What makes a 'good' wildlife pic in your view?

[BarbH]

Forgive me if this question has been asked before, but I just wondered what you all consider makes a wildlife picture that bit special? Is it technical perfection, action, capturing the moment or what? I've just seen Snake's pic of woodpeckers in the critique section and have to say I love it - can't understand why he's knocking it!
I also ask because I have just undergone a 'lightbulb' moment: I have had my DSLR and lenses for several years now, and hardly used them in the last few years due to their weight and having to carry all those lenses around. I often go out alone, and a female with all that gear can feel very vulnerable! So I ditched the lot and bought myself a Lumix FZ100 - already I've taken more pics in a couple of days than I did for the last two years with my Canon gear.
I've been down the camera club route, City & Guilds courses, etc., and I no longer feel I have to 'prove' myself to anyone, so my aim is to capture images I like and which give me a buzz.
What makes a picture stand out for you?

[Gill Catton]

For me its an image that not only illusrates the subject well but is also beautiful. A shot that captures a moment. I often like the subject to be part of the a picture rather than full frame but I know many prefer the exact opposite!

So in short I think its massively subjective!

[Richard G.]

It does seem to be in vogue at the moment to show animals within their environment, instead of filling the frame with a razor sharp image of just the creature. It also involves a bit more effort on the togs part to setup the backdrop. It doesn't have to involve action for me, in fact one of my pet hates are those blurry images that attempt to show movement, but that's just me, as Gill says it very subjective; I'm sure there will be others who love that type of image.

[NicolaB]

I'd agree with Gill there...an image has to be really attractive as well as technically sharp, correct exposure etc. I like an image to show the subjects environment as well, and also like a good action shot or something out of the ordinary, I also like the images with a bit of creative blur as well...just goes to show that we all like different things!

[artdemole]

One that is natural and pleasing not touched up!

[turkeyneck]

In my mind there are lots of different reasons I like certain types of wildlife pictures. The types of pictures I really do like are the ones where I think 'how the hell did they do that?' These usually involve an action shot that is not only unbelievably difficult to capture in it's own right but has been done with excellent photography skills, ie sharp, good framing, background etc. My friends and myself included are after one of the holy grails of bird photography, a kingfisher entering the water. Forget the background and everything else I've mentioned, just to get a kingfisher sharp in flight is unbelievably difficult. Yet I've seen some brilliant photos of exactly this, see Charlie Hamilton James for examples. On the flip side, I've been viewing (recently) some cracking Fungi photos in the Gallery and these don't tend to move that much but are still excellent photos. Horses for courses, I reckon

[thunder]

What makes a good wildlife photograph? I couldn't possibly put it into words, but I know one when I see one!

henrya

[Jackaroo]

Originally Posted by thunder

What makes a good wildlife photograph? I couldn't possibly put it into words, but I know one when I see one!

henrya

I would go along with that. It's essentially futile to try to put into words what it is that turns you on to a picture. I like to see action but then again I enjoy pictures of subjects in repose. Some images of nature when her claws are good and red are stirring but sometimes I might prefer the calming simplicity of a squirrel or some other bird or mammal grooming itself. Murder and mayhem or parental solicitude in nature are equally engaging as far as I'm concerned.
As the man says "I knows what I likes" and that usually applies to images or music, people or animals.Whatever!

regards, Jackaroo

[freiston]

I reckon I agree with all the above

I do like high-IQ 'portrait' or 'specimen' pictures but I also like pictures that express or capture an essence of the subject/situation - especially when the picture makes me think, like turkeyneck, "how the hell did they do that?"

I think blur needs to be appropriate (one of my other favourite subjects is 2nd World War aircraft - and a picture of an aircraft in flight with a frozen propellor or an invisible propellor does look weird in my eyes) but blur to demonstrate movement can defeat the object by obscuring the subject (Jeez - that sounds awkward when I read it back to myself).

Ultimately and despite any theorising, as thunder says, I know what I like. But then again, I sometimes cannot make my mind up about a picture

I'll get my coat.

[dav56]

Originally Posted by artdemole

One that is natural and pleasing not touched up!

I agree with Artdemole. I only crop and do a basic sharpen on my photos.
In addition for me a 'good' photo might not be perfect compared to others, but every time I see it, it puts a smile on my face and it takes me back to where and when I took the photo.

Dave