent shots there.. I like it

[rasputin]

GetCarter said:

Feel free to shoot me dead. Way too much HDR.

Actually I completely agree!

This wasn't a planned shot. The swan swam past, I quickly tried to find a nice angle and snapped before it was out of sight. Overexposed and most of the sky was blown. I HDR'd it (and got "creative" with the sky) about as much as I could get away with from a single shot, and I think it has improved it. But still not 100% happy with either of the above pics.



So you're saying rescuing dodgy shots isn't what HDR is all about?

Edited by rasputin on Wednesday 18th November 19:15

[paul911]

Gemm said:

I'd also make the swan face the other way.

+1

No 1 for me too as there’s more foreground. I think its quite a nice pic though and only slightly over HDR’d.

[Scott330ci]

Neither I am afraid - awful HDR