Interesting Comparison

[Rogerdodge]

Hi
This weekend we had four pretty competent photographers faced with the same very obliging subject.
I think it is interesting how similar the results are, and also, perhaps, how different.
We (I am sure?) would welcome your constructive comparitive criticism.
Please be kind as it was at about 8:30 a.m., cold, drizzly, and blowing fairly hard with 100% cloud cover.
Cheers
Roger

[Padfield]

It's quite striking that although the pictures are superficially very similar, the backgrounds are quite different. In this instance, I think I prefer the first background, because it sets off the butterfly beautifully, without distracting at all.

I'd be delighted to have taken any of those pictures, especially in the conditions you describe.

Guy

[Susie]

I'm not in a position to give a critique but from personal perspective I preferred the last photograph because the eye area is lighter and more detailed and it is always the eyes I look at first. That being said they are all the most amazing photographs and each of you should be commended for what you have achieved. They are all beautiful!

[m_galathea]

All very good indeed, very similar I'd say.

I like to be able to see some detail in the surrounding habitat in photos, which none of these have. No. 3 is the closest to what I like in this respect.
No. 1 has stunning colour and beats the others there - spot on exposure.
No. 4 has the best composition IMO, it's unfortunate that the ferm is slightly overexposed.

Good work, as Guy said I'd be delighted to have taken any of them.

[Neil Hulme]

Hi Roger,
They all look very good to me and there's little to choose between them. Reckon I might pick a different favourite on a different day!
Neil

[eccles]

No 3 for me. Lisa's has the best compromise between composition, sharpness, noise and contrast.

[Gruditch]

I would say, working from the top down. A little over saturated, a little too dark, a little too dark, and a little to light. I snuck a little look at Lisa's PC, and thought her effort was to dark, then went and lighted my own up too much.

Still we all nailed the actual shot.

Gruditch

[Gwenhwyfar]

No 3 for me. Lisa's has the best compromise between composition, sharpness, noise and contrast.

Cheers Eccs your my best pal !!

I was surprised how different my background was to everyone elses, and like susie say's about the eyes - the eye on mine is very dark and slightly dark overall.
On my monitor, the colouring and lightness on Pete's is fine, but still dark around the eye.
Roger has a good lightness to his, but comes over on my screen as being a litle over saturated.
Gary's is rubbish! perhaps he might have gotten it right, had he not been so nosy looking at my screen!

[NickB]

Yep! I'd be happy to have taken any! I think no 3 has it for the overall picture - if only Gary hadn't been too keen to lighten it up too much (unlike Gary to take a lead from anyone else.... ). And I agree that Roger got the background right tho' sometimes I also see Roger's as a little saturated - but that could be my monitor not being properly calibrated...Pete - what can I say? - the splayed legs must have made all the difference!
I think this demonstrates too the tough job we will have with the Comps this year deciding a single winner....

[Gruditch]

There, I think this is a bit better, I used CS3 this time.

Gruditch

[Pete Eeles]

Pete - what can I say? - the splayed legs must have made all the difference!

The fact that I had to retrieve my image from the trash can may have made a difference. If only I'd know how the images were going to be used

Cheers,

- Pete

[eccles]

Trashcan? You have a strange idea of what is good or not then, Pete. Although I liked Lisa's shot best, they're all pretty damned good, yours included.

[bugmadmark]

From my point of view - Ive still yet to see one of these with the naked eye - let alone photograph one - so I like them all!