A fisherman in morning light.

[falke]

Intro:
This is a Kingfisher (Alcedo atthis/Kungsfiskare) at close up. I even had to remove the extender as it would not otherwise have fitted in the frame... ;o) This photo is from a distance of approximately 3 meters from a small hide.

It was amazing to get such a good look and I saw a very peculiar behaviour. When he caught a small fish he smacked it very hard to the pole to kill it before he swallowed it. I guess it it is a bit unpleasant to have a struggling fish down your throat....

I also think that the little azure blue tail is extremely cute! I have never seen it this way before.

A close friend of mine suggested that this might be a young kingfisher as the plumage are in such good condition and that the feathers on the breast are so fluffy.

Geographic info:
This from river Rönne å to the northwest of of the lake Ringsjön in the most southern part of Sweden called Skåne.

Technical information:
Canon 300/f4 lens on a Canon 40D body, in rawformat and used Adobe Lightroom for some adjustments before the edit in Photoshop CS3.

Exp=1/200, f=5,6 ISO=400

Just crop, white balance and a bit hue
Noise reduction with Noiseware professional
Sharpening with Photokit capture sharpener

[Manos Papadomanolakis]

I really like the action!
My only nit the BG is little busy

[Geurt Bloem]

Yep, subject very nicely placed and sharp. The background a little busy with some distracting highlights.

[Fabs Forns]

Other than the busy background, it's a great image.
I used a vignette blur filter and cloned the highlights out with a very low opacity clone stamp.

Hope you like it! Tried to leave enough detail in the bg to make it look real.

[falke]

Thank you so much for your time, Fabs! I am a little divided here and maybe you can help me out..... ;o)
I can't help thinking that your edit makes the photo stronger as it makes the Kingfisher stand out even further

However despite this, am I not sure that this is the right way to go. In Sweden we have a debate among birders about digital manipulation of bird photographs. I know that you have only changed the BG but even so. Is this kind of digital editing OK here on this site and regarded as OK even by ornithologists in the USA. As a biologist I like to see the habitat, the BG and the things around... but I think that on quite a few photographs the birds seems almost stuffed and put on a stand in a museum... as there is no environment what so ever. I think that it should not be too perfect... then it becomes unnatural and in some way artificial.

[Alfred Forns]

I like the re post !!!! Just perfect !!!!!

Falke I understand your concerns The image should be enhance to your ethics and no more I don't think there is clear guideline on what to do Basically is psersonal choice I have no problem with the manipulation as long as is disclosed and within limits

I'm sure any time there is a suggestion it is based on the person (making suggestion) ethics We all should be comfortble with what we are doing

One way or the other it is a fine image in every way !!!!! Big Congrats !!!!

[Judy Lynn Malloch]

Wonderful image Falke with such excllent detail and lighting and the fish in the beak is awesome. I do like the repost as I think very little was taken away only enough to remove a couple of spots that was drawing the eye away from the image. Wonderful capture !!

[Fabs Forns]

Thank you so much for your time, Fabs! I am a little divided here and maybe you can help me out..... ;o)
I can't help thinking that your edit makes the photo stronger as it makes the Kingfisher stand out even further

However despite this, am I not sure that this is the right way to go. In Sweden we have a debate among birders about digital manipulation of bird photographs. I know that you have only changed the BG but even so. Is this kind of digital editing OK here on this site and regarded as OK even by ornithologists in the USA. As a biologist I like to see the habitat, the BG and the things around... but I think that on quite a few photographs the birds seems almost stuffed and put on a stand in a museum... as there is no environment what so ever. I think that it should not be too perfect... then it becomes unnatural and in some way artificial.


No problem, Falke.
I understand and respect you point and there's always a debate going here on how much to go. Up to personal ethics and preferences :)
Having said that, habitat and be attractive and distracting, and if we are looking at including the environment and not editing the image, we need to be extra careful when we frame in camera, to make as pleasing and authentic as possible.
Tha would be the best of both worlds :)