Tawny Eagle

[Dr.Pranay Rao Juvvadi]

Canon 1D MIII with Canon 500 f/4, Handheld.

EXIF: 1/1000, f/4, Aperture Priority, Evaluative Metering, ISO 400.

I hope my processing in ok, especially the sharpening. Like to hear what you guys think.

[Axel Hildebrandt]

Eye contact, head angle and BG look good. I would crop a bit off the top and lighten the eye a bit more and run NR on the BG.

[arash_hazeghi]

Excellent portrait with eye contact and nice green BG, really stands out!
I agree with lightening up the eye. Also I think this is oversharpened a little bit and there are halos, you posted another nice shot yesterday http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...ad.php?t=42290 which had exactly the same issue with sharpening and noise, after repost it improved dramatically, I think this will also improve a lot if you use similar processing.

[Ray Rozema]

Great pose. Agree w above comments. It appears the light is coming from the left side of the bird thus the right eye is in the shadow. Probably better to have the light coming from behind you if possible

[Arthur Morris]

I would have liked to have seen the lens pointed less than an inch to the right for a stronger COMP.

Is this a free and wild bird? Yes to lightening the face and agree that it is a tad oversharpened, esp. the face.

SH and BKGR are very nice.

[Ed Cordes]

Nice portrait. I agree a bit more room to the left would be good. Sharpening looks a bit overdone.

[Harshad Barve]

nice image and agreed with all good points covered
TFS

[Arthur Morris]

I was suggesting less room on the left. This would bring the bird into the frame in the lrc from a slightly stronger position. Also, lightening the iris would be a good plan.

[Jim Fenton]

Arthur's comment on the framing on initial lens position is interesting, however, I'm not thinking this would have worked without a head turn back toward the photographer to pull the eye contact back into the frame instead of away?

[Dr.Pranay Rao Juvvadi]

Thank you all for the suggestions, appreciate them.

Probably better to have the light coming from behind you if possible

Ray, I could not shoot form a better angle.

Is this a free and wild bird?

Artie, this is a wild bird.

Reposting the image with the following changes: left a bit more space on the left, lightened the whole image, reduced the sharpening and dealt with the noise.

I tried lightening the eye selectively, but it was looking a bit unnatural, so left it as it was.

How does it look now?

[Arthur Morris]

Good job on getting close to a free and wild bird. For the third and last time I am wishing for more on the left (if you have it) and less on the right. The COMP in the repost is weaker than the COMP in the ORIG post....

[Dr.Pranay Rao Juvvadi]

For the third and last time I am wishing for more on the left (if you have it) and less on the right.

Artie, Pardon me for asking, is the space you are wishing for in front (left) or behind (right) the eagle?

[Arthur Morris]

Sorry for not being clear on that. My original post suggested pointing the lens a bit more to the right. That would move the bird left in the frame with less room to the left and more of the eagle's body on the right. That would have made it very tight on the left so taking one big step back and pointing the lens to the right would have yielded an image with the body of the bird entering the frame from a stronger position. I will try to post an example in a minute. Be right back...

[Arthur Morris]

In taking a closer look at your image side by side with some of my similar images, I came to realize that the problem with the COMP here arises in part from the bird's posture with the head projecting more forward than usual. If you had simply pointed the lens to the right about two inches and down and inch in the image presented in pane 10 it would have been perfect. The image in pane 10 as presented is unbalanced to the right....

[Arthur Morris]

Perhaps there is an easier way of explaining it. You needed to include a bit more of the slope of the bird's uipper back. Here is an example (albeit from a different bird family).

[Dr.Pranay Rao Juvvadi]

Thanks a lot for the effort Artie. Reposting the image with the changed COMP, hope it looks fine!

[Arthur Morris]

YAW. Now you are talking. I had no idea that you had more of the bird on the right! The COMP immediately above is to my eye, perfectly balanced.

[Arthur Morris]

Hi Pranay, Do you find the Eye Doctor work here objectionable?

[Dr.Pranay Rao Juvvadi]

YAW. Now you are talking. I had no idea that you had more of the bird on the right! The COMP immediately above is to my eye, perfectly balanced.

I'm glad I finally got the COMP right. The very reason I'm here on BPN is to Improve and learn. Thanks Artie for helping me to get it right.

Hi Pranay, Do you find the Eye Doctor work here objectionable?

Not exactly objectionable, but its one of those things I do not do. The eye work has definitely enhanced the image, but at the time I took the picture, the light was at an angle from the left and the eye was in the shadow. So brightening the eye seemed a bit unnatural to me.

[Arthur Morris]

Hi Again,

re:

I'm glad I finally got the COMP right. The very reason I'm here on BPN is to Improve and learn. Thanks Artie for helping me to get it right.

Me too and YAW.

Not exactly objectionable, but its one of those things I do not do. The eye work has definitely enhanced the image, but at the time I took the picture, the light was at an angle from the left and the eye was in the shadow. So brightening the eye seemed a bit unnatural to me.

I understand and respect your position, but do consider the following:

Here, you are exposing for the brightest tones, probably the ligthest feathers on the breast. I would rate them as well lighter than a middle tone. If you have a good understanding of exposure theory (see same in ABP), you will understand that when exposing for tones that are well lighter than a middle tone that your middle tones are about 2/3 under-exposed and your dark tones are about 1 2/3 stops too dark..... Thus, when I choose to lighten the iris I am choosing to render the eye more naturally (of course to my perception). And with the eye shaded, the amount of under-expousure might actually be well more than several stops.

Also, the human eye has the ability to see detail in light and dark areas far better than a digital sensor.

Lastly, I have always chosen not to be bound by the limitations of the media that we are using.
Respectfully.

[Dr.Pranay Rao Juvvadi]

Artie, you have explained it so very well and I really get what you are saying. My only aim is to capture and present an image as close as possible to what I saw in the field.

This has been a very educative interaction and I look forward to more such interactions with you. Thanks a lot.