The Better Ibis?

[Mad Aussie]

Curious to know what people think of this treatment.

This is the original shot ... a White Ibis gliding in for a landing in a tree. Being close to the trees and across the pond from me created a deep depth of field.




To isolate the Ibis I applied some post processing. Is this version better than the original?

[Barefoot]

The short answer?

Yep.

[AntZ]

An improvement for sure. I do this quite a bit, but this has just made me think if in doubt with aperture go smaller, as it is easier to blur than it is to add sharpness.

Nice shot too.

[MoinMoin]

Hmmm - the more blurred background looks better. But the white is a touch too shining (maybe just in my eyes!).

[edbayani11]

i prefer the original shot if the dark area behind the head and beak were lightened a litle bit to give more contrast between the head and background.
maybe darken the very light branches a little bit.

[Rinkdaddy]

I prefer the second shot as it makes the detail of the Ibis stand out better and the background is more pleasing to the eye.

[Marko]

I actually like the first shot better but I'd like to see the branches behind the ibis burned in more.
marko

[Ben H]

I see what you were trying to do, and done well I would prefer the PP'd version, as the bird would stand out more.

However, it's been fairly badly done, and I can obviously see the cutout, and therefore it's quite jarring and looks obviously fake. The outline of the bird has a white glow where the bird selection has been feathered and it stands out straight away.

So I'd say - plus one star for the idea (it's one I use quite a bit) but minus one star for the execution, and so in this case the original, the more natural shot, is the only one I could choose.

I know it's not the crit forum, but you did ask which we preferred, and I gave you the reasons why...

(I'd probably also darken those trees down, as they clash quite a bit with the bird in terms of brightness...)

[Michaelaw]

That's one tricky shot MA and I think you did as good as the circumstances allowed. White bird with a black head is a tough shot. I like the first one best because everything has a richer tone. The second one seems to be compromised by trying to bring the bird out more. This after viewing repeatedly for as long as you've had it up

PS...I'm assuming that youwere in fact trying to bring the birds head and neck out more....If so, I worked on your shot and found the dodge tool in PS really did the trick on this one

[Mad Aussie]

However, it's been fairly badly done, and I can obviously see the cutout, and therefore it's quite jarring and looks obviously fake. The outline of the bird has a white glow where the bird selection has been feathered and it stands out straight away.

Actually Ben that's not right. I didn't cut it out at all. If you look closely at the 1st shot (straight out of camera) you can see that white glow you talk about before I PP'ed the image. Not sure what that is actually. Hadn't even noticed it until you mentioned it. Some sort chromatic aberration perhaps?

So unless there's another reason to say it was badly done ... take that back or I'm getting my 10 day old mullet out