Which is the Better Image and Why?

[Arthur Morris]

Both images were created down by the lake in Indian Lake Estates with the Canon 800mm f/4L IS lens, the 1.4X II TC, and the EOS-1D MIII. This image, Image 1, was created from the car at ISO 320. Evaluative Metering +1 stop: 1/320 sec. at f/14 in Manual mode. Rig supported by the BLUBB. (See the situation in Pane 3.)

The subject in both images is the same young Osprey.

Don't be shy; all comments welcome.

[Arthur Morris]

After photographing from the car for a while, I decided to try to approach the bird on foot. I was successful, getting as close as mminimum focusing distance, about 20 feet. This image was made at about 25 feet. Same rig as above with the lens on the Gitzo 3530 LS topped by the Mongoose Mm3.5. ISO 320: 1/400 sec. at f/13 in Manual Mode.

I have a definite preference for one of these images. Last time I did this y'all got me to change my mind! We shall see.

[Arthur Morris]

This is the situation. Good luck! For the first image it took some careful maneuvering with my Sequoia.... Note the sun angle and try to figure out where you would put your vehicle...

[Ed Cordes]

I also like the first one. The head is turned toward the viewer and the eye has more direct contact. I also like being able to view the open beak and tongue better. As Peter mentioned a bit more body in #1 helps as well.

Re the position of your car - off to the left of the frame so the Sun is directly behind me and on the birds.

[Ramon M. Casares]

What I like better in the first one is the body angle, both head angles look very nice, but in the first one, the body angle is better IMO. So I would choose the first one. Great, light, comp, detail, exposure and open bill is a plus! Congratulations!

[BillTyler]

In addition to the previous comments, with which I agree, the first is better because the sky looks clean (brighter blue), not dirty, and the bird colors are similarly crisper and cleaner. Altogether, even without the pose differences, the first image is definitely better.

Bill

[Dave Phillips]

liking both, I would prefer #1 because of lesser shadow inside the mouth.
Light actually looks very high in the sky, so slight movement would have little effect,
notice catch lights in top of pupil

[allanrube]

Also, for number 1, the mouth is important in these portraits and 1 shows a "deeper" throat.

[Juan Carlos Vindas]

For me the choice was easy, number 2 is my fav.
Why?

1-Even though the number 1 has a wonderful HA, in my opinion number 2 has just a few degrees toward you.
2-The color of the sky in number 2 is not so saturated, looks more natural for me.
3-Very important at least for me, I love symmetry and having sky in front and in the back balance the image IMO.
4-And most important, the pattern of those feathers on the neck reminds me of solid layers of lava one on top of the other.

[Dave Mills]

I like the first. There seems to be more contact (head angle) with the bird and the viewer. Seeing more of the body is also a personal preference along with the sky color.

[Jeff Wear]

my pick #1 head position ,I like the sky better in this one and the added body makes the shot better

[Mark Fuge]

I like them both, but would go with #2, personally. :cool:

I like the lighting a little better, as well as "personally", I like the head angle better. The first one is how all images are shown. There are thousands of them with that pose. However, I like the more subtle angle of the second image better "personally".

I also like the format, though I would crop a little behind the bird, to bring it off center. I know we had this discussion before Artie, but for me, the head is the subject and I would like to see that closer to the right 1/3 point of the frame. Personal choice. But as noted both are keepers in my mind and eye.

As for your second question, I would move a little to the left, as the lighting is slightly from the side as noted by the shadow of the tree. It's close, but I would move slightly if possible.

Don't throw either away! Someone might just want to buy the first one!!! ;) :D

[Bill Bryant]

Sign me up for the second as well. Less sat. BG and more detail in the beak. Both great images though. Congrats.

[Lance Peters]

Hi Artie - #1 for me - Like the head angle, body angle and the crop better than #2 - also the shape of the wing with the pattern of the feathers is stronger in the first. The reds and blacks of the beak/throat are also more prominent giving it a added boost.
:)

[Phil Liew]

Artie,

I prefer the HA of the second as the beak has more details but would prefer a portrait crop instead of landscape. For the tone etc since it is shot in RAW (I suppose) it can be tweaked in PP.

Both pictures exhibit hot white areas.

For this exercise I am with the second shot.

[Kobus Tollig]

I like the first more because there is more of the body and more angle on the head. I would just add some space to the left. Well done

[Octavio Campos Salles]

Definetly the 1st one. The vertical frame adds a lot to the composition, including some of the wing.

