My son thought the original, uncropped photo of the owl was a better picture. I thought cropping it caused the owl to be more of a standout. What do you think?

They are both great images but the first one emphsises the owl whereas the second emphasises it place in its world losalamos666 · 2008-01-05: 00:37

I think the same... Losalamos666 be right Angel3mil · 2008-01-05: 07:41

The first photo was also a close up, no? Both are beautiful. I can't decide. Terrei · 2008-01-05: 12:04

i like this one sunshineand · 2008-01-05: 12:29

I'm going to wimp out and say that I really like both compositions for different reasons. The close up owl is like a classic movie shot that draws your eye to the center; the wider uncropped shot is like a trendy modern movie that presents a whole field of vision--your brain, not your eye, is supposed to make the choice. Gary M. · 2008-01-05: 16:34

Can't decide. The second shot really shows how that owl can blend in to the environment. Self preservation in the wild. But I also like the close up to see the expression on the owl staring intently at you. Brett King · 2008-01-05: 21:36

Thanks all for the feedback - all so thought provoking. I love the comparison of emphasizing the owl and the other its place in the world... Gary, of course you bring your unique cinematic perspective which makes my aesthetic eye expand. Thanks. And BK, had I had more than a split second to take a good shot, I would have stood mesmerized by his intent gaze. Thanks. Danas · 2008-01-05: 22:01

yup, son loses out this time, cropped pic is better james conrad · 2008-01-06: 02:11

Cropped. Give you son a time out for even suggesting otherwise. Oh, wait--he's grown up, isn't he? Nancy · 2008-01-06: 09:48

i liked having to look for the point. sometimes subtley is very powerful. absolutely beautiful shot. BreezyOnTheEyes · 2008-01-22: 22:57

Tagged: nature