Is it Real, or is it "Counterfeit"? #2

[Arthur Morris]

Again I ask, can you see any obvious Photoshop work on this one, or is this the original. Is the bird's head from the original frame?

Do feel free to comment on the image as presented. I will post the orginal after viewing the repsonses by the Photoshop Police :) :) :)

This Yellow Wabler was photographed at Point Pelee on Friday morning with the Canon 800mm f/4L IS lens, the 1.4X II TC, and the EOS-1D MIII. ISO 800. Evaulative metering +1 1/3 stops: 1/320 sec. at f/9 set manually. Fill flash with Better Beamer at -2 stops.

Don't be shy; all comments welcome.

[David Thomasson]

Again I ask, can you see any obvious Photoshop work on this one, or is this the original. Is the bird's head from the original frame? Do feel free to comment on the image as presented. I will post the orginal after viewing the repsonses by the Photoshop Police :) :) :)


Nice work, Artie! As a duly sworn officer of PSPD (Photoshop Police Department), I find no probable cause in this image to issue a citation. We can only ask that you use your criminal skills responsibly. :cool:

[Arthur Morris]

Ah, and a good sense of humor too. Perhaps this is as it was right out of the camera.... We shall see if it passes muster with our Axel-eyed moderator and/or others....

[Mike Landwehr]

Hi Artie,

I love the warbler. Reminds me of our trip to the Galapagos! But, it appears that photoshop has covered up part of his left foot!

Mike

[Arthur Morris]

Hi Artie, I love the warbler. Reminds me of our trip to the Galapagos! But, it appears that photoshop has covered up part of his left foot! Mike

I still need a great image of a Galapagos male with the amazing rufous cap... As for the left (far) foot, only the ORIG will tell....

[David Thomasson]

Hi Artie,

I love the warbler. Reminds me of our trip to the Galapagos! But, it appears that photoshop has covered up part of his left foot!

Mike

I looked twice at that and concluded that the left foot was gripping a bit of branch on the opposite side of the main stem. But we shall see. I love a good mystery.

[Arthur Morris]

I looked twice at that and concluded that the left foot was gripping a bit of branch on the opposite side of the main stem. But we shall see. I love a good mystery.

Did not want to leave you guys hanging. As the side by side JPEG shows, you are right David ad Mike was incorrect. :) Not sure what he was holding onto???

[Alfred Forns]

Hi Artie

I zoomed the image to 1200 pixels and looks good to me. I would have to say its original .... if it isn't it passed the test !!! :)

[Doug Brown]

If I had to guess anything, I'd say that you replaced the eye. There are a few yellow pixels that look a little too yellow. If you did anything else to the bird, it looks very good. I also see a little ghosting on the branch with two buds on it.

[Mark Fuge]

It looks like you may have removed a leaf and branch in the area of the wing and redid the wing. The pattern on the wing appears to be different and there is an apparent correction area on the main branch where you may have tried to fix the area of the removed branch. Just my $0.01 worth?

[Arthur Morris]

If I had to guess anything, I'd say that you replaced the eye. There are a few yellow pixels that look a little too yellow. If you did anything else to the bird, it looks very good. I also see a little ghosting on the branch with two buds on it.

Hey Doug, I did lighten the iris a bit while trying not to overdo it. If there is any ghosting on the branch it was the result of my generic JPEG sharpening via an action.

[Arthur Morris]

It looks like you may have removed a leaf and branch in the area of the wing and redid the wing. The pattern on the wing appears to be different and there is an apparent correction area on the main branch where you may have tried to fix the area of the removed branch. Just my $0.01 worth?

Hey Mark, Thanks for your comments. Could you be specific and let me know exactly where on the wing and the perch the branch and leaf were, that would be great. If you posted a JPEG with the branch and the leaf drawn in place you just might win the grand prize. Or maybe it was a new head??? :)

[Axel Hildebrandt]

Hmm, I'm on a laptop and would have to see it on my bigger monitor to be sure. My best guess is you added canvas at the bottom and there seems to be some cloning near the back. Great pose, light, angle and details, BTW.

[Fabs Forns]

Hmmmm, bottom looks pretty real to me. Let's wait for the original.

[Stu Bowie]

Lovely pose, and I feel the yellows are well exposed. I like the diagonal perch across the image. I cant work out how, or what his left foot/claw is holding onto, as it doesnt wrap around the perch like the right foot.

