Goosemaster
Well-known member
This is my 1957 sweet 16 Browning
3 objectives when taking a photo
- Thread starter AKSkeeter
- Start date
Goosemaster
Well-known member
Goosemaster
Well-known member
This is my 1957 sweet 16
Wind River
Well-known member
I think a pillow for Christmas is requested. 
That1uncle1776
Member
Lower than the dog is usually a good policy, and sometimes you can't get low enough!
But every once in a while, high above the dog is the best choice.
Usually eye contact makes a photo better, too.
But not always.
Shooting during the "Golden Hours" usually give the best results.
Include the environment, too.
The one tip I'd give other than those already mentioned in the thread is; a dog with it's ears perked invariably makes the photo better than a dog with it's ears back. Some dogs just hate being photographed, but if you rattle a box of treats or use a squeaker to get their attention, the results are almost always better.
But every once in a while, high above the dog is the best choice.
Usually eye contact makes a photo better, too.
But not always.
Shooting during the "Golden Hours" usually give the best results.
Include the environment, too.
The one tip I'd give other than those already mentioned in the thread is; a dog with it's ears perked invariably makes the photo better than a dog with it's ears back. Some dogs just hate being photographed, but if you rattle a box of treats or use a squeaker to get their attention, the results are almost always better.
AKSkeeter
Well-known member
Yes and "catch light" in the dogs eyes is also important!
It's just my opinion, but I think that with most environmental shots it's advantageous to not have the dog coming towards the camera and because of that catchlight really isn't significant. Even if there is a dog (or hunters) in the shot, they're not really the focus of the image, it's the landscape you are trying to capture. Here's a published example of a dog coming towards the camera, but there is no catchlight. The dog-in-motion, the leading line and the fall colors are the most important parts of the image:
Here's another published example where the landscape is the feature of the image, not the hunter or the dog:
My favorite hunting landscapes always have something that draws the eye into the photo. This photo isn't mine but I included it in my last book because it's so good at drawing the viewer right into the scene. Anthony Hauck is the photographer and his dog Sprig is showing us all where to look:
This isn't a great hunting landscape and it will never be published in any magazines or books, but it is a good example of using leading lines to draw the viewer into the photo:
Again, all just my opinion.
Bob Peters
Well-known member
This is a photo with potential but it easily could have been so much better. Look at that big country, but I feel squeezed in just looking at it. Why? That beautiful sky, the thing everyone loves about the west, is clipped terribly. What other interesting clouds and shades of blue were up there? We'll never know. I found it claustrophobic, like the ceiling was an inch above my head.
Interesting take. I can only say that's a minority opinion.
Bob Peters
Well-known member
It is a nice photo with the landscape, the beautiful dog's gaze leading the viewer into the picture, and the other hunters and dogs in the distance. I just think if the camera would have been tilted up slightly you'd get more sky in the image, the dogs head would be closer to the lower third grid lines on the right side. I'm guessing a majority of people would say it's a good image. I'm also guessing a majority of landscape photographers would say it's an image that could easily be improved upon. Just my amateur take. Thanks for sharing your images and tips, they are good ones.
Bob Peters
Well-known member
That dog really finds a lot of partridge!