Sparrow hawk

This was the last time I saw him at the Martin colony, after taking a young bird which had fallen out. The next time in the hide there were only six young at three entrances and only 7 birds going in to feed younger chicks. The flying young from the earlier broods come back now and then and mill around the holes but then go off. Maybe they have dispersed.At my last 4 hour session the other day the hawk didn't come in at all. I shall carry on to see how the later broods fare. It has taken up much time- but I,ve plenty of that !
D200
125th @f8 500 ISO
JohnR

Another great addition to the sparrowhawk story John. Great eye too! Hope you get more shots from the later broods - I'm sure the hawk has got the hang of the process now!

Dave

Another fine shot John. I seem to recall the colours on your previous shot were a little more punchy - perhaps a little more contrast or saturation?

Thanks Dave
Ian
I know what it is- there were previous comments about the pics being too red due to the old red sandstone that the the site is on. So I took some red out of this shot and gave it a little more blue.
Glad you raised this,as it highlights the whole point about showing shots as they really were at the time instead of altering them to what people expect.
Thanks
John

Agree with Ian it lacks punch and looks some what drab. However a sterling capture .

It would be nice to see the original colours as it does look a little dull on my monitors.

Any better ?

Much

Yes much better now IMHO. An excellent shot.

Thanks ! I must admit I get problems with "punch" etc with this blasted new monitor and I have a slight colour blindness problem too( not joking !) So your comments are really helpful.
Really I just take the pics and hate the processing !! ( Could be win98 !!!! )
Cheers
johnR

LOL. Much improved.

Exactly !
Sorry Simon but its too blue for me. But if this is how you like it - fine !
Cheers
John

Simon's is the best of the three John. The other two are way out. I think you need to get someone who's not a bit more 'neutral' vision to check your monitor colours John.

Nick
Sorry I don't agree.
I think it would be within the forum guidelines to ask before posting someone elses image after being altered too.
After all it was just a Sparrow hawk shot for Gods sake.! The final adjusted one looks nothing like the original.So what do people want ? The best thing to do is to get them to come and take the pictures !
JohnR

Yes I must agree with Nick, your second image was much better than your first, but Simon's
interpretation is on a different level altogether IMHO. It reminds me of the 'old' days when somebody's darkroom skills could squeeze every ounce of detail out of a skilled photographer's negative.

Hi John

If it helps i have a couple of monitor calibrators which you could try and run on your display, and as I'm not a million miles from you (Droitwich) i wouldn't mind dropping off to you?????

regards

Kevin

Lets start again shall we
Its just a Sparrow Hawk picture within a sequence of life around a sand martin colony..
What are people trying to turn it into ?
This is begining to highlight the problems with this forum which was pointed out by a member recently.
Can you imagine me being keen to post anything else ??? I doubt it. maybe that/s what some want .
JohnR

Nick
I think you need to get someone who's not a bit more 'neutral' vision to check your monitor colours
Haven't got a clue what you mean.
John

John, when an image is posted on this forum, it is there for all to see and comment on as they sit fit, hopefully within the guidelines. Some viewers are highly skilled professionals who should know what they are talking about, others like myself are amateurs who may or may not.

Your images, quite rightly in most cases, draw a lot of comments mostly favourable ; and this being so increases your reputation on this forum accordingly IMHO.

You are not afraid, again quite rightly, to criticise other people's images in the interests of debate and 'edification' so don't take offence when people do the same, when the rare occasion arises, to yours. So carry on posting for the future pleasure of us all.

Hi John, really nice work and I think that the processing suggestions by the other members is of sufficient quality to bring out the best in your work. This is a critique forum after all and I think Simon was trying to help you and I'm sure posted a 'version' in the best possible, and well meaning of terms..

I have to agree with David that Simon's interpretation of your excellent work is the better of the three. However, you have to have a good shot to start with so I don't think anyone will fault that John, just something missing in the processing and possibly calibration issues.

Kind regards,

Brett

David
Iwill be sending a PEM
Cheers
John

John,

Apologies...

I think you need to get someone who's not a bit more 'neutral' vision to check your monitor colours

... is a typo - it should have read '... got more ...'. You have said yourself that you have 'have a slight colour blindness problem too( not joking !)' and that your monitor is new. So, your monitor is not currently displaying colours properly, and your colour blindness is compounding the issue. While it may appear to be OK to you, it certainly doesn't to those on the forum that have taken the time & trouble to set their systems up to show things as neutrally as possible.

Kevin has made you a very kind offer, I'd suggest you take him up on it sometime soon .

