# Awesome frog photography



## MD_Frogger (Sep 9, 2008)

I was looking through yahoo pics and I stumbled along this gallery...absolutely the most vivid frog shots I've ever seen!

18700 - Photograph at corporatefineart.com


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Good stuff. #79 looks like a tinc x auratus hybrid, or one of those funky cobalts that have been floating around but are supposedly not hybrids.


----------



## Baltimore Bryan (Sep 6, 2006)

I was just thinking that, Dave. Picture 11463 said "tinctorius" but it looked like a hybrid or mutation. Anybody know what morph or auratus numbers 11476 and 11437 are? I've never seen any with that bronze band outlining an even darker brown line. I especially liked the variabilis pictures toward the beginning, those first few had incredible color. Thanks for sharing.
Bryan


----------



## Phyllobates (Dec 12, 2008)

Wow! Those are amazing. Love the pum shots.


----------



## MD_Frogger (Sep 9, 2008)

That's what I was thinking as well Dave. Do some of the pics look like the frogs have been super-imposed on a different background to you guys?


----------



## markpulawski (Nov 19, 2004)

Most if not all of those are Pat Nabors frogs, I tried to talk him out of the 103 Auratus, can't remember the background story on it though. None of those are hybrids, I think the 1 tinc is an Alanis or Infer, he works with a few not so common morphs.


----------



## BBoyette (Mar 9, 2009)

Alot of these photos are photo shop edited.


----------



## VicSkimmr (Jan 24, 2006)

Editing a photo is a part of every photographers work flow.


That being said, they're all very harshly lit, poorly composed, over saturated and over sharpened. They do all appear to be in focus, so there's something to be said there, but without shadows none of them look natural at all to me.


----------



## markpulawski (Nov 19, 2004)

VicSkimmr said:


> Editing a photo is a part of every photographers work flow.
> 
> 
> That being said, they're all very harshly lit, poorly composed, over saturated and over sharpened. They do all appear to be in focus, so there's something to be said there, but without shadows none of them look natural at all to me.


Wow who peed in your Wheaties....

Obviously not natural setting but amazing photos none the less.


----------



## VicSkimmr (Jan 24, 2006)

I guess that was pretty harsh.

They look super-imposed because the photographer used a harsh flash (probably the onboard flash) from head on, which removes all the shadows. That's why it's almost never a good idea to use the on-board flash. It's impossible to get interesting lighting that way.


----------



## DartAsylum (Feb 17, 2011)

i loved the photos


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

VicSkimmr said:


> Editing a photo is a part of every photographers work flow.
> 
> 
> That being said, they're all very harshly lit, poorly composed, over saturated and over sharpened. They do all appear to be in focus, so there's something to be said there, but without shadows none of them look natural at all to me.


Well everyone is entitled to their opinion but seeing as he seems to be making a living doing this, he must be doing something right. Jim Zuckerman Bio

He has some great images in his pro-folio. Like any artist though he has a "style", thats going to resonate with some, and not so much with others. I personally feel some pics, especially in the frog gallery are a little overly saturated and some seem over sharpened to me too but still found the majority pleasing. Composition looked fine to me mostly. He was obviously going by the rule of 3rds in most photos. If I see one weakness in composition it may be that he centered to many subjects in to many photos, but sometimes you just gotta work with what you got and the centered photo is overall the best you get. 

Shooting frogs like that can be challenging since sometimes plants don't have perfect leaves, or a piece of dirt may be in the way etc..etc...which restricts your ability to compose the shot in the ideal way. Sometimes you get the perfect image but often while shooting and editing you make a ton of decisions and compromises to get that photo to be the best it can be...but not everyone will always agree that end result is the actual best result possible, and may have made different decisions that suit their tastes more. Art is subjective


----------



## VicSkimmr (Jan 24, 2006)

:shrug: Like you said, it's his style and art is subjective, so more power to him, but we have photographers on this board that blow him away IMO. He may still be using film for that matter, that might explain it.

I've probably just been hanging around too many photography forums (where harsh critiques are just the norm)


----------



## Azurel (Aug 5, 2010)

Thanks for sharing the link......

By the looks of his Bio I don't think he has to worry about photoshopping pics to make them any good. Hell of a list of accomplishments.

But it is fine art photography which isn't the same per se as shooting in field as I am sure most of the animal pics are posed in some sort of manner.


----------



## MD_Frogger (Sep 9, 2008)

VicSkimmr - If you have a link to better quality frog pics I am sure everyone that's looked at these would love to see those! The intention of the thread was not to dissect the pictures through a fine tooth comb, but rather enjoy the animals against the vibrant backgrounds that you just don't see too often posted but the average hobbyist. 

I think my favorite may be #67 with the view from under the pum hanging on to the brom flower by one hand...caption it "Determination" print it out poster size and put it on Amazon!


----------



## VicSkimmr (Jan 24, 2006)

Off the top of my head...

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/frog-classifieds/60481-varadero-tarapoto-imitators.html
http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/breeding-eggs-tadpoles/54026-varadero-transport.html
http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/members-frogs-vivariums/47514-tarapota-imitators.html
http://calphotos.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/img_query
frogs
Macro photography with flash - Dart Frog Forum on Husbandry and Habitat Information
New Camera Pics - Dart Frog Forum on Husbandry and Habitat Information

Sorry I'm coming across as such an elitist dick, I'm really not in person heh. The guy's photos are good and he has an incredibly wide depth of field.


