Flying Pigeon:

Film: Ektachrome 64 - Camera: Mamiya 645-80mm lens. Fill-in flash. Exposure 1/15 sec. @f-22/panned.

-- Bahman Farzad (cpgbooks@mindspring.com), January 01, 1999

Answers

Great idea, but a near-miss as the wings are cut off too much for my taste.

Frank

-- Frank Kolwicz (bb389@lafn.org), January 01, 1999.

The wings are clipped too much and the image looks computer manipulated.

If we're going to allow manipulated images, I have some great art to post too.

-- Keith Clark (ClarkPhotography@spiritone.com), January 01, 1999.

Sorry to disappoit you Keith! The image is NOT computer manipulated. As a matter of fact it is as real as you can get it and is older than when the first PC ever hit the market. All you had to do was to ask rather than to accuse!

-- Bahman Farzad (cpgbooks@mindspring.com), January 01, 1999.

Another interesting shot Bahman. Of course it might be more completely wonderful with all wings included, but I like the action of the shot. I would think the flash would freeze the action, but I guess if it was set to fill at 1/15th, maybe not. Very painterly. (can I say that again?)

-- Mike Green (mgprod@mindspring.com), January 02, 1999.

nice job of creating motion. However, I wouldn't know it was a pigeon if you hadn't said. Maybe a little less abstraction would help?

-- Larry Korhnak (lvk@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu), January 04, 1999.

I wonder if "I wouldn't know what it was if you hadn't told me" applies in this case? Bob Atkins said the same about my recent post of a Bison skull in a thermal pool and I thought that perhaps it did apply in that case. I think you could say the same about the recent post of Old Faithful.

As to this shot, however, I think my reaction isn't one of "What kind of bird is that?" but rather something like "That bird is moving and this is a great way of showing it."

Larry - I know that is your shot of Old Faithiful and your comment above which prompted me to say something here, but this really isn't directed at you specifically.

Just thinking out loud here folks.

-- Jim Harrison (hphoto@earthlink.net), January 05, 1999.

As this is a critique site, I don't think we should worry too much about stepping on toes. I'm happy that some one is thinking and taking the time to comment, even if it's to disagree with my comment. I still think a little less abstraction would be better ( pan with a rear curtain sync flash?). Just the opinion of one happy amateur.

-- Larry Korhnak (lvk@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu), January 05, 1999.

The abstraction is good, but the composition doesn't work for me.

-- Duane Galensky (duane@wild-light.com), January 08, 1999.