Brenda Fishbaugh, QPSA
November 2023 - Wild Horses at Little Big Horn
Original
About the Image(s)
Canon R5, Canon RF 100-500, handheld
ISO 400 500mm. f/8.0 1/1000 sec
We visited Little Big Horn in Montana on our Wild West trip this September. While my husband was driving around looking for the actual area that troops arrived, departed and fought, I saw a herd of wild horses. They were far off (see original for partial herd) and the light was so-so.
Horses are feral and not a "Nature" pic, so anything goes (other than latest AI) and I would enter them in PSA Color or Mono.
The pic is fairly static, just two horses standing in sagebrush, but I had fun working on them. I "selected subject" and lightened them, then chose background and darkened the background. I added some radial gradients of subtle gold light coming down to the horses, to make them more interesting. I used radial gradient on their eyes to make them a bit more alive, but I don't thing that was as effective as I hoped. Noise and sharpening applied.
Originally, I cropped in, but actually went back out so it was more obvious they were wild, or at least not on a farm.
I actually like the unusual look I achieved, regardless of whether I could garner an acceptance with some ordinary looking horses not doing anything. But I'm open to any ideas on what you might do differently. Thanks!
This round’s discussion is now closed!
31 comments posted
I like seeing the horses surrounded by sagebrush and that they clearly are in the wild. I like the idea of brightening the horses. I'd like it more if the brightening were were not quite so emphatic. Posted: 11/04/2023 16:36:33
Thanks! I was afraid they might appear too "lit up". I will wait for everyone's feedback and then rework them. Posted: 11/07/2023 15:41:26
Robert, check out my latest version. I did not brighten the horses as much. Better? Posted: 11/14/2023 19:39:04
This is a wonderful image, Brenda, and I agree that keeping it a little more wide on the crop is a great choice. I also really like how you left a little more space on the left.
I'm with Robert on the horses being lightened a little too much for my personal liking... I also think the added warm-tone radiants changes the horse's color too much from the original. I like the brown tone of their natural coloring, and especially with the horse on the right, the golden radiant actually gives the horse an appearance of being both brown and blondish in color (after playing with the original in Lightroom, it seems it is present on the original too).
My only other suggestion is to keep playing with the crop and the placement.
I took a real quick stab at changing the whit balance, black balance, shadows, highlights, color saturation, selective masking for contrast and bring more shadows up, then cropped as with the attached for just a slightly different look... not a drastic change; more of a tweak. This version made from the original. Posted: 11/04/2023 17:40:00
I'm with Robert on the horses being lightened a little too much for my personal liking... I also think the added warm-tone radiants changes the horse's color too much from the original. I like the brown tone of their natural coloring, and especially with the horse on the right, the golden radiant actually gives the horse an appearance of being both brown and blondish in color (after playing with the original in Lightroom, it seems it is present on the original too).
My only other suggestion is to keep playing with the crop and the placement.
I took a real quick stab at changing the whit balance, black balance, shadows, highlights, color saturation, selective masking for contrast and bring more shadows up, then cropped as with the attached for just a slightly different look... not a drastic change; more of a tweak. This version made from the original. Posted: 11/04/2023 17:40:00
I like your rework, with the horses showing up because the sagebrush is bluer. I'll wait for group feedback and then rework. Thanks so much!
Posted: 11/07/2023 15:42:50
Posted: 11/07/2023 15:42:50
James, check out my latest version and see if you like it better. I used your suggestions. Thanks! Posted: 11/14/2023 19:40:18
There are many great things about your image. The composition is great. The color of the two horses is outstanding. But, I feel, the out of focus brush in front of the central horse is just too disturbing. However, there is some brush just behind the horses that is in sharp focus. With a lot of careful work, you could clone some of that area in to the out of focus areas. In my revision I did a quick use of the clone tool to indicate my suggestion. I also cropped tighter and warmed up the image. Posted: 11/06/2023 14:44:24
Gee, I would never have caught the out of focus brush being an issue. I can include the front sagebrush as part of my Subject Selection and see if that keeps it more in focus. Thanks for bringing it to my attention! I'll wait until everyone weighs in and then I'll rework taking it into consideration. Thanks so much! Posted: 11/07/2023 15:44:52
Foreground blur can be just as effective a tool as background blur.
It's OK to have the foreground in clear focus, of course.
