Hi there! Thank you a lot for sharing this for free! It's a nice picture I used it here: taxino.skyrock.com/ and I credited it at the end of the first article as I couldn't do it directly next to the picture.
I love how weathered this skull looks! Sure, pristine and perfect skulls are nice to look at, but the weary worn-down appearance this one has gives off much more natural vibes. Quite eyecatching in it's own right, even if it's not the most beautiful example of animal skulls.
Decent? Really? It's weathered and incomplete. And I'm not meaning lack of horn sheats. On the other hand that photo... Well let's just say that his not a good photograf. For comparison I do my photos with Sony DSC-h3 without any lenses or anything. Nikon is great if You don't like to think about what You're doing. Have much more to say but no one will actually read it.
Can I just butt in to say that this is a stock photo, not a photo that's supposed to be for and about the skull? The photo was taken so that it can be used in photo manipulations, and it's a perfectly good stock photo.
Just because you are also a photographer, doesn't mean you know about every single field of photography.
Most skulls you're going to run across are weathered. Not everyone can get a hold of a fresh animal head to clean it. Bottom jaws also usually fall apart, depending on the age of the animal and overall health.
The photograph is fine. It shows appropriate depth of field, and your camera does have a lens: the one that's built into it. If it didn't have a lens, you wouldn't be able to take pictures. Pretty much, your camera is a very expensive point and shoot. While they're great for taking quick pictures, they're an absolute nightmare for taking specialized pictures like macro shots.
Your photos aren't honest that great, either. They focus on one small portion of the skull and leave the rest of the skull blurry( [link] ). With your pictures, especially the ones showing the lower jaw, I would expect to be able to see both of the skull pieces.
I meant any OPTIONAL lenses,tripods and so on. You probably knew that but trying to do idiot from me. That's not nice. I'm not a profesional photograf and never had oportunity to work in studio so my photos aren't great. That's true. They are just for commercial purposes. When I see profesional photografer I want to see some good work. If that photo and many more of "tpenttil" are actually considered as good ones then...Nah. No place for hard words. Honestly my camera is worth about half of that Nikon rubbish and it IS great for taking macro shots. I specialize in macro of insects. But still. I'm just an amateur who has his own opinion.
You don't have to be a profesional. But if you name yourself a profesional, then you have to be good. And one more time. If You know your camera and know few things about photografy then even my little and cheap camera can take good macro of tiny insects outdoor.
As for You "Jadestone". Yeah I know that this is a stock photo. But when I see coments like "impressive" or "I see a rabbit there" then something is boiling inside of me. It's funny how only THAT single photo of whole set has comments,75 downloads so far and for sake 2000 views! Does others from that series aren't any use?
;D I knew my point and shoot quite well. It had to be at a certain distance on the macro setting..But only with certain lighting, otherwise it wouldn't work.
Why does it matter to you what other people comment, or how many views a picture has? Bones simply aren't something that people search for a lot, that's why the rest of them don't have many views/downloads. Hell, I have had stock up for several years that barely have any views.