American BlueJay

[MichaelM]

A few things about this leave me uneasy... Thoughts are appreciated.

I like the perch on the back of the branch from a habitat perspective, but I couldn't crop it in a manner that wouldn't bisect the image. Also, I was concerned that my PS skills might result in a worse outcome than leaving the horizontal branch in the foreground but it is killing the image for me for sure. I could have used a little more BG on the left and top, but alas, this is what I have to work with.

So question 1 - Branch in front of the bird?

Question 2 - Branch bisecting the image vertically

Question 3 - clone out the horizontal branch even if my skills might look worse than leaving it there?

[Gus Cobos]

Welcome to the BPN family Michael,
To answer your questions; all three...the thick branch in front of your subject is quite distracting. The branch thats bisecting the image vertically, and the horizontal branch coming from the left of the frame; all take away from the composition... It's a shame because you have good details and a good color rendition...In situations like this, Its best to have patience and wait for the bird to come out in the clear or you change your capture angle by walking around him and position yourself for a proper capture...In this composition; the ideal capture angle would be you on the other side of the Blue Jay waiting for him to turn his head to look at you...chalk this one for experience and move on to your next capture...looking forward to your next one...:cool:

[Dave Leroy]

Hi Michael, It is a very nice image and too bad about the branches. Gus has lots of good suggestions. Sometimes though you just end up with branches. My suggestion is the only way to improve your pp'n skills is to use them, so give it a go and see what happens. The next time it will be easier. Good Luck and keep osting. Dave

[MichaelM]

Thanks all...you confirmed my feelings.. fortunately I had a good day with this bird. I was curious if there were any redeeming qualities to the "branch through the bird" image that I might be missing.. maybe one of those cases where it was good to break the rules.

So how about this.. How far should I try to go to eliminate the extraneous branches?

WOW!!!

I was looking close at this image before posting and I can't believe my eyes... While I cropped this and made a number of adjustments to it it is other wise untouched. Do you see what I see? I'd be happy to share the original with anyone who wants to pixel peep, but I can't believe what I am seeing...



edit---

I just shared this with a friend who frequents the location I shot this and was reminded that there is an island in the sound not far away that has been know for its share of radioactivity and other issues.. it is certainly within flight range. I also remembered a Chickadee from the same location which had one gimp leg. It didn't dawn on me at the time, but likely from the same place.

[Gus Cobos]

Hi Michael,
Tell me that you cloned in that third leg in PhotoShop...:eek: This is a freak of nature, if you didn't...
As far as this composition goes, This is way better than the previous image. Suggestions: You need to clone out the upper twig on the upper left side of the frame; the top fork branch over the head; the lower twig on the left side of frame; the other lower twig on the right side of the frame, and the two vertical yellow oof bands in the background...I like the bird's third leg...interesting...:cool:

[MichaelM]

Gus, I couldn't clone in a leg if you were going to pay me a gojillion bucks.. That's legit and I just noticed it. I shot this series at a preserve on the north shore of eastern Long Island. Just north of there is the Plum Island Animal Disease Center... I would think this and the other bird migrated south from Plum Island.

So if I may ask... What is the lesser evil... a bad clone job or leaving the branches in an image like this one? I can handle a small cloning of twigs but my skills are still developing and I would bet that taking out as much as you mention would be pretty ugly. On a scale of 1 - 10, with 10 being this image after someone like yourself clones the branches, how would it rate as is?

My other question is... given that this looks like an clone job on the leg, and I am the only one who knows it isn't, how would one prove the image is legit if one had to? I feel uncomfortable using the image if there is question as to it's legitimacy. Seems kind of lame to leave the question open. Am I better off cloning the leg out? Who's going to believe the leg wasn't cloned? It would seem to only discredit me to leave it like that if I can't prove it legit. Otherwise I like the image and would love to use it.

[Gus Cobos]

From 1 to 10 Michael,
I would give you a 8...:p:D the way it is with the third leg...this is wild. In this photograph you have a good head angle with good eye contact, the color rendition is good, and you have sharp details...I'm working out of my computer at work; and I don't have access to PhotoShop...when I get home, I will re-work this image for you...congrats on this capture, this is very special...

[MichaelM]

I'm inclined to remove the image, though your efforts on it will be appreciated none the less. Since I just noticed the leg, but have no way to corroborate it, I'd rather not have it out there to create any misconceptions. If you want to save it first please do.. I will delete it shortly.. or if you can delete it please do so.

