Fraser River Estuary

I did the normal pp'n and then simplified three times with Topaz.
Dave

Dave, two things:

Always try to get the bird flying into the image instead of heading out of it (meaning get him on the right side here instead of the left) and I'd leave the bird masked off from all the filters - let him stand out with detail while everything else is lost in the smoothness. Might be interesting that way as well...

Dave, It looks like a painting! nicely done.

Nicely done Dave,
I like the soft pastel hues and the applied effect...:cool:

Thanks Denise and Gus. I find it interesting what effects a person can get by mucking around.
Good points Jules. Would have been easy to layer out the eagle to see the difference. Also good to keep the other point in mind. Tks

Dave

I like it a lot Excellent feel The eagle landing doesn't bother me that much since its going for a perch, ideally you wanted landing into you but sure like it as presented !!!! Beautiful !!!!!

Very nice effect, and since this is a manipulated image, I'd go ahead and place the Eagle on the right of the frame to create a better balance of the elements.

Dave: Nice diagonal and horizontal compostion! I don't think the bird adds to the image, and as Fabs pointed out, it unbalances the image. Nonetheless, it could eaily be moved to a more advantageous position. I'm thinking above the right of the two longest tree trunks. However, I'd be inclined to borrow a bird from another image, if I had one. Going toward you or away, to me at least, has more to do with whether you want the bird to be flying into the scene( pointed away) or out of the scene (toward you). The bird flying into the scene would also need to be nearer one of the edges, and larger in relation to the rest of the image, that the later. Then again it depends on what image elements you want to emphasize, the scene or the bird in this case.
I would still use Simplify on the bird element, yet with more detail (less simplification) than the rest of the image. I have a problem with mixing of "styles", (having the bird un-filtered, and the rest with simplify for example) for the style is what binds the image together on the most basic level. Just an opinion, of course.
I just love Topaz Adjust and Topaz Simplify. I'm assumng you had to simplify 3 times because you were using the Adjust preset. I would strongly suggest you download the 30 day trial of Simplify, and if you are like me, you'll buy it in a matter of days. You can easily manipulate levels of simplification, add black outlines, create a number of other interesting effects. As a matter of fact, I would consider Topaz Simplify one of the best Plug Ins going. At $39, it is capable of doing things that I've yet to be able to recreate in Photoshop. Hope I've been helpful ~Bill

Thanks Bill, I will look into Topaz Simplify and consider buying it.
The reason I took this particular photo was because of the eagle landing on the old timber piling. However having said that, the various comments made by your self and others will help give me a more critical "eye" in both taking the photo and it finishing it. Tks, Dave

Dave: I don't think you need more of a critical eye in taking the picture, as far as this one is concerned at least. I was not aware that the eagle was landing on the old timber, and thought that it was just in the scene. Actually, that in itself changes the dynamics of the image considerably, making the eagle the focal point. Placing it closer to the timber (so it is more apparent it is landing) would therefore be my approach. Before you simplify, working on the original image, I'd mask the bird, copy it to a new layer and fill in the the copied area in the original area with a clone tool. Then I'd minimumly simlify the bird layer, more on the original, then move the bird closer to the timber, trying to find a compostionally balanced postion. Titles are often very important, though not always, but in this case "Eagle Landing on Timber" would help direct the viewer to the main idea of the image, and thats about all that would be needed IMO. regards~Bill