Outback Lizards

[Toddyh]

Some of my favourites

#1


#2


#3


#4

[eaglem]

Those Lizards certainly camouflage themselves well.

[wigz]

Good collection Toddy. #3 is my pick.

[Toddyh]

Thanks guys.

[seaslug]

Great subjects #2 my favourite.

I think all that out of focus foreground spoils #1. I recon you could get a good crop and leave that out.

[Toddyh]

Thanks Greg. Something to think about. I'll have a look at that.

[Toddyh]

Another version of the first couple

#1


#2

[Grumpy John]

Hi Todd, #2 is a great improvement well done.
While I agree with Greg that the OOF area at the front of image #1 is distracting, I think it helps frame the lizard. The removal of the vertical branch only tends to emphasize the horizontal branch. I think you're caught between a rock and a hard place with that one, just do what you feel looks the best.

[Toddyh]

Thanks John. Always enjoy hearing a different perspective.

[Toddyh]

Maybe a happy medium like this would be better

[seaslug]

Yes #2 improved, could still do with a little more processing with highlights and shadows but I liked it anyway.
This is how I would see #1 improved.

[Toddyh]

Thanks Greg. This does look impressive but not really representative of the colours. This guys is pale and designed to camouflage in the dusty, dry west of the state.

[seaslug]

Yes I might have went a bit too far with the levels, but the intention was to try and bring out a bit of detail lost in the original post.

[Isac]

Good shots Todd. We saw heaps of huge bungarras in the North West and they can be very frightening. They camouflage well and can scare the BJ out of you if they feel threatened. Good shots - TFS.

[Toddyh]

Thanks Greg. This guy is a Lace Monitor (Bells form). They are more pale and have stripes rather than spots compared to the coastal Lace Monitors.

[Isac]

Thanks for that info Todd.

[Isac]

Yes #2 improved, could still do with a little more processing with highlights and shadows but I liked it anyway.
This is how I would see #1 improved.

Greg, the cloning is very visible in your edit as you've sourced from directly above your clone area. A tip would be to clone from similar areas away from the area you want to to cover and use a dabbing method rather than dragging, which helps to disguise the cloned section. Best way though for this particular image is to copy most of the tree to a new layer and enlarge or resize it so the bottom part leaves the frame, then use a soft brush to clean the edges of the new copy. I used this method as it's very easy, quick and doesn't change the tree except for making it a bit bigger - only known to the person doing the edit. I also used the "enlarge" method for the tree on the right. If you want a tutorial, let me know.

[seaslug]

Thanks but no thanks. The purpose of what I did was to illustrate how the composition and skin detail could have been improved to Toddy. It was a very quick edit and that's the way I choose to do things when the clone quality is not the point of the exercise. I doubt whether a normal person who had not seen the original would have picked on the work that I did. From now on I'll leave all editing advice to you.

[Isac]

I've obviously upset you Greg. It was not my intention, so please accept my apology - It won't happen again.

[Toddyh]

Well I appreciate all the feedback. I liked Greg #1 attempt to bring out more detail and I liked Greg #2 pointing out the cloning issue. If anyone thinks things can be done differently I'm all for speaking up. That's how we learn and after all this is a photography forum. If we're not discussing photography (including editing) then what are we doing here?