[Gus Cobos]

Michael,
Do not delete...keep this for your records...:eek::cool:

[Christopher Miller]

Please don't delete it, Michael! If you say the third leg is real, I for one believe you. It's a very interesting photo!

Christopher

[Lance Peters]

Hi Michael - Welcome to the BPN family :)

intresting to say the least - now does it really matter what anyone else thinks - you know it to be true - then thats all that matters.
Gus has all the techs covered - you will learn a lot here - have a look at the educational resources forum - lots of info and help in there.
looking forward to seeing more :)

[MichaelM]

Christopher, thanks. Indeed it is real. I will review the 200 or so images from two shoots from that location to see if there any other oddities. I do recall one Chickadee with a deformed left foot. I think I a shot of that while it was perched on the hood of the 500.

[MichaelM]

Lance, thanks for the welcome.

The angle of the extra appendage would leave me questioning it if I hadn't made the capture. I seem to remember doing some localized editing on the perch, but never noticed the leg. Of course I can be mixing up images. Truth told, I would have to be crazy to claim such a thing, especially to a group like this..fluent in post processing edits.. You're right though... thanks. Pretty crazy no?

[Gus Cobos]

Hi Michael,
As promised, Here is the compositional adjustment of your second posting...see if this presents best to you...I eliminated all of the distractions, ran noise reduction in the background, adjusted the mid-tone, boosted contrast and saturation, opened up the area around the eye and selective sharpened...:cool:

[Alfred Forns]

Michale I would post the three legged bird in the ID gallery and see what you get. As for being legit or not all you need to do is produce the RAW image ... simple.

As far as the cloning I wish all of you would not get carried away, we do have the ability to clone and there is nothing wrong ... the problem is how much? So far there is no standard as to how much so its left up to the photographer. The end image "here" is over what normal is in my book, as an exercise in "what can be done" its just fine.

Doing so much branch removal is not the thing to do. If you end up with one small branch coming out of the birds head or a prominent body part you might want to clone out (disclosing would be good). For selling stock usually we use a disclosure or removing minor ..... etc.

It is a temptation to make the perfect bird on a stick with a perfect bg every time but its not easy. Do the best you can, move around to make the best image within the clutter presented and get what you get. Please don't get clone happy !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lately I have seen much more cloning than I care to admit to.

[MichaelM]

Hi Michael,
As promised, Here is the compositional adjustment of your second posting...see if this presents best to you...I eliminated all of the distractions, ran noise reduction in the background, adjusted the mid-tone, boosted contrast and saturation, opened up the area around the eye and selective sharpened...:cool:

Gus, first of all, there is a huge learning curve for me to be able to do what you did.. Cloning would be so far more obvious.. Here is one same day... The twig entering from the right side went right through the top of the jays head.. I liked the image otherwise so a shot at cloning the background, but that was it.

It was very much a fly by the seat my pants ordeal..



You presented the image with much more contrast and deeper blacks. I like the selective darkening on the perch. And while I could never do it, I like the darkening of the light vertical to the left of the subject.

I've been giving more thought to the first image with the branch through the bird and while this particular image is unacceptable to me, I think I could be OK with that pose with bisection on a less dramatic scale, just to present the bird in it's habitat rather than being too forensic. If it were just one image being presented I might opt for a cleaner composition, but in a series where there are other images I could deal with it how it is if the branch was about a third of it's thickness.. maybe.

Now, regarding the extra appendage on the earlier image.. As much as I can swear I didn't intentionally alter that image, I am a horses behind.. When I zoomed in on the original, the detail of the extra leg was far to close to the left leg, so I backed through my history steps and sure enough...I had one rogue clone step in there...the left leg. So, at this point, I'll withdraw any claims to a three legged Bluejay, but I think I'll leave that image here just to show what not to do..on a lot of levels!!! Gotta lay off the rock candy when I am doing post work.. Man, do I feel like a moron... :o

[MichaelM]

It is a temptation to make the perfect bird on a stick with a perfect bg every time but its not easy. Do the best you can, move around to make the best image within the clutter presented and get what you get. Please don't get clone happy !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lately I have seen much more cloning than I care to admit to.

As I mentioned in my response to Gus, I kind like a little bit of clutter for "habitat" purposes. So maybe my lack of cloning skills is a good thing.. :p

[Alfred Forns]

Hi Michael With the stick through the bird's brain (lethal in most cases :) ) the solution is simple and is not in cloning. At the time you are making the image move right or left a couple of inches to keep it form merging.