Re: First wildlife pictures

"Bob G" <bobjames27@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:f2feea61-2cd1-4c8f-abba-39db39a62666@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I think you have to decide if you are photographing an animal or a
> nature scene. If you are presenting a picture of the animal, then
> crop to animal. The backgrounds in most of the shots don't add to the
> image. There are some shots where the background does contribute, but
> some that need cropping.
>
> --
> Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

> Completely disagree. I went to the web site expecing to find run-of-
> the-mill, boring, done-a-million-times-before, pictures of wildlife
> and instead found some very appealing photographs, more like
> abstractions that work very well than like straight shots of "pretty"
> scenes. The backgrounds form an integral part of the harmony. This
> photographer has a distinct way of seeing and I would like to
> encourage him in his work.

Thanks Bob.
The intention was to show the real "wild" life, not just an animal that 
could be sitting in the zoo.
They were taken in a sanctuary that used to be the hunting grounds for the

****tuguese kings. We walked for miles until we finally found this place. 
There's something magical about seeing eye to eye with wild animals
without 
gates or anything else between you and them.


-- 
Focus