• Photos

  • Level

  • Score

Flaps Down

© Michael Kelly

Flaps Down

Uploaded: December 03, 2013

Description

Young gull comming in for a landing.

1/500 f7.1 160mm ISO 500


Exif: F Number: 7.1, Exposure Bias Value: 0.33, ExposureTime: 1/500 seconds, Flash: did not fire, compulsory flash mode, ISO: 500, White balance: Auto white balance, FocalLength: 160.00 mm, Model: Canon EOS 70D

Comments

Peter W. Marks December 03, 2013

And yet another bird and beautifully shot as usual Mike. #1554784

Jeff E Jensen December 03, 2013

Very nice! The framing with the rocks and foreground works well with the background. Would only be better if it was an eagle or hawk instead of a seagull :o)

Speaking of eagles, they've started showing up around here. Another 6-8 weeks or so and we'll be in full-on eagle season around here. Can't wait! #10914272

Beth Spencer December 03, 2013

The background really complements the bird. Great shot as usual!! he looks pretty intent on landing! He wasn't trying to attack you was he? #10914428

Sherran Andersen level-classic December 03, 2013

Nice clarity here. I also like the colour of the bg. #10914439

Kalena Randall December 03, 2013

Love this one, Michael! The difference from the gull to the background is super. It makes the gull stand out nicely. The details are crystal clear! #10914446

Rita K. Connell level-classic December 03, 2013

great contrast and I really like the rocks and foreground it gave some place for him to land. great capture love the background. another going in my favorites you know how I love birds. #10914476

Dale Hardin December 04, 2013

Excellent capture in all ways, Mike. I'm very impressed with your efforts lately. #10914746

Michael Kelly level-classic December 04, 2013

Thanks everyone!

Jeff just didn’t have any Eagles handy for this shoot, but I envy you your Eagle season. We only see one rarely around here.

Thanks Rita, I would rather have that than a contest award.
#10914937

Elaine Hessler December 04, 2013

I have nothing to add that hasn't been said above. It is WONDERFUL! #10915022

Stephen Shoff December 04, 2013

Mike, how do you feel about this one? What were you looking for by posting this for critique?

The bird, of course, is excellent. But overall the image leaves me with the feeling that it is a composite with replacement background. I think the 2 things that cause that is that 1) there is no transition from very sharp in-focus to evenly out-of-focus, so the bird is disconnected from the environment, and 2) the environment is not a familiar setting for sea gulls.
#10915073

Jeff E Jensen December 04, 2013

Well, Reno isn't that far away. . . . #10915081

Susan Williams December 05, 2013

I had the same thoughts as Stephen -- that this may be a composite and I wondered about the dry setting with no hint that a water source is nearby. If this is a composite, I think it might be more effective if the edges of the seagull were softened.

A flock of gulls occasionally show up at the lake near my house and they are fun, but challenging, to shoot. They stay over the water and have to be lured closer with food. #10915260

Dale Hardin December 05, 2013

I have no doubt this is NOT a composite. One, Mike usually does not do them and second, it's not unusual for gulls to be far inland, especially around trash disposal areas etc. Thirdly, it shows no tell tale signs of being a composite other than the DOF which is explained by the data. #10915369

Peter W. Marks December 05, 2013

On a cold , freezing-rain, morning it has been interesting to read comments that in some cases are based on ornithological preference (prejudice? you are fun Jeff :0); sometimes on a zany jump to conclusion that from an image that only shows a few square feet of landscape, there can't possibly be a pond, lake or ocean a few yards behind the camera (could this be you Susan?) and then some good solid technical stuff from our Stephen and Mr Dale.
God, I love Phellos! I think it was Mike who in welcoming Sherran described this group as 'nutty'. Yes indeedy! #10915398

Michael Kelly level-classic December 05, 2013

Thank you Elaine!