[Arthur Morris]

I cant work out how, or what his left foot/claw is holding onto, as it doesn't wrap around the perch like the right foot.

Me neither. But do see the side by side close-ups above. And do note in the ORIG that you can see the claw of one of the toes of the left foot below the perch....

[Arthur Morris]

Hi Arthur, if anything, to me the top part of the back and the lower part of the head looks to be (pp) separated to blur a part of the bg, bordering those body parts. IMO, the left foot is on a stick going out straight into the back from the main branch: the one toe is pointing out to the right of the main branch, indicating a (small) branch on the back of the main. I cannot tell if another head was pasted on this one, so if that is the case, well processed. I do like the outstanding details, colors and composition of this bird.

Hi Peter, I believe that you might be right about the left foot. Nothing, however, was done to the upper back or the back of the head.

[Mark Fuge]

Hey Mark, Thanks for your comments. Could you be specific and let me know exactly where on the wing and the perch the branch and leaf were, that would be great. If you posted a JPEG with the branch and the leaf drawn in place you just might win the grand prize. Or maybe it was a new head??? :)

This is the area I see. The branch appears to be modified. Maybe yes, maybe no and the wing doesn't appear to be a continuous pattern. ????

[Dave Phillips]

This is the area I see. The branch appears to be modified. Maybe yes, maybe no and the wing doesn't appear to be a continuous pattern. ????

ditto, exactly what I was seeing Mark....the lower part of twig looks modified with cloning along right edge.
Great catch on wing feathers....I think!

[Arthur Morris]

This is the area I see. The branch appears to be modified. Maybe yes, maybe no and the wing doesn't appear to be a continuous pattern. ????

Good work Mark; one of your catches is correct, the other is not. Only I will not say which for now, the twig or the wing.... :) :) :)

Let's keep the fun going and see what others have to say....

[Arthur Morris]

ditto, exactly what I was seeing Mark....the lower part of twig looks modified with cloning along right edge. Great catch on wing feathers....I think!

Hey Dave, No copy catting! So which is it for sure, the twig or the wing? (I won't say till I post the ORIG.)

[Dave Phillips]

Hey Dave, No copy catting! So which is it for sure, the twig or the wing? (I won't say till I post the ORIG.)
:):):)
I will have to go with the wing, as Mark noted, there are some irregular lines, but
there definitely is a cloned edge along the twig edge.....still going with wing!!.....I think!!!

BTW, that left foot is definitely on a branch protruding to rear out of site...another "I think"

[Arthur Morris]

:):):) I will have to go with the wing, as Mark noted, there are some irregular lines, but there definitely is a cloned edge along the twig edge.....still going with wing!!.....I think!!!

Well, at least I have you confused.

[David Thomasson]

The PSPD Crime Lab suspects cloning in this area. They've assigned Inspector Clouseau to the case.
You could be in big trouble, Art.

http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/9204/wingfix.jpg

[Paul Lagasi]

The is a nice photo of a yellow...only thing I notice is the the eye...checked back in my files and in all my photos the eye is solid black....the wings look ok to me. Canvas may have been added but I can't see where. I think the warblers left foot is grabbing a branch that has been removed....feather under right leg doesn't seem right. Grasping at straws here.

[Arthur Morris]

Hey Paul,

re:

The is a nice photo of a yellow...only thing I notice is the the eye...checked back in my files and in all my photos the eye is solid black....

We need to remember that when we are exposing for bright yellow, esp. in sun, that the middle tones and darks will be underexposed. I am not positive that this species has a black iris; looking at photos is not a good test.

the wings look ok to me.

That is good but seem more below....

Canvas may have been added but I can't see where.

No canvas added.

I think the warblers left foot is grabbing a branch that has been removed....

Not; see the first side by side close-ups.

feather under right leg doesn't seem right.

That is in the ORIG. See the next pane.

Grasping at straws here.

That was the plan :) :) :)

[Arthur Morris]

Congrats to Mark Fuge who was the first to note the irregularities in the wing. And to David Thomasson who finally got it right. After checking out the original above I think that you will understand why all in all I am pretty proud of the post-processing here.

[Arthur Morris]

Here is the optimized image again for easier comparison.

[Arthur Morris]

In retrospect I can see that some folks had a point as far as the bird's left foot holding onto a branch that had been cloned out--the grey branch, not the brown branch.

[Arthur Morris]

As per usual, the folks here have helped me create a better image. I grabbed a nub of the branch that was originally removed to give the bird something to hold onto. Thanks all for playing!