Reptile photography, vote for your fave

[Oldbeard]

http://www.exo-terra.com/en/nactus/voting.php

Hi this is a worldwide competition of wildlife photography. Some great pics to look at and vote for.
My favourites are
the egg eating snake, Category 4 Image 3,
the bellfrog diving into the water Category 4 image 1
the red eye tree frog is gorgeous too category 3 image 3
the Uroplatus gecko is awesome
and the Jamaican Boa Category 6 Image 1 which is apparently endangered. great looking snake

http://www.exo-terra.com/en/nactus/voting.php

[Just_Joshin]

Some nice photos in there but many of them are TOO nice!!!

They look WAY WAY WAY too photoshoped and studio like. Even alot of the "wild" shots are overdone IMO.

[pugsly]

Of course they are photoshopped mate.

Competitions mostly ALLOW it now as they know competitors are going to do it anyway, most the time its very hard to tell (if done right).

If I only knew HOW to use than damn program I would be sweet! haha

[bump73]

Pugsly, keep it real mate.

IMO Photoshop is for people who can't take photos..

Ben

[Just_Joshin]

Originally Posted by pugsly

Of course they are photoshopped mate.

Competitions mostly ALLOW it now as they know competitors are going to do it anyway, most the time its very hard to tell (if done right).

If I only knew HOW to use than damn program I would be sweet! haha

LOL, yeah i know they've been photoshopped but that my point, they look ridiculously overdone and IMO it has ruined alot of the photos as they look too fake. Many of them look like the reptiles have been posted onto an image.

Wish i knew how to use the damn thing as well, lol. If only i had the time. I haven't even attempted to use it yet, lol. I'd just rather work on taking better raw shots. With that said, the only thing i like to see it used for is to clean up unavoidable things, like rain, dust and lighting. It is especially useful for cleaning up underwater photography, which offer suffers from alot of suspended material through the water in the photos, especially around the local area. That is something you cannot avoid, unless your in the tropics with 30+ metre visibility, lol.

[-aspidites-]

Nothing wrong with photoshopping! In fact, any serious digital photographer realises that you need to do it.

When film was the standard, people would select different films for different purposes. Velvia if you wanted high saturation, for instance. Different films for different tonal curves for another example. With digital, you don't have that option. Of course, you could simply use in camera options, but you'll usually get better results adjusting these things by yourself (f you know what you're doing), on the raw image, rather than letting the in-camera software do it.

Some good photos there! I had trouble picking on some of them.

[pugsly]

I like keeping them as is as well.

BUT, photoshop comes in handy if you know HOW to use it, can fix blemishes etc, I dont agree with changing colours and enhancing areas etc, especially not when its used to photograph things for sale.

The photographs there have all had work done, but I would say most would look just as good without it. The clarity is supurb, some very expensive camera's being used thats for sure!

[-aspidites-]

Originally Posted by pugsly

BUT, photoshop comes in handy if you know HOW to use it, can fix blemishes etc, I dont agree with changing colours and enhancing areas etc, especially not when its used to photograph things for sale.

I think it can be fine to adjust them to hell and back to get a decent image out of it. I agree, however, that such techniques should NOT be applied to images of animals (or anything else) for sale, if the intent is to misrepresent the animal or item for sale.

imho, there's "phart" (photographic-art) and then there's photo-documentary; they both have different end goals and both goals should be respected.

[pugsly]

Too many frog photos in there..

There easy to photograph, but get all the votes cause there 'cute' lol...

Some nice shots in the past 2 years as well.

Might have a crack next year I think!

[pugsly]

Yeah I agree there.

But I have no patience lol.. I take about 200 pics a session, come home load em, resize about 30-40 favourites, then save em or post them.

I couldn't be bothered learning photoshop or I would be there for hours and hours fixing every photo haha.

One day I will get the hang of it though..

[herpie boy]

i was gonna ask if you entered pugs,you have some awesome work mate and should enter next year for sure.im semi computer illiterate and i taught myself how to use photo shop to an extent and dont even know how to post pics.

[pugsly]

lol you'll get there mate!

Yeah. By next year I should have a new camera too. Plenty of time. See what happens, not up to that standard yet though, some amazing images.

[Oldbeard]

just because they are great photos doesn't mean they are photoshop. Some of them are the best wildlife photographers in the world. They spend alot of money on cameras ($30000 a camera or more) and travelling to get awesome pics. They take the time to sit for hours taking hundreds of photos till they get the right shot.
I don't want an argument about it, I just think there are some great shots to be appreciated for the work that is put into them and for the awesome reptiles as well

[nuthn2do]

The majority of those are shot in a studio, maybe shopped as well but there's nothing unusual about that because it's what sells. If you take time to read the fine print they are milking the public for advertising fodder.

[Importer]

When you get to look as bad as i do you need all the help you can get,

And with the exspensive cost of a good plastic surgeons,
that are way out of my reach,
you use the next best thing.(photo shop)