Hello Senior Critiques/Curators

I am submitting one of my recent wildlife image which was not published and got 2% from expert curators. I would like to know what went wrong with this image ? I understand that photography is a subjective field , and publishing or not publishing must be having some criteria. Sadly recently many of my wildlife images got rejected, which i think were publish worthy. Now i am getiing confused about submissions. Not getting an award is totally different from not getting published. 

Please enlighten me in depth about wildlife images, so that i can improve upon myself.

This image i clicked in Masai mara (Kenya) , its a Hyena cub which came out of den for short while, the adult Hyenas were not around, and luckily i could click this image in which i had brief eye contact with cub. The cub has an innocent curious look as if waiting for mom to protect. He seemed so unsure of us.

The following are camera settings

Camera Nikon D 750

Focal Length 600 mm

ISO 3200

Aperture 6.3

Shutter speed 1/1250

Anita welcome to critique and thank you for sharing this fine image... All I can do is give you my take on your image and what I would do going forward.

Back in Photoshop I used the dodge tool on the hyena to try and lighten to help the power of impact. and make it more appealing to look at. I then used Nik tools Tonal Contrast to help the texture stand out on this wonderful animal I did not do anything to the background. - Last saturation +14... To my eyes i think it stand out better with more power to please the many.

Image two Topaz AI sharpen and a extra +12 Satuation. Maybe a little more bite..

Thank you Daniel for your input and time, but my question still remains is it worthy of publishing or not ? this brightening and sharpness does brighten the subject and it looks attractive, but I did not go for it because I took into consideration the environment where the subject in under a canopy of branches and some light is filtering through spaces but some parts are in shade, was trying to balance it as natural as possible. Sometimes I get confused with expert curator ratings , this image getting 2 % is beyond my logic. I don't say I am expert or master , but still feel it was quite underrated during curating.

Anita take no notice of any ratings no matter who they come from. They don't have names attached so you have no idea who the hell is giving you advice. I think my last revision could stand a chance on a good day just maybe.

Thank you Daniel for your feedback, just a query does 1x have dedicated expert curators for each genre or it's free for all, because I keep seeing different styles becoming popular at different times

Dear Anita

I always look forward to seeing your wildlife photos, and if I saw this one in curation I would have no hesitation whatsoever in recommending it for publication. I am seriously beginning to wonder what is going on in the curation process

Best wishes, Elizabeth

Hello Anita,

In addition to what Danny already improved, I'd get him off- center, crop from the right. He's standing, so less space in front than behind him underlines this, apart from the middle not being the hottest spot, a common flaw in photography.

Best regards,

Mike

Thank you so much Elizabeth, your comment and observation always bring about so much inspiration and positivity 

Hello Mike 

Thanks for your feedback

Sometimes I feel it's nice to see the wild animal in its habitat, and environment around adds to the story , in wildlife the the eye contact matters a lot , because it's hard to get and connects immediately with the viewer

Anita,

Thank you for sharing this photograph with us here in Critique.  I think it's an excellent shot of the hyena cub.  It has the 'cuteness' factor with the inquisitive/cautious expression.  Sharpness is good, and the colours and tones are OK.  A little stronger colour and contrast like Daniel's edit are nice too - it's a matter of choice.  You wrote about the light filtering through the branches.  You were there, you remember the mood, so editing should be done with that in mind. 

I am puzzled about the tree on the right.  Is it in front of - or behind - the animal?  One branch is covering part of the ear, but another disappears behind the cub.  It is completely blurred, so we assume it's either ahead or behind, but those details are confusing.  A small point, I know, but nit-picking is what we do here.  If you could tell us about the editing you did I would like to know. 

As for the percentage scores in Curation - I agree with Daniel that we shouldn't take them too seriously.  An algorithm calculates them, and we are not told how many members vote, who they are, how quickly they decide, or how skilled/experienced they may be at photographing and judging photographs.  Many members are noticing illogical scores lately.  Perhaps the algorithm takes into account the volume of wildlife shots per day.  Who knows?   It's an excellent picture regardless. 

. . . . Steven, senior critic

Thank you Steven for your feedback , i dint know that algorithm decides everything, then i have nothing to say , it's just chance then. As far as the right side branches over the ear and behind the ear are concerned , they are exactly as it is in raw , if you want i can share the raw file , so I presume one branch was in front and another behind and as they are shy animals  we were at  some distance to avoid alarming them. In technical specifications i have given focal length as 600 mm , so it could be the compression of zoom lens .

Anita,

I have many P and awarded photos, but mostly I see the following %. 92,98,99 sometimes 100%  or in the other way 4,2,1 %   I think people go fast through curation with a yes or no. I should forget this. I played a little bit with your photo. For me you can improve the composition. changes with the format and light and sharpness only on the head and left above. Theo L.

Thank you Theo for your valuable feedback 

Hello, Anita
Welcome to our forum. As my friends before me said, l like your wildlife images. This image is also very attractive in depicting the hyena cub.

I read through the comments above and agree with most of my colleagues on the matter of strengthening the color and contrast, as well as the sharpness. The second edited image above is therefore quite well edited.

Had there been more space above or below the hyena, I would have placed it some more to the left, that is off center. As Steven T stated the blurred tree causes a confusion on one hand, but enables depth of field on the other. I personally think that this image is quite suitable for publication. Have good light... Cicek Kiral.

Thank you so much Cicek for your valuable feedback