Merlin on Lichen

[Richard Stern]

I cropped it fairly wide as I wanted some of the lichen on the rocks to be included. Taken on a stormy day on Brier Island, NS recently.

D7000, 300 F/4 AF-S + 1.7TC, resting on open car window. 1/320, f/7.1, +1/3 EV, ISO auto (1600).

Cropped, nr, selective usm.

Thanks for looking,

Richard

[Satish Ranadive]

Wonderful image.Loved the head turn and expression in birds eye.Beautiful color-scheme.

[Jonathan Ashton]

Pleasing image nice composition and colours and a lovely pose, but perhaps a little short on detail - perhaps the NR a little heavy or was it a large crop?

[Stu Bowie]

Richard, great look-back pose, and love the large eyes these guys have. The lichen shows up very well, and comp wise, I feel you could still move the merlin over to the left, and show off enough lichen.

[Ofer Levy]

Nice pose and perch. IQ is not great - I guess it is a serious crop?

[Daniel Cadieux]

Great bird and perch. I agree the IQ is not up to par here and it does look like a large crop. Lovely colours though between the lichen and the blueish BG. I'd recrop with the subject closer to the left.

[Cheryl Arena Molennor]

Gorgeous shot with a really neat perch. I wish the bright white area was not there. Nice head turn

[Tony Whitehead]

I like the colour palette in this image with the complementing colours in plumage and BG and skin and lichen.

[Arthur Morris]

Ditto Tony and agree with the poor image quality and the smooth looking feathers. Pease, please, pretty please post the uncropped original capture.

[Richard Stern]

Artie - Here's the original Raw file, converted to Jpeg in LR3, downsized to 1024 wide, saved for web at 190k for posting in BPN, nothing else done. If you really want, I could pm you the actual raw file.

Richard

[Juan Carlos Vindas]

Image quality has been mentioned. But I am also glad you shared it with us. Lovely bird, I do like the inclusion of lichen too. Bird photography=never enough reach!

[Arthur Morris]

Artie - Here's the original Raw file, converted to Jpeg in LR3, downsized to 1024 wide, saved for web at 190k for posting in BPN, nothing else done. If you really want, I could pm you the actual raw file. Richard

Thanks Richard. After seeing the original, it looks like you used some sort of filter or effect on the bird.... IAC, your compositional choice was mis-guided. This image is about the lichens. The rule of thirds works perfectly here and allows you to show off the wonderful habitat.....

As Ofer would say, WDYT?

[Richard Stern]

Hi,

In the original post, the only effect I used on the bird was Noise Ninja. Overall, WDYT? -- Yours is much better, of course! Wish I'd thought of that crop myself.

Thanks for all the crits. Maybe I'm gradually getting somewhere!

Richard

[Ofer Levy]

Hi Richard, since this is a critique forum and not a master class - I will add my 2 cents in here...
I MUCH prefer the composition in your original post over Artie's repost. If anything I would consider moving the bird a bit more to the left and down but the bird's size in the frame is just right and there is more than enough lichen for my taste.
In Artie's repost the bird is way too small in the frame, placed too much to the left and the right side is not that interesting to justify so much of the rock and lichen.
Unfortunately you can't crop that much and still maintain a decent IQ but that's a different story...

[Arthur Morris]

Hi, In the original post, the only effect I used on the bird was Noise Ninja. Overall, WDYT? -- Yours is much better, of course! Wish I'd thought of that crop myself. Thanks for all the crits. Maybe I'm gradually getting somewhere! Richard

The bird in the original post looks like a polished carving. This is generally not a good look for a photograph.

[Arthur Morris]

Hi Richard, since this is a critique forum and not a master class - I will add my 2 cents in here...
I MUCH prefer the composition in your original post over Artie's repost. If anything I would consider moving the bird a bit more to the left and down but the bird's size in the frame is just right and there is more than enough lichen for my taste.
In Artie's repost the bird is way too small in the frame, placed too much to the left and the right side is not that interesting to justify so much of the rock and lichen.
Unfortunately you can't crop that much and still maintain a decent IQ but that's a different story...

In the original composition the bird is too centered and the nicest/brightest yellow lichens (to the right and below) are excluded. I far prefer the composition in Pane 12 to the original composition. Ofer, you might wish to check out some of the image designs in some Robert Bateman paintings .

