Very central and large in the frame for my tastes and I'm not sure if the small branches really add to the overall aspect of the image. The lower twig with the leaves is not attached to the main perch in this frame and should be removed IMO. Nice colour and detail on the bird however so it makes for a good study with good use of DOF. There appears to be 'cloning relics' just behind the left foot of the bird or is that something else..?
Re the cloning, that is just me being sloppy, I normally check what I’ve done, and obviously this got through the net. I did a reasonable amount of work it this area, as it wasn’t just cloning out a “twig”, but also reducing the main branch, thickness wise.
Re size, that’s personal, and with this image easily changed to whatever rocks your boat.
Re the greenery bottom right, considered removing it, but decided against it for the following reasons:
1. I thought that the overall image would then become rather “bland”, to the eye.
2. With its inclusion it gives a “stop” to the image.
3. By leaving it in, I provide some more N.H. info. principally when the image was taken, season wise.
Don’t like commenting on my images once I’ve posted them as it can easily sound like your trying to defend the indefensible, but you made some good points here which I thought merited explanation. Thank you.
I don't mind this one being big in the frame - probably because I took a few frame-fillers myself at the weekend .I take the point about the lack of connection between the twig and branch, but I agree that the foliage adds context so would leave it.
I've had a good look at this and have put it down to the perch being very uninspiring. I know that's what birds land on, but there are better ones. I wouldn't clone anything out here, just wait for a better perch. Technically all looks good.
It's fine to reply after posting. It's called discussion and there is a big difference discussing the image than there is defending it. I'm sure you'll know when you're defending the undefendable........
Agree the perch is very uninspiring and is perhaps something you have in your control, I don't know whether this is at a set up or is an opportunist image. nits re the artifacts mentioned.
For me the composition is not working here as the goreous bird needs to be higher in the frame IMHO that might have kept the connection between the greenery and the perch too...
I too would like to see a bit more at the bottom of the image, the twig would then be attached to the branch, and the bird put more in touch with its surroundings. I wouldn't want to see it cropped any tighter, the shot looks like some of my winter shots, the inclusion of the twig shows the season to be otherwise.
I agree with your second set of comments about providing more N.H info, after all a picture is supposed to be worth a thousand words.
I appreciate your comment and all the others, but there was one suggestion which II was expecting, as it is all about post exposure and manipulation.
Create a layer and then copy the small nodule on the top left of the perch. Now transpose this to the bottom right of the frame, attach to it, the sprig with the leaves on it, not forgetting to paint out the other nodule, which would be semi opposite, and give the game away if left.
Discussion
11 replies200-400 @ 290, 1/20 sec @ f5, tripod mounted, cable release used. Full Frame, two twigs growing out of the bird, cloned out.
Brett
Edwin Kats
Re the cloning, that is just me being sloppy, I normally check what I’ve done, and obviously this got through the net. I did a reasonable amount of work it this area, as it wasn’t just cloning out a “twig”, but also reducing the main branch, thickness wise.
Re size, that’s personal, and with this image easily changed to whatever rocks your boat.
Re the greenery bottom right, considered removing it, but decided against it for the following reasons:
1. I thought that the overall image would then become rather “bland”, to the eye.
2. With its inclusion it gives a “stop” to the image.
3. By leaving it in, I provide some more N.H. info. principally when the image was taken, season wise.
Don’t like commenting on my images once I’ve posted them as it can easily sound like your trying to defend the indefensible, but you made some good points here which I thought merited explanation. Thank you.
It's fine to reply after posting. It's called discussion and there is a big difference discussing the image than there is defending it. I'm sure you'll know when you're defending the undefendable........
Perhaps just a tad low in the frame, I also agree with Graeme about the perch not being great. Nice detail and DoF though!
Lewis.
For me the composition is not working here as the goreous bird needs to be higher in the frame IMHO that might have kept the connection between the greenery and the perch too...
I agree with your second set of comments about providing more N.H info, after all a picture is supposed to be worth a thousand words.
I appreciate your comment and all the others, but there was one suggestion which II was expecting, as it is all about post exposure and manipulation.
Create a layer and then copy the small nodule on the top left of the perch. Now transpose this to the bottom right of the frame, attach to it, the sprig with the leaves on it, not forgetting to paint out the other nodule, which would be semi opposite, and give the game away if left.
But Hey, what do I know.
Lee