----------



## carbonetc (Oct 13, 2008)

VicSkimmr said:


> :shrug: Like you said, it's his style and art is subjective, so more power to him, but we have photographers on this board that blow him away IMO. He may still be using film for that matter, that might explain it.


I'm with you. There's a lot to like about the photos, but the subjects are being blasted with the flash. That's my number one complaint about any frog photo, really. Since I believe these were taken in the wild, the flash was probably his only real option though.

I would include Lee Hancock as one of the better photographers on the board.



> I've probably just been hanging around too many photography forums (where harsh critiques are just the norm)


This forum has always been allergic to criticism. It's a real shame. Our vivs could be taken so much further if people weren't afraid to say anything about them except how awesome they are.


----------



## kyle1745 (Feb 15, 2004)

They are nice shots but the colors are very manipulated.


----------



## johnc (Oct 9, 2009)

As someone who got mentioned in the thread (thank you for the compliment), I thought I'd post a few thoughts. I spend most of my time photographing salamanders, and lately a lot of dart frogs. For years I've been changing and tweaking methods for photographing these little blighters and I go back and forth with what I think is good and not so good. 

I've been lucky enough to license several of my photos for commercial and non-commercial use over the years. Between that and the feedback I've gotten from good people like yourselves, I can honestly say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. While some of us may view the photos in the first post of this thread as being overly artificial or posed, I think that's a view shared mainly by amphibian enthusiasts rather than the public as a whole. Ordinary people love "cute" frog photos, and if you look at the photos that win competitions you often see this kind of flat flash, poppy color photo. They rarely if ever look natural and more and more I find myself preferring a photo that has some nice shadows in it, some depth, and at least the illusion of some kind of natural feel.

To some extent I pose my photos - usually the frog is placed on a leaf and coaxed to face the right way for a photo. I agree with carbonetc - Lee takes probably the best photos on dendroboard and I should only be so lucky to come close. I think most of Lee's best shots are unposed, or they at least appear that way. However, I do try. Looking at Lee's photos inspired me to rethink how I "flash" my frog photos, and that's given me some very pleasing images recently, such as that lamasi shot I posted a few weeks ago. But you know, I don't view myself as a very artful photographer and I truly believe that I don't have an artistic eye. I try, but hand-on-heart I regularly remind myself that it's alright to not be the best at something, as long as I enjoy my photos and get to interact with some amazing animals. 

Here are 2 young guys from Indiana who take staggeringly good reptile and amphibian photos, the vast majority of which are taken in the field. It's humbling to see what talent is out there and to see such beautiful photos:

Flickr: indianaherp's Photostream

Flickr: Todd W Pierson's Photostream


----------



## Scott (Feb 17, 2004)

Tim Paine

That is all ...


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Scott said:


> Tim Paine
> 
> That is all ...


Those are some great shots.



Vic linked to a dartfrogz post that mentioned Thor Hakonsen, and he does have some great shots. I found his flickr...
Flickr: Thor Hakonsen's Photostream


----------



## jeeperrs (Jan 14, 2010)

I loved the pictures. I think they have a fun Andy Warhol feeling. It would only make sense that you amplify the colors, since that is why every dart frog owner is in the hobby. So, how do you get the pictures? Do you remove them from the main tank and keep them in an inclosed area or do you just mount a camera and wait patiently? 

As for the critics...I am delighted they were never on the formal committee of selecting some of the great artists of the world. I would fear a boring world of art would have been created. Focus is only a simple perspective and it takes genius to think differently. I have heard that to be a great artist, you must posses "revolutionary nerve"


----------



## VicSkimmr (Jan 24, 2006)

carbonetc said:


> I would include Lee Hancock as one of the better photographers on the board.


I haven't seen these before, thanks!


----------



## carbonetc (Oct 13, 2008)

Scott said:


> Tim Paine
> 
> That is all ...


This guy knows how to light a frog. Very nice. Were these taken by the average photographer the frogs would be half white from flash reflections. Capturing smooth, wet skin takes finesse.


----------



## Jeff69 (Nov 30, 2009)

Nice pics I need to post some of my Frog pics.


----------



## johnc (Oct 9, 2009)

carbonetc said:


> This guy knows how to light a frog. Very nice. Were these taken by the average photographer the frogs would be half white from flash reflections. Capturing smooth, wet skin takes finesse.


I agree but for years I've purposely avoided using the "two-in-the-eye" setup he has used for photos like this:

http://www.amphibios.org/Portfolio Items/760dpi Images/R-sirensis1.jpg

To me the multiple obvious flashes in the eye kinda ruins an otherwise awesome photo :/.


----------



## VicSkimmr (Jan 24, 2006)

clone it out  it would take like 2 seconds


----------



## johnc (Oct 9, 2009)

VicSkimmr said:


> clone it out  it would take like 2 seconds


Then you get into photographic manipulation. Then we may as well start taking those cute frog photos like the fellow linked in the first thread.


----------



## VicSkimmr (Jan 24, 2006)

I guess, I always do touch up work to my shots.


----------



## MD_Frogger (Sep 9, 2008)

Moral of the story...art is in the eye of the beholder. 

Thanks for sharing all the links! Really shows the range of frog photography.


----------



## johnc (Oct 9, 2009)

VicSkimmr said:


> I guess, I always do touch up work to my shots.


I try not to do anything to the frog, but I'm not above cloning out a spec of dust on a leaf or something.


----------

