Out-of-My-Box

[Arthur Morris]

For more than a decade I have been teaching folks that nearly all successful images of preening birds need the eye visible and the head parallel to the back of the camera. Nearly all....

Canon 800mm f/5.6L IS lens with the EOS-1D MIII. ISO 400. Evaluative metering at zero: 1/400 sec. at f/5.6.

Don't be shy; all comments welcome.

[denise ippolito]

So where do we go from here? I can't help but think where is the eye or bill? However there is a side of me says that it's interesting and shows some feather detail that we don't often get to see on a Harlequin. :)

[Ed Vatza]

Hi Artie,

I think you are at a distinct advantage here because you were there and know the configuration of the preening duck.I keep looking at the image and having difficulty coming with a head placement. So while I agree that it is possible to make a compelling image without the eye showing, in this case I feel I need an eye to help me figure out the image. Second point, I don't see any detail in the tail feathers - maybe my monitor.

[Christopher Miller]

Hmmm... Not sure if this works for me, Artie. Like Denise and Ed, the lack of a visible eye looks kind of weird to me and makes it difficult to figure out the bird's pose. On the other hand though, I do find the colors and patterns on the head and wing rather interesting.

[Cindy Mead]

the more I look at this, the more I like it. The vivid colors and bold markings grab my eye, and I'm wondering what this would like like using the fract. filter ;)

[Julie Kenward]

I see that beak peaking out and I love it. Not what I see selling to the everyday Joe but what an interesting look at the Harlequin.

[Dan Brown]

Hey Artie! Very OOTB! I really like this! First, I look and wonder what it is, then after I figure that out, I wonder what it is doing. Oh, it's preening! Then I sit back and enjoy the lines and colors of the plumage as brush strokes! To sum up, this draws me in and keeps me there for a while! BTW, I would like to see more detail in de-tail!

[Arthur Morris]

Thanks to the last few folks who saw the light :) I held my tongue after the first few folks pretty much trashed this one. First off, know what the subject is should not be a factor in evaluating the image. Photography must speak to the viewer on its own right.

I liked this image a ton right out of the box (pardon the expression). I cropped rather tightly--eliminating probably about a third of the total area of the original frame, to emphasize the beautiful patterns of the near wing (that conveniently happens to be pretty much parallel to the back of the camera). Just for the record book the black triangle surrounded by the two orange red strips is the top of the head. I do not believe that the tip of the bill is visible--I think that the small, skinny, black triangle is on a feather somewhere...

As for the lack of detail in de-tail (are you originally from Brooklyn Dan?; I am!), one would expect that shaded blacks would be somewhat lacking in detail in a frame where the whites in the light are correctly exposed. That said I did do a lot to lighten the bottow of the tail and a few other dark areas but there is nothing worse than overdoing that.

In the TIFF, there is actually a sliver of space between the darks and the edge of the histogram and not a single pixel shows as clipped. Still, you do not actually see much detail there even in the TIFF. And when we create a JPEG, the compression increases the contrast making the blacks even blacker.

Thanks all for stopping by. I may wait a bit and post this in Avian just to compare reactions.

As to your question ("So where do we go from here?"), that is a good question that I ask often :)

[Myer Bornstein]

Artie
I love it for the beautiful patterns. It shows nature in its full glory. It is a keeper

[denise ippolito]

Re:
As to your question ("So where do we go from here?"), that is a good question that I ask often :)

I guess time will tell...:) Could that be the answer<smile>