# Can't compete with Anand, but...



## Stephen_C (Oct 16, 2012)

...here is a shot of a three and half year old tigress in Bandhavgarh, India (the Banbehi tigress), taken at 8.00 one January morning at ISO2000 with a 1D MkIV and 300mm lens: 1/250 at f/4.5.

PLEASE don't ask why it wasn't a portrait shot - it was snatched in great haste with little time for thought! 

I shall post no more tigers: I simply can't compete with Anand's superb shots!

Stephen


----------



## Alrik89 (Oct 16, 2012)

Stephen_C said:


> PLEASE don't ask why it wasn't a portrait shot - it was snatched in great haste with little time for thought!



That explains the messed white balance.


----------



## K-amps (Oct 16, 2012)

Alrik89 said:


> Stephen_C said:
> 
> 
> > PLEASE don't ask why it wasn't a portrait shot - it was snatched in great haste with little time for thought!
> ...



Messed WB? Might be a bit off but still reasonable... nothing some PP couldnt fix if it bothered someone.

Looks like a good shot, not every shot has to be a portrait... and why would you not shoot more tigers, did "Anand" shoot perfect portraits the first time he picked up a camera?

Is it just me or do both posts seem a bit twilightish this morning?


----------



## sandymandy (Oct 16, 2012)

Good shot, but i prefer these colors  No offense!


----------



## Stephen_C (Oct 16, 2012)

I don't believe the white balance was "messed". It was a difficult shot to process in Lightroom (v3, as it then was) because the MkIV is not that good at ISO2000 and the lighting conditions at the scene were, frankly, appalling. There was no direct light - it was all in a shaded gully. Some contrast was brought out in processing but I had no wish to overdo it and make it otherwise than it looked when I saw the scene.

I appreciate others may have different views.

Stephen


----------



## Stephen_C (Oct 16, 2012)

sandymandy said:


> Good shot, but i prefer these colors  No offense!



Certainly no offense taken and of course it looks more pleasing. However, it's not what I actually saw in the pale, wan light of the early morning! Processing raises interesting questions but, generally, I try to stick as close as possible to what I recall of the scene (of course, memory is notoriously bad, so I may well be "off").

Anyway, enough of me, enough of tigers..! 

Stephen


----------



## anand (Oct 16, 2012)

Stephen_C said:


> ...here is a shot of a three and half year old tigress in Bandhavgarh, India (the Banbehi tigress), taken at 8.00 one January morning at ISO2000 with a 1D MkIV and 300mm lens: 1/250 at f/4.5.
> 
> PLEASE don't ask why it wasn't a portrait shot - it was snatched in great haste with little time for thought!
> 
> ...



Why me.......Stephen !!!!!?


----------



## bbasiaga (Oct 16, 2012)

I also prefer the twilight feel of the first (original) picture. 

The digital conundrum...because it can be changed, does that mean it SHOULD be changed?

-Brian


----------



## Stephen_C (Oct 16, 2012)

> Why me.......Stephen !!!!!?



You're too good! 

Stephen


----------



## anand (Oct 16, 2012)

Stephen_C said:


> > Why me.......Stephen !!!!!?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Stephen, see the number of views your image got. That proves who is "too good".


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 16, 2012)

bbasiaga said:


> I also prefer the twilight feel of the first (original) picture.
> 
> The digital conundrum...because it can be changed, does that mean it SHOULD be changed?
> 
> -Brian


Its up to the original shooter. If he wants to use PP to change the image to look like what he remembers, he should. The camera is merely guessing at the colors and other parameters based on mathematical algorithms and can be way off of what the scene actually looked like. It is not necessary to keep a photo in its out of the camera state.


----------

