Gloom

[Bruce Miller]

I've been trying to get a nice photo of these all too common invaders! They are pretty though. I took this from a blind in my back yard pointing toward my feeders. It was somewhat of a overcast day, but the picture looks grayer than it was. It seems to me, my photos lack "punch" I'm not sure if that is PP skills or something in the way I shoot?

This was shot with a Canon 40D + 100-400 @ 400. f7.1 (the sweet spot on my lens, so it seems), 1/640, ISO 400. I shot this in manual mode. Something I am trying to get better at.
Thanks for looking!

GB,
Bruce

[Johan Kruger]

wow very interesting looking bird, never seen one, not even in on a photo.

[John Chardine]

Bruce- Nice winter-plumage Common Starling. I like the plain background and perch. Also the composition is good although maybe a tad too much negative space on the left. Contrast is good and if you punched this up you would start to clip the highlights and shadows. There is not much colour in a winter plumage Starling against a gray BG, except for the feet, which look good and quite natural here. There is a hint in the image of the "scratchiness" of over-sharpening so that could be backed off a bit I think. As well I think you could dodge the eye highlight a little to brighten it up.

[Bruce Miller]

Johan - this is a European Starling. They are one of only two non-native birds in Ohio. This one is in winter or first year plumage. These birds are quite invasive, so most people dislike them. They are however a very pretty bird.

[Bruce Miller]

Bruce- Nice winter-plumage Common Starling. I like the plain background and perch. Also the composition is good although maybe a tad too much negative space on the left. Contrast is good and if you punched this up you would start to clip the highlights and shadows. There is not much colour in a winter plumage Starling against a gray BG, except for the feet, which look good and quite natural here. There is a hint in the image of the "scratchiness" of over-sharpening so that could be backed off a bit I think. As well I think you could dodge the eye highlight a little to brighten it up.

John,

John, Thanks for the critique. I wish my version of photoshop had grid lines showing the thirds. I tried to guess and put the eye on the top right intersection. It might be over to far and this is causing the excess negative space you mention. I’m grateful there are no big white blobby spots on this bird (like chickadees). That makes exposure a nightmare. However, I find the birds with black eyes and black feathers all around the eye, to be really tricky to not have looking dark, bleak and without depth. I like your suggestion of dodging the eye a little. I have not had a lot of success doing this in the past, but I will try! While I’m at it, I will tone down the sharpening. I’m not sure if this photo had my standard pass of USM or if I ran it twice?
Again, I really appreciate your input. This is how I learn!

GB,
Bruce

[annmpacheco]

Hi Bruce, this is a lovely portrait of the starling. It almost looks like porcupine quills to me, well almost! I would like to see the repost with less negative space and the eye work. TFS Ann

[Peter Farrell]

A nice image of this Starling. I agree with John about dodging the highlight in the eye.
Peter

[Bruce Miller]

Last two nights I have not had a chance to rework the picture. Maybe tomorrow night.

Thanks everyone for the comments.

Bruce

[Bruce Miller]

Ok I redid this photo, but I'm not sure the eye is any better??? I did change it to a vertical crop, which I think works. Let me know what you all think.