Stephen, this was testing out the 70D. I am pretty happy with it as I have a lot of trouble catching birds on the wing. Wanted to see how the focusing worked. Much harder than my airplane shots because I know where they are going and can track easier. This is not a composite and has very little editing and no selected editing. We get lots of gulls in Reno and this was taken at a local park. I don’t usually share what I consider to be very bad shots but just so you can see here is the very next frame from the camera.

I was and am always looking for honest opinions. I don’t care if they are good or bad as my ego is not bruised if the reviews are negative. I value honest negative feedback a lot because I know how hard it is to give. I find I have a lot of trouble evaluating my own work outside of obvious blown shots so the thing I find of most value in this group is getting feedback that I can trust. I try to hold up my end of this by also giving honest opinions back. Of course they are only opinions as there is no such thing as an evaluation of art that is objective.

True Jeff, but that winter driving can be ugly.

Susan, see my answer to Stephen and the new post.

Thanks Dale – you are correct. Reno has gulls everywhere. Like I said this is a city park but some of their favorite hangouts are various store parking lots.
#10915406

Jeff E Jensen December 05, 2013

Peter - We have tons of California Gulls around here, in fact, they are the Utah State Bird (look that one up on Google). Because they are protected, you can't do anything to or about them, including feeding them. They are a pest and could be thinned out considerably and nobody would notice. For that reason, I'm happily prejudiced towards the Bald Eagles that come through here early each year. Funny thing is, when out shooting the eagles, there are always hundreds of gulls around as well. #10915409

Michael Kelly level-classic December 05, 2013

Thanks Peter did not mean to exclude you it is just your post went up while I was posting - I did say nutty, but meant it as a term of endearment (love this club). As you can see from this second post, you are correct about the lake. I was almost standing in it. #10915411

Susan Williams December 05, 2013

Please know that any comments I make are made in the spirit of a constructive critique, and never ever intended as "negative feedback." I see Phellos as a virtual roundtable and everyone has their favorite beverage and a snack. :)

Mike - this image looks different on my work monitor and it does not look like a composite at all. So I stand corrected. My home monitor may be too bright.

I'm a bird-lover so I think seagulls deserve as good a life as swans. #10915413

Michael Kelly level-classic December 05, 2013

Thank you Susan - I also strive for that also. Negative feedback was a poor choice of words. Just know that I value constructive critique feedback a lot. I am not opposed to a "great photo" type comment either given or recieved if that is an honest assesment. I also try to let people know when a shot is not my cup of tea. The shot may be wonderful but just not appeal to me for some reason. It is hard to be construtive on shots that for whtever reason do not appeal to us.

Despite what Dale said I do replacements and other DD things occasionally. I normally put that in remarks as a form of my photo ethics. Not right or wrong, just what I do. So, having Stephen or you think this was a replacement does not bother me. I just wish I could do it this well. #10915452

Elaine Hessler December 09, 2013

Ditto, and me too! #10918365

To discuss, first log in or sign up (buttons are at top center of page).

Get Constructive Critiques

Sign up for an interactive online photography course to get critiques on your photos.


 

Did You Know?

Discussions by Category: You can view photo discussions on various themes in the Community > Photo Discussions section of the site.

BetterPhoto Websites: If you see an orange website link directly under the photographer's name, it's totally okay. It's not spam. The reason: BetterPhoto is the one that offers these personal photography websites. We are supporting our clients with those links.

Unavailable EXIF: If there is no other information but 'Unavailable' in the EXIF (meaning no EXIF data exists with the photo), the 'Unavailable' blurb is not displayed. If there is any info, it shows. Many photos have the EXIF stripped out when people modify the image and resave it, before uploading.


 

The following truth is one of the core philosophies of BetterPhoto:

I hear, I forget.
I see, I remember.
I do, I understand.

You learn by doing. Take your next online photography class.

1

You & 1

Love It!


Copyright for this photo belongs solely to Michael Kelly.
Images may not be copied, downloaded, or used in any way without the expressed, written permission of the photographer. Contact photographer via gallery
Log in to follow or message this photographer or report this photo.