[Ofer Levy]

In the original composition the bird is too centered and the nicest/brightest yellow lichens (to the right and below) are excluded. I far prefer the composition in Pane 12 to the original composition. Ofer, you might wish to check out some of the image designs in some Robert Bateman paintings .

Hi Artie, this is how I would have liked to see the composition - just moved the bird to the left and slightly down. Pardon my ignorance but I have no idea who Robert Bateman is and I am not particularly interested to see his image design....
It would be interesting to hear what other think although I guess many would prefer to stay out of trouble as usual....

[Ben_Sadd]

I would go for something like this. Unfortunately, the crop is just too great to hold good detail, but i think you original post suffers from NR on the bird.

[Arthur Morris]

I would go for something like this. Unfortunately, the crop is just too great to hold good detail, but i think you original post suffers from NR on the bird.

Ben, Thanks for the repost. Not sure which image you started with but you wrecked the IQ .

[Arthur Morris]

Pardon my ignorance but I have no idea who Robert Bateman is and I am not particularly interested to see his image design....

Hi Ofer. Whatever.

[Ben_Sadd]

Ben, Thanks for the repost. Not sure which image you started with but you wrecked the IQ .

What me?

I must admit that I wasn't really thinking IQ with the repost.

[Arthur Morris]

What me? I must admit that I wasn't really thinking IQ with the repost.

If you started with the original image that was posted in Pane 10 and cropped it without enlarging IQ should have been fine.....

As for your crop/composition, there is too much room on the left and too much water for me .

[Arthur Morris]

Tanks Peter. I still prefer the upper left thirds spot for the bird . It has been around for centuries and in this case it works perfectly for me.

[Danny J Brown]

Pane #12 is the only one in this thread that works. It is pleasing to the eye, the interesting rock/lichens habitat is included, and you don't see all the noise in the previously heavily cropped bird. Basic photography here -- gotta give the guruji a break once in awhile even though it's sporting to challenge him.

DB

[Ofer Levy]

Pane #12 is the only one in this thread that works. It is pleasing to the eye, the interesting rock/lichens habitat is included, and you don't see all the noise in the previously heavily cropped bird. Basic photography here -- gotta give the guruji a break once in awhile even though it's sporting to challenge him.

DB

Hi Danny, firstly, this discussion is about composition only and not about image quality. Secondly, your attitude that you "gotta give the guruji a break once in awhile even though it's sporting to challenge him" is totally disrespectful and doesn't belong to a critique forum. There are no gurujis in here and if you take a look at my website you will realise I don't have to challenge Artie as a sport. Artie has learnt a thing or two by reading my comments the same way that I have learnt some very good ideas from him. This is the essense of a critique forum - we learn from each other. If you tend to bow to a "guru" you will not improve your photography mate...

[Arthur Morris]

Ofer, You stated above, "Let's see what others have to say." Then when Danny agrees with me you do not like it.... Pretty funny.

I have said the following to you before, and though two months ago you stated that you would become one of my biggest supporters because you realized how hard I work to help others improve, your behavior here has not changed much: "Ofer. You are a great photographer. I do not understand why you feel the need to post a negative comment to every one of my images that you post to while commenting "Great shot" to images with several serious flaws posted by others. I do not understand what you get by disagreeing with every thing that I say, by dismissing every suggestion that I make as pout of hand. I do not understand your need to have folks believe that you know much more about photography than I could ever hope to know. And lastly I wonder why you give me pretty much zero respect. "

As I suggested before perhaps you feel that by constantly taking pot shots at me that you are elevating yourself as a photographer. Or perhaps you are jealous of my great successes (financial and otherwise) and the respect that I have earned over the past 28 years, or the contest honors that I have reaped. I don't know. But you should know that I have received e-mails from several folks in the last week or two who have asked, "What's up with Ofer? What does he get out of trashing you at every possible opportunity?

I do appreciate that your most recent artie-put downs have for the most part maintained a civil tone.

[Danny J Brown]

Ofer: Regarding your statement, "There are no gurujis in here and if you take a look at my website you will realise I don't have to challenge Artie as a sport."

One of the definitions of "Guru" in any dictionary is "A leader in one's field." I think that describes Artie pretty well so if the shoe fits.........! Also, similar to your feelings about Bateman in Pane #17, I'm not particularly interested in looking at your website.