It's also OK to have a bit of blur in the foreground... and that foreground blur can even add to the mind trickery of "depth." Posted: 11/08/2023 17:04:44
It's OK to have the foreground in clear focus, of course.
It's also OK to have a bit of blur in the foreground... and that foreground blur can even add to the mind trickery of "depth." Posted: 11/08/2023 17:04:44
Jim, I used your suggestions on my latest version on 11/14. Let me know what you think! Thanks! Posted: 11/14/2023 19:41:04
Nice shot. The houses look great but the sage color seems a little off. It must have been a cloudy day. The out of focus bush in front doesn't bother me but there seems to be a slight halo around the horse's head on the viewer's right. Posted: 11/11/2023 13:52:07
Thanks for your catches, Ed! I'm am going to rework as soon as everyone's critiques are in, and see what everyone things of my new version. I appreciate the help! Posted: 11/12/2023 17:13:04
Ed, I redid my image in the 11/14 version using your ideas. Let me know what you think. Any better? Posted: 11/14/2023 19:43:08
Thanks for the feedback! I reworked my image, and I have to say that once I started working on it, I did see the out of focus sagebrush on the sorrel horse as very distracting, as Jim had mentioned. I tried removing them and cloning them, without much luck.
So I moved to another version of the pair. In this one, we don't have the two horses looking at each other, which is disappointing, as that gave us a "round and round" on the composition. But we do have their bodies free of out-of-focus sagebrush!
I did add just a bit of yellow to the horses, but no "rays of the sun" made with giant radial filters, so they are much darker than they were. The DeHaze slider was my best friend on the horses, and made their sad wild horse coats look much richer.
Ed mentioned the sagebrush color being off. And James reworked the image adding some more life to the sagebrush. So I added a tiny bit of blue and a tiny bit of green to the Background Selection, which I think added some nice contrast to the warmer color horses.
Gotta say, these horses are scarred and full of burrs, ticks and the sorrel is very pregnant, but ribs showing, probably from worms. One of the horses in another image has a huge bite that healed horribly. Not so much fun for "living free".
Thoughts? Thanks! Posted: 11/14/2023 19:07:29
So I moved to another version of the pair. In this one, we don't have the two horses looking at each other, which is disappointing, as that gave us a "round and round" on the composition. But we do have their bodies free of out-of-focus sagebrush!
I did add just a bit of yellow to the horses, but no "rays of the sun" made with giant radial filters, so they are much darker than they were. The DeHaze slider was my best friend on the horses, and made their sad wild horse coats look much richer.
Ed mentioned the sagebrush color being off. And James reworked the image adding some more life to the sagebrush. So I added a tiny bit of blue and a tiny bit of green to the Background Selection, which I think added some nice contrast to the warmer color horses.
Gotta say, these horses are scarred and full of burrs, ticks and the sorrel is very pregnant, but ribs showing, probably from worms. One of the horses in another image has a huge bite that healed horribly. Not so much fun for "living free".
Thoughts? Thanks! Posted: 11/14/2023 19:07:29
This version looks fantastic, Brenda. I agree that it's a shame these horses aren't looking at each other ... that they are looking at the viewer helps.
The colors on this version are so much better to my eye... the brown tone of the horses looks much more natural ... and the sagebrush very much has the silvery-blue color tone that also looks and feels much more natural to my eye.
Well done! Posted: 11/15/2023 08:31:33
The colors on this version are so much better to my eye... the brown tone of the horses looks much more natural ... and the sagebrush very much has the silvery-blue color tone that also looks and feels much more natural to my eye.
Well done! Posted: 11/15/2023 08:31:33
Thanks for your initial feedback that led to this version, James! I appreciate it! I am glad you like this one much better! Posted: 11/15/2023 09:08:29
I like the closer cropping that reduces the negative effect of the out of focus sage brush. Its color and the colors of the horses are more natural now. You might be amazed at the high quality of images you can make with the R% using an ISO of 2,000 or more. Using a high ISO would have allowed you to use a much smaller aperture, which would have increased the depth of field... Posted: 11/16/2023 17:41:55
Thanks, Robert. I often shoot at 20,000 ISO for my night birds, and use Photo AI to remove the noise. You bring up some great points and have started a wonderful discussion!
My understanding was that a professional images recommend just the subject in focus. That's why we pay $20,000 for a f/2.8 lens. That's why software lets us sharpen the subject and blur the foreground and background (although this is not allowed in Nature, PhotoJournalism and Travel PSA competitions).
