Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Arctic fox

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Arctic fox

    This arctic fox cut at the petting zoo here in Reykjavík seems to be having a bad hair day. The depth of field just barely covers it's head. Is that a good or bad thing in your opinion? I would like to know what people think.

    Iceman


    #2
    Re: Arctic fox

    For me, if If you chose a very shallow depth of field for an animal or people shot then the eyes need to be totally in focus AND looking directly at the viewer.

    So for me this picture doesn’t quite work although I wouldn’t call it a bad thing!
    Canon EOS R5, R6 plus the usual suspects ......

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/bo_fo_to

    Comment


      #3
      Re: Arctic fox

      It looks like a finely executed shot technically.....good exposure, sharp...but not quite a portrait which is maybe why the shallow dof doesn't add anything here...I did the same recently with some dog shots.

      A lower angle and or eye contact would be the most significant improvement here I think.
      Brian Vickers LRPS

      brianvickersphotography.com

      Comment


        #4
        Re: Arctic fox

        Thank you for your comments. Like I said, this was in a petting zoo, and there was a fence, so, unfortunately, a lower angle wasn't possible. I also agree with you both that eye contact would have made a big difference.

        Comment


          #5
          Re: Arctic fox

          Agree with lunarbo you do need the eyes in focus, but nevertheless a good shot -- never seen one.
          Trev

          Equipment - According to the wife more than a Camera Shop got

          Flickr:
          https://www.flickr.com/photos/trevb2639/

          Comment

          Working...
          X