Hello guys,
i am well into wildlife and photography and take many pictures of the birds that vist my garde from the hide i have, however i have been told that a intresting background where there is branchs and twigs of the tree in focus is to distracting when looking at my pictures and a burry background is better...
i would like some feedback regards this and have put two images into my gallery of a blue tit ( both pics show the same bird ) one is cropped and i have burried the backgound a bit using photoshop.
the other is the same bird and shot uncropped without any burring ( please note its not cropped to same as the other but is same picture)...
so which would you like best... any feedback will be greatly appreciated
Kestrel....
dont just look enjoy and leave for others to share after you. we dont own the earth we just rent a small part of it....
Hi Derek,
Personally I think you should do what YOU prefer, forget about everyone else it is what you like most that matters. You seem to like the detailed photos so go for that :-)
For me, I must admit I don't like the photoshop blurred photo as the blue tit looks softened as well (I don't know whether this is deliberate or not) though in general, I can like photos of either type it just depends on the subject and what is wanted from a photo, it isn't a case of either/or, it is a case of what is best for the photo in question in regards to it's purpose. If it's a detailed portrait of an animal then a simple background does work best, but this doesn't necessarily mean the background has to be blurred. In all honesty your original blue tit photo doesn't have what I would consider to be a complicated background and I personally find it works well with the blue tit centred, focus on branches to the left and nothing in focus on the right.
Millie & Fly the Border Collies
I am only speaking from a personal point of view. My interest is in birds rather than photography, and I use photos to help me with identification. I really don't mind whether the background is altered or not as long as I can see the detail of the bird to help me with identification. It is normally better for me to see a cropped photo as it makes the bird bigger and brings out the detail better.
I wonder if you could post the photo without any blurring, but crop it? Then I can compare 2 cropped photos, one untouched, the other blurred.
Cheers, Linda.
See my photos on Flickr
sparrow mate i have unloaded a unburred cropped picture of this so ya can take a look and tell me what you think...
Some technical problems methinks. I can't see your latest picture!
sorry mate ya can view now
Kestrel - would you mind putting the pics up on this page so we can see them together?
Thanks
Burred picture above
un-burred picture above...
Thanks.
Provided the bird is clear and big enough to make out what it is (!) then I am quite happy.
So sorry no real preference.
I agree that it should be down to the photographer's choice and opinion, if you like the background clear have the background clear :o)
Personally I like the background to be out of focus on my bird photos and stick to a f/5.6 aperture. So really its all down to choice. I prefer you blurred background, but go with whichever you prefer, they're your photos :o)
Photography is a form of art and we all have our own views and preferences when we see a painting. What a dull place if we all liked the same thing. Sorry to 'sit on the wall' on this one but surely it is what you want to achieve and then if you are happy with the result.