I was actually mad that I was at f8.0 instead of f/7.1, which would have blurred my background better with my lens at 500mm.
I understood that only in landscapes (maybe architecture, etc) to we potentially want everything in focus and use focus stacking to get that look.
However, this pic is a hybrid--a portrait and a landscape--and because its not PSA Nature, I can do what I want with it.
I may try putting the horse head facing the other horse on this image...cut and paste...I've never done that, so it would be a good lesson.
And I love Sunil's Monochrome, which solves a lot of these issues. We are traveling now, so I'll try everything before November ends.
Posted: 11/19/2023 08:57:24
My understanding was that a professional images recommend just the subject in focus. That's why we pay $20,000 for a f/2.8 lens. That's why software lets us sharpen the subject and blur the foreground and background (although this is not allowed in Nature, PhotoJournalism and Travel PSA competitions).
I was actually mad that I was at f8.0 instead of f/7.1, which would have blurred my background better with my lens at 500mm.
I understood that only in landscapes (maybe architecture, etc) to we potentially want everything in focus and use focus stacking to get that look.
However, this pic is a hybrid--a portrait and a landscape--and because its not PSA Nature, I can do what I want with it.
I may try putting the horse head facing the other horse on this image...cut and paste...I've never done that, so it would be a good lesson.
And I love Sunil's Monochrome, which solves a lot of these issues. We are traveling now, so I'll try everything before November ends.
Posted: 11/19/2023 08:57:24
Those are helpful thoughts on focus. Thank you. Posted: 11/19/2023 10:28:40
Liked your original ver. try BW, may look good, attached quick try. Posted: 11/15/2023 13:13:30
You are the master of monochrome. I'll give it a try with both versions. Thanks! Posted: 11/16/2023 09:57:53
Photography is an art form so there is no "right" or "wrong" image. There have been several comments that a blurred foreground is acceptable, and that is fine. But, to me an image should tell a story. Brenda has captured an image of two beautiful horses but when I look at the image my eye is drawn to the foreground which I feel is a distraction. An artist painting the scene would not have intentionally blurred the foreground. But, a blurred background is almost always acceptable as it focuses your attention on the subject. Posted: 11/17/2023 07:01:27
More about depth of field. Depth of field is defined as the area of sharp focus and is greatest with short focal length lenses and small aperture settings. And depth of field decreases with wider aperture settings and as the focal length increases. So, with a 20mm lens and a small f stop everything can be in sharp focus from, perhaps, 10 feet to infinity but with a 400mm lens and a wide aperture setting the depth of field might be only 10 feet. And, the area of sharp focus is greater in front of the subject than it is behind the subject. Posted: 11/17/2023 07:42:13
Thanks, Jim! This is a great discussion and you cover a lot of artistic and technical points. Here was my response to Robert...let me know if I am off track in my thoughts!
"Thanks, Robert. I often shoot at 20,000 ISO for my night birds, and use Photo AI to remove the noise. You bring up some great points and have started a wonderful discussion!
My understanding was that a professional images recommend just the subject in focus. That's why we pay $20,000 for a f/2.8 lens. That's why software lets us sharpen the subject and blur the foreground and background (although this is not allowed in Nature, PhotoJournalism and Travel PSA competitions).
I was actually mad that I was at f8.0 instead of f/7.1, which would have blurred my background better with my lens at 500mm.
I understood that only in landscapes (maybe architecture, etc) to we potentially want everything in focus and use focus stacking to get that look.
However, this pic is a hybrid--a portrait and a landscape--and because its not PSA Nature, I can do what I want with it.
I may try putting the horse head facing the other horse on this image...cut and paste...I've never done that, so it would be a good lesson.
And I love Sunil's Monochrome, which solves a lot of these issues. We are traveling now, so I'll try everything before November ends." Posted: 11/19/2023 09:00:59
"Thanks, Robert. I often shoot at 20,000 ISO for my night birds, and use Photo AI to remove the noise. You bring up some great points and have started a wonderful discussion!
My understanding was that a professional images recommend just the subject in focus. That's why we pay $20,000 for a f/2.8 lens. That's why software lets us sharpen the subject and blur the foreground and background (although this is not allowed in Nature, PhotoJournalism and Travel PSA competitions).
I was actually mad that I was at f8.0 instead of f/7.1, which would have blurred my background better with my lens at 500mm.
