Okay, me next

[KMann]

If you are still around Hertz, you might like to have a look at this photo and perhaps some feedback.

Part of a series of swan photos, this is a portrait of a mated pair of Trumpeters. I was struck by how sheep-like swan tend to be, copying each others' movements continually. I wanted to say something about that, at the same time giving the idea of movement and elegance.

I like the photo, think it reasonably successful, but, having enjoyed your critiques here, I wonder what you might think.

This is François and Monique.

http://www.katherinemann.ca/images/trumpeters.jpg

[Hertz van Rental]

First off, you only have one-and-a-half swans there, not a pair ;)
This will probably annoy some people. It's a matter of opinion, of course. But to me it certainly works against what you are trying to do.
You aren't showing enough of it for the viewer to see if it is mimicking the first swan. But you are showing enough to make the viewer want to see more.
This is distracting and tends to take the eye away from the swan you can see.
As for movement, the whole swan is facing towards - and is positioned - in the bottom right corner. The visual convention is that the swan is swimming out of frame towards the viewer.
In addition, the graphic black and white nature of the image gives us a white mass bottom right with a lot of black above it. The white mass in this instance has all the visual weight and is below the centre of the image so the black upper area should give the feeling of pushing down thus enhancing the sense of movement of the swan.
However, you have half a swan stuck up there, the white mass of which balances the bottom white mass and also attracts the eye up. Both of these cancel out the sense of movement that should be there so the image appears static.
In simple graphic images such as this composition is of paramount importance. Get it wrong and the picture goes from something to nothing.
Keep everything the same in the image but paint out the half swan and you will see that the picture changes completely. Then you will see what I mean.

The other thing is: what are the swans on, exactly?
On my monitor there is no detail in the background whatsoever so the swans appear to be floating in space. Just the merest hint of texture or detail so we could see it was water would be a help.

Elegance is a given in a swan. They would look elegant falling over their own feet so you don't have to worry about that.

There are actually some nice things going on in the image, by the way. You just need to take more notice of what is going on in the whole frame.

[KMann]

Thank you for your thoughts.

Here is the modified file, with the top swan cloned out, as you suggested. Interesting. More like a postcard and less like a graphic statement, even with the background gone. A lot more conventional approach, I think.

I don't dislike the solitary swan on the black field. If he was looking forward instead of into the frame it would probably be better. The turn of the gaze takes you back into the frame ...

The second photo here is a jpg of the untouched RAW. The river water was uninteresting and I deliberately got rid of it because it was not a photo of a swan or two swan on a river. It was a graphic about the idea of "swan".

While I don't dislike the modified photo - François is still magnificent! - I rather liked the half swan - implication of two frames in a film?

Anyway, thanks for your critique! :)

http://www.katherinemann.ca/images/swanish.jpg
http://www.katherinemann.ca/images/twoswanonariver.jpg

[Hertz van Rental]

I didn't say that the image would be 'better' with the second swan cloned out - only that doing so would show you what I meant about the sense of movement.
It's the actual position of the second swan which is the problem.
If it had been in the top left corner then it would have worked with the picture and it being only a partial swan would not cause any problems.
It's central position does cause problems along the lines of my previous post.
Composition is a subtle and tricky thing. Things don't work just because we want them to.
After a few more viewings I think that trimming a bit off the bottom would make the whole swan seem even closer to going out of frame and enhance the sense of movement - but it would ruin the proportions of the frame...

As a graphic image the swan's head and neck is too 'photographic' which is at odds with the lack of detail in the rest of it's body, the water and it's beak.
Very subtle detail in the water would balance this out, and a little more information in the beak would help too.

When producing an image people all too often concentrate their attention on the main subject and largely forget about the rest of the frame. But everything in there affects the final image so you have to give it equal attention.
The Devil, as they say, is in the details.