Hawk Owl - Using Quick Mask

[Jeff Nadler]

Snow is ok but I personally do not like high-key images of birds against bright white overcast sky, which 90% of my wintertime days seem to have. This image had very bright white sky, so almost went to the recycle bin. But I tried a quick mask selection of just the bird and its perch, inverse, and decreased exposure of the background. Not usre this was the best approach but I like the results.

It is tough for me to paint the edge of the bird precisely so perhaps the transition area is not perfect. For the pure background crowd, I tried cloning out some background twigs but it ends up looking just too manipulated to me so discarded.

In any event, having a northern hawk owl in northern NY is not a common event so I was pleased to have an eye level 10 foot away encounter. Almost full frame.

[Arthur Morris]

I just love the intense stare and the soft light. Your selection techniques look pretty good. What camera and lens?

[Stephen Stephen]

Great eye contact Jeff. I know what you mean about the BG twigs but I may have removed at least a portion of the one on the left that's piercing its breast.

[Axel Hildebrandt]

Great find, details and stare. It is a bit tight in the frame, especially at the bottom and I agree with Stephen regarding the branch near the chest. Could you post the techs?

[Joe Senzatimore]

Nits aside the stare is what makes the shot. I would love this to be mine. Great bird and a great find.

[Tony Whitehead]

Lovely intense stare. I agree re removing some of the OOF branches touching the bird.

[John Blumenkamp]

I think this looks great Jeff, and I'd say you did well with your selections, etc. The stare if fantastic. I don't mind the OOF branches behind the owl... adds some depth to the image in my opinion. I'd also be curious to hear the camera body and lens used to create this one.

[Juan Carlos Vindas]

Hi Jeff, the first thing that came to my mind was that the oof branches distracted too much.
I think this wonderful owl deserves some extra work on the oof branches, at least on my opinion.
I hope you don't mind.

Question to PS professionals: does my version looks too fake?

[Jeff Nadler]

Canon 40D, 500mm F4 IS and 1.4, EC +2, F8, ISO 400, tripod, no flash

[Axel Hildebrandt]

Hi Jeff, the first thing that came to my mind was that the oof branches distracted too much.
I think this wonderful owl deserves some extra work on the oof branches, at least on my opinion.
I hope you don't mind.

Question to PS professionals: does my version looks too fake?

Not necessarily fake but there is a piece of owl missing (between the two upper branches on the right). :)

[Art Kornienko]

Excellent in all areas Jeff, killer eyes for sure. Lovely pp work.

[Juan Carlos Vindas]

Not necessarily fake but there is a piece of owl missing (between the two upper branches on the right). :)

Ooops!
Good thing you saw it, I though it was part of the branch.:D

[Jeff Nadler]

Not looking to debate, but I think we are all too focused sometimes on the studio look for a bird. Thanks for the edit but I like mine with branches better-for the oof branches add depth and a sense of place.

[Juan Carlos Vindas]

Not looking to debate, but I think we are all too focused sometimes on the studio look for a bird. Thanks for the edit but I like mine with branches better-for the oof branches add depth and a sense of place.

No problem Jeff.
I agree with you about been focused on the ''perfect shot'' but I just wanted to see how your image would look without the OOF branches.