I understood that only in landscapes (maybe architecture, etc) to we potentially want everything in focus and use focus stacking to get that look.
However, this pic is a hybrid--a portrait and a landscape--and because its not PSA Nature, I can do what I want with it.
I may try putting the horse head facing the other horse on this image...cut and paste...I've never done that, so it would be a good lesson.
And I love Sunil's Monochrome, which solves a lot of these issues. We are traveling now, so I'll try everything before November ends." Posted: 11/19/2023 09:00:59
When focussed on a subject, I thought the depth of acceptable focus behind the subject was greater than the depth of acceptable focus in front of the subject. Posted: 11/25/2023 19:39:10
I worked on my wild horses again.
My first effort was to take the sorrel horse's head and put on the newer version, so both horses would be looking at each other. However, the difference from her elongated neck to turned neck did not work at all, regardless of transforming size and shape. I then tried to bring the better pinto horse's head into the original composition, again with no luck!
Next, I went to monochrome (thanks, Sunil), as it does solve a lot of the issues. I tried a couple dozen versions and decided to go dark and gritty, which is what Sunil had done.
I also used a tight crop at the bottom that brings us closer to the horses and we see how deep in sagebrush the horse on the left is.
I used a few different tools to remove the white out of focus sagebrush that was on the sorrel horse, and I think its less distracting.
What I did learn doing this and listening to our group, is that this is not going to be a competitive image. I love horses and had horses, so I think I was not looking at this objectively. As I worked and worked on it, I realized that this was not going to be what I hoped. Thanks so much for helping me get there...disappointing as it is. Time to move on to another photo!
Posted: 11/26/2023 14:30:57
My first effort was to take the sorrel horse's head and put on the newer version, so both horses would be looking at each other. However, the difference from her elongated neck to turned neck did not work at all, regardless of transforming size and shape. I then tried to bring the better pinto horse's head into the original composition, again with no luck!
Next, I went to monochrome (thanks, Sunil), as it does solve a lot of the issues. I tried a couple dozen versions and decided to go dark and gritty, which is what Sunil had done.
I also used a tight crop at the bottom that brings us closer to the horses and we see how deep in sagebrush the horse on the left is.
I used a few different tools to remove the white out of focus sagebrush that was on the sorrel horse, and I think its less distracting.
What I did learn doing this and listening to our group, is that this is not going to be a competitive image. I love horses and had horses, so I think I was not looking at this objectively. As I worked and worked on it, I realized that this was not going to be what I hoped. Thanks so much for helping me get there...disappointing as it is. Time to move on to another photo!
Posted: 11/26/2023 14:30:57
This monochrome version is very nice Brenda!
I also like the reworked color image you did, keeping the sagebrush a little more true to color with that silvery blue.
I think I prefer this monochrome image though... and even if you decide not to enter it into competition, you could post it online in various social media formats, and even print a copy for you to enjoy yourself at home either north or south! Posted: 11/27/2023 08:49:10
I also like the reworked color image you did, keeping the sagebrush a little more true to color with that silvery blue.
I think I prefer this monochrome image though... and even if you decide not to enter it into competition, you could post it online in various social media formats, and even print a copy for you to enjoy yourself at home either north or south! Posted: 11/27/2023 08:49:10
Thanks, James! I agree its a nice image and I like it, probably most in color. I think I might darken the horses a bit in the color version. And, as you suggested, post on Facebook. I also make notecards for gifts, and its a nice image for that type of use.
I appreciate you keeping the conversation going...you are great at that!
Posted: 11/27/2023 15:59:32
I appreciate you keeping the conversation going...you are great at that!
Posted: 11/27/2023 15:59:32
I love to keep the conversation going!
We risk losing so much in the "digital realm" ... we must put in extra effort to overcome that risk. :-)
Printed in color, even if smallish in size, and hung proudly above the work station/desk/computer or even in the family room would be a lot of fun I believe! Posted: 11/27/2023 17:03:37
We risk losing so much in the "digital realm" ... we must put in extra effort to overcome that risk. :-)
Printed in color, even if smallish in size, and hung proudly above the work station/desk/computer or even in the family room would be a lot of fun I believe! Posted: 11/27/2023 17:03:37
Thanks again for being such a great addition to the group! Do you have a "twin" that would like to join us? Posted: 11/27/2023 18:14:37