[John Hawkins]

The only thing to be considered here is the pose. most everthing else can be done in post processing. I like the first as the bird seems more alert. I prefer this head angle. Can see more of the body. I like the the vertical vs th horizontal. John

[john crookes]

To Me the details in he second are better in the darks and the eye is brighter also.
The first the blacks are close to clipping and lack detail on my monitor.

I like both poses but like the space around the second one a bit more

so to me the second one is my choice

John

[MichaelM]

First one works for me, though the dark feathers on the head are close to clipping. Much prefer the vertical orientation, the HA and the body angle. First seems more compositionally correct, while the second seems a bit ordinary...with all due respect.

[Mark Fuge]

I was wondering Artie, why didn't you post the other image you took? That one where you had a problem with the open area behind the head. It might have been a good contrast to the other two! :D

[Nagesh Mula]

I love portrait pictures when the bird is captured till its belly (i.e. smoewhere between neck and belly) as it gives a nice S curve unless you want to show the nuances in the face only (for which I would include more of the face and small part of neck).
From your picture I think you wanna take a portrait in the first category that I am talking about.
In that case the first one does very much justice to the picture for two reasons
1. It is a Vertical crop which requires more of body, along with a good head angle.
2. The second one, even though has more room but the slant angle of the body w.r.t frame does not do justice, it neither qualifies for the face nor for the body portrait in my opinion.
However, i would love to see the horizontal format of the first picture too.

[Arthur Morris]

Thanks all for your comments and reasons. While I do like both images a lot, and feel that each will sell, I have to confess that I like #2 better. (There I go swimming against the tide again.) I like the more subdued sky color. #1 is a bit too electric blue for me. I like that the bird in #2 has more room in the frame. And I love the curve of the wing in #2. And the balance.

The processing on #1 was too contrasty--yeah, my fault, I know . There is more detail in the mouth in #1 because I selected and lightened it.

ps: I guess that I most closely agree with John Crookes

[Arthur Morris]

I was wondering Artie, why didn't you post the other image you took? That one where you had a problem with the open area behind the head. It might have been a good contrast to the other two! :D

Way cool and a great job of blending....

[Arthur Morris]

As for the situation while I was in the vehicle, remember that the bird was well above me as I was very close. And I had to work through the cut-out opening, and thus the sun was a bit from the left. If you look closely you can see my tire tracks in the grass. What you can't see is that immediately to the left of the enclosure, behind a restraining wall, is the lake (so there was not much room to maneuver).

[Stu Bowie]

Both images have the right to be on their own, but I would choose no 1 solely for the better head angle. Sharp, well exposed, and love the open beak.

[Ramon M. Casares]

I have to confess that I like #2 better. I like the more subdued sky color. #1 is a bit too electric blue for me.
Artie, this is just a PP issue, that's why I didn't consider it as an important point when choosing wich one I liked better.
I like that the bird in #2 has more room in the frame.
Yes, that is true, but IMO the head ended up being too centered in the frame, and also with you PS knowledge, adding canvas to #1 shoudn't be much of a challenge to you ;)
And I love the curve of the wing in #2.
Here I do agree with you, the curve is really nice.
And the balance.
IMO both images have good balance.

At the end, it all comes down just to personal taste I think.

[Doug Brown]

The eye contact is what makes the first image my choice.

[Art Kornienko]

Inspite of the technical differences the overalll image of #1 shows the Osprey in a more confident and majestic pose. In #2 it almost looks like the Osprey is confused, looking down and somewhat slightly away which doesn't seem to flatter the species. I think the vertical comp works better and prefer the whites in #1, not even close for my vote.

[ChasMcRae]

I like #1 better because it appears more dynamic where as #2 seems more passive and/or static appearing. First impression !
Chas.

[Rosl Roessner]

I would vote for #2.
Like the feathers on the neck of the bird and have a much better feeling for the whole balance in the image.
For me there is too much "body" with no "Expression" in #1.
Just a personal taste...
Love from Germany,
Rose

[Arthur Morris]

Light actually looks very high in the sky, so slight movement would have little effect, notice catch lights in top of pupil

I think that the high-in-the-eye highlights were caused by the fact that I was several feet below the bird(S???) in each case looking up at them. The first image was created at 7:37am, the 2nd at 74am.

[Arthur Morris]

Thanks all for commenting. I still like #2 by far but will re-optimize #1.