Canon 40D, 100-400, Tripod, 8-7-08 @ 8:01am
1/3200, f/5.6, ISO 400,
Removed dead branches and misc cloning.
Canon 40D, 100-400, Tripod, 8-7-08 @ 8:01am
1/3200, f/5.6, ISO 400,
Removed dead branches and misc cloning.
The viewfinder is my guidance.
Interesting perch. I think I'd remove the branches on the left side as well since they're just floating there not attached to anything. Some fill flash or lowering the contrast some might be good as well. Here's a quick edit. I'm not sure I like my colors better than yours but I thought I'd throw it out for comment.
Lovely light and compo, although it could use some space at the right. I do like the branches, though, they add a touch of interest.
I am on the fence in regards to that branch - but I think it's the face-to-face placement with the GBH that is its undoing. I prefer the warmer tones of the original. Was this an underexposed image? I say this as there is colour noise on the plumage that looks like exposure was pushed back up in PP.
I agree with Daniel about the color of the original as it is more vibrant and natural iin appearance. I personally like the inclusion of the branch as it adds to the overall interest of the capture IMO. Many thanks for sharing Bill.
Thanks, I never thought about taking out the branch from the get-go, don't know why that is, just personal, I think. Image exposure is about as shot, but there were minor tweaks also. I always use a Levels adjustment to even out the slider to histogram image. The first image I did of this was too light when I viewed it and went back and adjusted brightness/contrast to darken some I think.
The viewfinder is my guidance.
Bill I think that your original has more of a habitat feel with the branches included. Thanks for posting this one.
Nice light, pose and BG. I agree on more room at the right and wish for a lower angle. Could you have backed up a bit?
Hi Bill,
I agree with Fab but at the same time, I would love to see this one in horizontal.
I go with Bills as well, has more detail. NIce job Bill.