A visit to the Zoo ...

[Murray Foote]

... on a Canberra Photographic Society excursion about a month ago....

(The aspect ratios of the (portrait) page make the vertical ones much larger).

[tommyg]

Not seeing any images?

[Murray Foote]

They're there. I can see them. Don't know why that would be. Maybe try another browser (I'm using FireFox).

[tommyg]

No good in 2 browsers, and 3 different computers.

your link (viewing the source of the page) looks like this;
http://zenophon@velocitynet.com.au@zeno ... 0-Edit.jpg

If I put this directly into the browser, then I get an error page not found... I've never seena link with all those @ symbols, so I think this is where the problem is

Cheers
Tom

[Murray Foote]

Is that better?

I removed the first part of the string and the images still came up.

Earlier, I just right-clicked to copy URL in Filezilla and posted. It always worked before. I'll have to watch out for it in future.

[tommyg]

Yep all good now

First image is great - maybe just darken the blacks slightly

Second image looks a little overexposed and over sharpened to me, but a great capture - maybe in colour?

Third image looks like it was indoors, and the colour balance is slightly off - nice pose though

And the final one might work better with a thinner image, removing some of the tree from the left hand side

[surenj]

Love #2. Wow! So effective when viewed large.

[Murray Foote]

You're quite right, Tommy, a small increase in the blacks for the snow leopard does help (I've adjusted the image).

The colour version of Tamarin Monkey is quite different:



I've also cropped the Koala in slightly from the left which does help.

The chameleon was in artificial light, fluoro probably, and first time round I couldn't see a neutral point and couldn't get the Lightroom sliders to work so I left it pretty much alone. I came back and realised there is a small specular highlight on the lip I was able to use so the colour balance is now better.

[biggerry]

I had no probs seeing these from the start and that was on the phone.

#1 - I find it disconcerting that the paws are chopped off, I reckon portrait orientation would have been better and chopped of the rear rump but, without know what else was in teh frame you may not have had a choice.

#2 I like but it looks washed out, I say, ramp up that contrast in the BW conversion. - good choice on the BW too.

#3 awesome, great crop and great colours.

[surenj]

I love the color munki... The strong yellow offsets the strong texture on his face and balances the picture.

You know what, you could try BW for #4. It's like a wild-life abstract!

[Murray Foote]

I tried increasing the contrast of the monkey and I think it works (changed above). I did it in Photoshop to hold the tonality of eyes where they were.

I've already done a mono print of the Koala:

[aim54x]

#1 appears too bright with what looks like large areas of burnt out highlight, that snow leopard will need its paws as well, they are such beautiful creatures.

#2 I am not sure about, the Cyanotype finish you have done here does not anything for me, nor does the colour version. I am also uncertain about the large, prominent OOF paw that dominates the lower portion of this image, attracting a lot of attention.

#3 has lost a lot of colour on the lizards back, pulling back the exposure a tad will help this, but a very good image.

#4 is better in colour, the subtle colours bring out that little bit more depth and shape than the monotone conversion.

[Murray Foote]

#1 Quite right, I've made it darker which helps and is more in keeping with the shaded location.

Gerry may be right that I should have tried it in portrait orientation but I had a 300mm lens and couldn't go back. He didn't stay there long. I think I don't mind the absence of paws though I would have included them if I could. There could have been other problems with paws with a squarer aspect ratio and more dead space, so it may not have worked as well. One alternative is to crop in, but I think I still prefer it as it is.

#2 No depth of focus, no way around that, I don't mind the out of focus hand. I'm more concerned at the other end, there's only just enough focus for the eye.

I revisited the toning and I don't agree. I don't think it looks as good without toning. Cyanotype perhaps but I was a Cibachrome printer not mono and I never did a cyanotype. I wasn't trying to refer to that and didn't use a preset or a filter. I was just toning it in sympathy with the monkey who is actually a lot more blue than that.

#3. Agreed. Exposure corrected. It's probably never going to look entirely right because it's artificial non-directional light.

#4. The colour version looks better on screen, though I think the mono version works well in a print, partly because the sense of reality is different and because the texture of the paper can come into play.