LM Chasing Sunfish Montage

[Paul Roberts]

Pretty cool? Or...a waste of 2 hours on a Sat night?

Also...tell me how large the image looks on your screen. Too small? Too large?

[swilly78]

Pretty darn cool if you ask me.  I would say size it up a little though.  Thanks.

[ab8aac]

That is awsume wish I had it hanging in my living room

[Hook Set]

Awsome pic.

[Sam]

Beautiful shot.

Makes me hungry for breakfast.  

[aarogb]

    That looks awesome!!!!!

    BTW, it looks just right on my computer screen.

[Jake.]

Great picture.  8-)

[LooksLikeSinbad]

Awesome! But too small.

[Under the Radar]

Great job Paul...

Def not a waste of your 2 hrs and the size is just right.

Again, great pic. Thanks for sharing.

[Crestliner2008]

Outstanding! A little larger would be nice, but then again, anyone can do that on their own. Looks like I'll be changing my desktop again!  

[looking4structure]

Great picture.Wish I had a large image of that for my screen saver.

[.dsaavedra.]

is this a montage or just a picture? my computer has been having memory problems so if its supposed to be a slideshow type thing its very likely my computer is not showing it.

anyway, the picture i see looks great! it also looks like a painting. did you paint this Paul? or is it a shot you took with your underwater camera? either way, awesome.

[rat-l-trapper]

That's a great picture. Thanks for sharing it.

[strick9]

Awesome!!!! Definetly not a waste of time!!!

It is now the new background on my desktop.

I also like the fact that the bluegill looks just like my favorite lipless crankbait!!!!

[skillet]

Not a waste at all! GREAT pic, right size ...

skillet

BTW You can almost hear the water swirling

[Dan:]

the sunfish looks off. was it just the angle or is the picture edited?

[Five-Alive]

cool picture, thanks for posting!!

[Paul Roberts]

To answer Dave and Dan:

It's a quick-n-dirty photo montage from two photos. The first was an underwater camera shot of a bass I was holding by the jaw. The second is a green sunfish my son caught.

I removed my hand, extended the canvas to accommodate the prey. I had to paint in the area where my hand was and the extra canvas. The sunfish was shot under different lighting of course and out of water to boot. I also didn't get fancy with the motion on it. That's why it looks sorta cheesy'.

I've done a bunch of these. My magnum opus' (lol) was a group of small stream brown trout feeding aggressively on a Hydropsychid caddis emergence. Every element was taken from images I shot for the purpose. The coolest thing was that the individual pupae and emergers were photos of the real thing too: I maintained a stream tank in my house and hatched local aquatic inverts. I photo'd them for use in magazine articles and slide presentations, as well as to watch them. Local kids would stop by to watch, and they agreed it was better than TV! I always thought so too.

For the Hydropsychid emergers shots I hovered over ready-to-pop pupae with a macro set-up for part of a day, and caught pupae swimming and got a spectacular shot of an adult leaving the shuck. I digitized em and soon had trout chasing them all through the head of a pool in the montage.

Unfortunately, the I Love You' virus wiped it out. I now only have a couple 35mm slides of it. Some day, I may re-do it.

[retiredbosn]

Thats awesome.  I don't believe I could accomplish the same thing ever.  Great pic

[Dan:]

ahhh, gotcha. That's what I thought. I used to do a lot of Photoshop stuff and trying to match the lighting of one picture to another was always a challenge. Nice work Paul

[Paul Roberts]

ahhh, gotcha. That's what I thought. I used to do a lot of Photoshop stuff and trying to match the lighting of one picture to another was always a challenge. Nice work Paul

Yeah, as in everything in photography, the quality of the original you work from makes a big difference.

[Bass_Akwards]

Paul I love your adoration for the sport.

Being a pro photographer myself I've aleays had mixed feelings about photo manipulation.   I use photoshop and understand why manipulation can be fun and artistic like in the photo you posted.

At the same time there's something beautiful about the "truth" and "naturalness" of an honestly great image.

When I first saw your photo I was actually blown away because I thought it was in a naturl setting and from that standpoint, a d**n near worthy picture for the pages of National Geographic, or at least a bass fishing magazine.  Knowing it has been manipulated leaves me with a more empty feeling.  Especially because it's animals/fish in the setting of nature.  

I personally like images of nature to be unmanipulated and "real," particularly of a picture that's subject matter is animal action. For example, to manipulate a shot of a cheetah  killing a buffalo in Africa, where the actual actions of the animals in the photo never really happened, isn't as "sexy" as if what is going on in the photo happend because of "natural selection."

That being said, I love the artistic side of what you did.  You did a very nice job in terms of making the image asthetcally pleasing, with a great use of body language, emotion, and anticipation.  You framed everything in the perfect manner and the light in the photo definately creates "mood."   I, for one, like it.

To answer your question, don't ever let anyone tell you, or at least don't listen, that ANYTHING you do that has to do with your art is a waste of time.  This kind of thing shows your "love of the game" both in terms of fishing, and photography, and for someone to tell you that your version of "art" is a waste of time, is not anyone you want to be hanging out with anyway.  Good job and definately not a waste of time.

[Paul Roberts]

Paul I love your adoration for the sport.

Being a pro photographer myself I've aleays had mixed feelings about photo manipulation. I use photoshop and understand why manipulation can be fun and artistic like in the photo you posted.

At the same time there's something beautiful about the "truth" and "naturalness" of an honestly great image.

When I first saw your photo I was actually blown away because I thought it was in a naturl setting and from that standpoint, a d**n near worthy picture for the pages of National Geographic, or at least a bass fishing magazine. Knowing it has been manipulated leaves me with a more empty feeling. Especially because it's animals/fish in the setting of nature.

I personally like images of nature to be unmanipulated and "real," particularly of a picture that's subject matter is animal action. For example, to manipulate a shot of a cheetah killing a buffalo in Africa, where the actual actions of the animals in the photo never really happened, isn't as "sexy" as if what is going on in the photo happend because of "natural selection."

That being said, I love the artistic side of what you did. You did a very nice job in terms of making the image asthetcally pleasing, with a great use of body language, emotion, and anticipation. You framed everything in the perfect manner and the light in the photo definately creates "mood." I, for one, like it.

To answer your question, don't ever let anyone tell you, or at least don't listen, that ANYTHING you do that has to do with your art is a waste of time. This kind of thing shows your "love of the game" both in terms of fishing, and photography, and for someone to tell you that your version of "art" is a waste of time, is not anyone you want to be hanging out with anyway. Good job and definately not a waste of time.

Thanks Todd.

I use this method as a form of illustration. There is a difference between something manipulated to deceive and an illustration. Using photographic images for illustration I think is just another tool.

Few divers have even seen such an image, much less captured it. The limitations of shooting underwater, especially in the wild state, virtually prohibit this being done. Presently, most UW shots of bass are either done in an aquarium, or shot in the springs in Florida, where water clarity allow. These are also almost always of spawning fish, or relatively inactive fish. The speed exhibited by hunting bass is not likely to be captured. Of course I put nothing past an enterprising individual figuring out a way.

But I'm not going to be the guy to do it. I'm happy illustrating ideas and concepts, and am thrilled to have photography as a tool, as long as the images are not misrepresented, and labeled appropriately. I call them digital photo montages -a collection of photographic images layered into a single image.

BTW: I've seen some of your work. You certainly know your business.

[twitchfish]

Wow.

[NewAngler]

nice job paul. like always.