Another excellent capture John, a brilliant series. Have to agree with the comments so far that Simon's interpretation does seem to be the most accurate. However, this takes nothing away from your stunning work.

Simon

Very nice picture John. The last picture is the best for me.
Best wishes
Frederic

John
I have to agree with the other guys, in that Simon's post seems to give the truest colours.
I really don't see what you are getting so upset about anyway, surely you post images on here for honest critique, not just for praise?
Best wishes
Phil

If my monitor is so far out then why don't other pictures posted by other people look wrong to me./
or am i missing something ?
JohnR

Hello John. Although colours and shades have precise positions on the visible light spectrum AFAIAA , colour perception, from my experience, is very subjective depending on many factors. There are many interesting articles on the web. For example see

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_vision

and for amusement.

http://www.echalk.co.uk/amusements/OpticalIllusions/illusions.htm

Anyway look on the brightside. Your image of an organism feeding, has attracted 28 comments.
My image of an organism feeding , of which I am proud, has attracted 1 (thanks Robert )

Keep on posting those images.

Getting old also change your perception of colours
Frederic

Yep- getting old certainly makes a difference - I've looked at the last two for about five minutes and still they look virtually the same -it's either spec savers for me - or perhaps Kevin could drive a little further up North and calibrate my monitor too!!

Oh dear! I was the one who first questioned the colours and didn't expect this outcome. However, it again illustrates the benefit of the forum, which is both enjoyable and educational. I've looked again at all three posts and then compared them with John's previous posts of the hawk and chicks. I agree that the third post is the most eye-catching and I think it is because it is brighter. However, if you look at the feather colours in the hawk and prey, they do seem to be very blue - I don't see it on any of the previous posts. Not sure what colour they should be, but I wonder why nobody picked on on the fact that the previous posts were greyer than they should be?

Interesting stuff - John - keep 'em coming PLEASE!

Seems a lot of fuss over nothing - not much difference really except there does appear to be a more orangey appearance to 1 and 2. Don't think there should be any complaints about opinions - if I post here I will expect,or rather hope, someone will taken the trouble to give an opinion or criticism - otherwise what is the point of this forum

This post has brought out some interesting points but there is one overiding factor behind my reaction. How far do we go to make an image appear as we want it to or as we think it should look?
As I have said,many times already, the bird is surrounded by old red sanstone sand, in the quarry. It is extreemely bright, and so there is bound to be some cast in the picture . So what ? thats the way it is, and if the shot had been taken late in the evening it would have been even stronger.We don't alter sunsets do we ?
If my set up is so far out then why dont all the pictures posted on by other people look wrong on my monitor.?
I am certainly not posting pictures for praise all the time,as has been suggested, but every one I have sent the last two shots to have said that the difference is so small its not worth worrying about.
The other point which some may have missed is that some male S Hawks have a very orangey chest- this one certainly has.
But I am still confused as to how far we go down the road of making stuff look like weTHINK it should.
John Robinson

Interesting reading but still the 3rd image is by far the better colour processing-wise. I don't care what it looked like when you shot it, I want to see top class images on this forum. It's like me posting an image that i know the background to and it's special to me, but no one else knows that. They want to view a pleasing image regardless of conditions etc. Well, I do, perhaps I'm being too general.

Great shot but I have to agree the colours look way off as mentioned. I'd take the help offered and take less offence to comments. A bird I'd love to have a bash at. Keep them coming.

Sorry Graeme, but if you look at the two pale areas in the top right hand corner,they are completely wrong and oversaturated. Also the pale shoulder area is blown. I still say that they way we present our images is a kind trademark if you like, so there's absolutely no point in putting colours in that weren't there. That's just my opinion anyway.
I certainly don't take offence at comments, hence the second post. However I don't think its a good idea to alter someones picture and download it without at least asking, as the guidlines state.
I have oftten been tempted myself, but never done it. I do realise of course that Simon was being helpful and there's nothing wrong with that.
JohnR

three great shots, first is a little flat for me and the highlights in the third a little overdone, second seems just about right in my book, but then i guess it's just a matter of taste

Exactly Jack !
I have my prefs and you have yours. But who is to say what's the right one at the end of the day ?
No one. The right one is the one that suits each individual. Simple as that.
Cheers
John

Hi guys,

I agree the 3rd is oversaturated but the first 2 seem underexposed/too dark and thus aesthetically not as pleasing - think somewhere between 2 & 3 for me - like you say, one mans bread etc, but I think this is simply a case of the image not quite being there yet in the post processing. And can we please lose all the dramatics - watched enough of that not long ago

Mark