PHOTO: Turkeys

Displaying 1 to 6 of 6 matches.
RoosterHD
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsExclusive iStockphoto VideographerMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:20AM
I have an opportunity to resubmit this image.


The rejection reason:


"We found the overall composition of this file's lighting could be improved."


I could not find areas blown out (255,255,255).


Help appreciated.  Thanks.


 

(Edited on 2013-03-21 07:22:53 by RoosterHD)

(Edited on 2013-03-21 07:23:19 by RoosterHD)
vandervelden
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusive
Posted Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:31AM

Feathers on turkeys just to the right of centre are blown out. If you're using Lightroom, drop the highlights down by about 27%. Even with that corrected, the lighting isn't great with little detail in significant portions of the birds.


More of a problem is the extremely shallow DOF putting very little in focus - 1/8000th at f1.4 - f8(ish) would have been better.
esp_imaging
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:50AM
Posted By RoosterHD:
I have an opportunity to resubmit this image.


The rejection reason:


"We found the overall composition of this file's lighting could be improved."


I could not find areas blown out (255,255,255). 


I haven't looked for 255,255,255 pixels, but the shot definitely looks over exposed. Highlights need to be pulled back, plus a bit more "bite" in the shadows.

I think the very shallow DoF works quite well.

(Edited on 2013-03-21 08:33:11 by esp_imaging)
kelvinjay
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveMember has won a contestForum Moderator
Posted Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:16AM
You don't need to have areas of 255,255,255 to have a loss of detail due to exposure. In the RAW file I'd try recovering the highlights or whites a little more if possible to get the detail back in those brighter areas.
donald_gruener
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveMember has had a submission accepted to the Designer SpotlightMember has had a File Of The WeekForum Moderator
Posted Thu Mar 21, 2013 10:50AM
If you can reprocess the RAW to recover a bit of detail in the highlights, great. But even just working from your rejected JPEG, simply correcting the slightly-too-cool white balance and enhancing the contrast in the dark end would make enough difference to get this accepted, as it's otherwise a reasonably strong, useful, & nicely composed stock image.

Your original on top, my 30-second tweak on the bottom:
Turkeys
RoosterHD
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsExclusive iStockphoto VideographerMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:12AM

Great information everybody.


donald_gruener - yes, much better.  


I'll take all of this advice and try again.


Thanks!
This thread has been locked.
Displaying 1 to 6 of 6 matches.
Not a member?Join