Shouldn't there be a few more? Or should I count the reflections as well?
:-)
On the shot itself, it would have been nice to have been looking at the front of the swans, rather than their backs. a good rule of thumb for nature shots is: if you can see both eyes, then maybe you have the beginnings of a good composition. I'd have cranked the aperture down a little as well - better to be underexposed on the water than over-exposed on your main subject.
I don't have a problem with fewer swans being depicted than the song indicates, although I have given an extra mark to those that either did find them, or had the patience to wait. That said, I am not scoring this high for a number of reasons:
The swans are a little over-exposed - if you are using a camera where you can choose the metering, use partial or spot, focussing in on the feathers; alternatively go with the cameras suggestion and then dial down 2/3 of a stop.
The composition lacks dynamism - the swans are swimming away from the viewer - there is no interaction.
The object dissected by the swan's neck (a moorhen, or a rock perhaps) jostles for the viewer's attention.
We'll just pretend the other four are right outside the frame :-) Like the composition, and good job of not blowing those whites. I might have dodged on heads a bit, since its advanced, but just my take. Nice entry.
Add photograph to your favorites
Add photographer to your favorites
Photographer found comment helpful.
