TraceyG Loc: SW, Fl.

Went looking for Bald Eagles, came up empty...still a little early here for them. But found this guy.

Would love some comments on how to edit. The sky was flat, and I'm new to this editing stuff, so I would appreciate suggestions.

PS...I do NOT have photoshop. On a Mac, with Aperature, and Viveza 2.

Love the bug above his head in this one.

tilde531 Loc: Seaford Delaware

(This one might be good for Bob to help you with... I know he uses Viveza)

Great captures though!
I'm envious! :)

TraceyG Loc: SW, Fl.

Thanks Tilde!

Bob, where are you???

catman

I never photographed a bald eagle but where I live in Penns I saw my first one ever. I was a passenger in my car and in the distance I saw a huge bird. At first looking at the wing span I thought it was a turkey bussard. But had a white tail, and I said to my wife "what the hell is that?" Then it landed on one of those tall electric things that carry wires across country. It turned around and the head was bright white also. We both looked at each other and said "thats a bald eagel!" Thy are WONDERFUL LOOKING birds. I will always carry my little point and shoot camera now. I hope I see more in my life time. Catman

TraceyG Loc: SW, Fl.

Catman, they are incredible birds, we get quite a few of them here. I'm monitoring a few nests this year, beginning the 1st of Oct. I've seen two so far, but not at the nests we are watching.....just the first two "snow birds".

sinatraman Loc: Vero Beach Florida, Earth,alpha quaudrant

I hate to tell you tracy and tilde but bob quit this morning. He got sick of all the garbage lately and sent me a message. i tried to talk him out of it but no luck.

bigfootmm

These are great captures as records of what you saw, but as photographs they won't accomodate you if you want images to show off your skills. First, they are not sharp and must be tack sharp unless the motion in them is meaningful. Second, the environment is missing. A blank sky is not helpful to your composition unless the subject fills the frame and has impact and great light. The last pic of the bird and the dragonfly has some humor, but there is no story, no sharpness, flat light, and no environmental interest. Keep shooting, you are on the right track!

bigfootmm

an example (not my pic)

evandr Loc: Tooele, Utah

These are great captures but they do need a better background or at least a more vibrant sky. The good thing is that due to the solid and plain background it becomes an easy cut and past. It took me less than 5 minutes to do this picture; I chose the Kennecott copper mine because it lends well to the color and lighting conditions, and it was fun.

TraceyG Loc: SW, Fl.

Thanks for the imput guys, but if you re-read my original post, I'm aware of the poor background, i need assistance or advice on how to edit it, to at least deepen the sky (as in the pelican shot) or how to change the back ground.

I'm new to editing and dont have photoshop.

evandr Loc: Tooele, Utah

If you don't have photoshop do not waste your time or your money getting it. Photoshop has the greatest market share and resources to promote itself so people are overwhelmed into thinking you have to use it because nearly everybody else does and that is simply not true; they simply have the resources to perpetuate themselves so the majority of new users look to it not knowing there are better choices to be made. I have been doing professional graphics art work for many years and I have never used it. Photoshop's learning curve is extreamly steep and there are simply too many usless whistles and bells for any but the most hard core professional user who is already embedded in its use.

I use a program called XARA Pro 7 with a few specialty plugins (I have yet to find a photoshop plugin that will not work with XARA) and I have been using it for ten years now; before that I used any of a number of inexpensive and easy to learn and use programs, XARA costs less than 1/4 of what photoshop does.

In the picture I posted I was able to peel the bird off of it's background in about two minutes using a program called Fluid Mask and then position it over the mine, adjust all it's parameters end export it as you see it.

Because Xara is a vector based program it does many things easier, faster and in real time (meaning you can see changes as they are happening versus selecting a change and then rendering it before it appears) whereas Photoshop is pixel based. I do have a copy of Photoshop elements because there is one tool where a pixel based program has it over a vector based program and that tool is the clone too. Xara has a clone tool that I use most of the time but it works differently so once in a great while I opt to import my work into elements, use the clone tool and then export my work back to Xara.

evandr Loc: Tooele, Utah

If you simply want a more varied or vivid sky then consider these.

The direction of the lighting on this one is not quite right but you get the idea.

TraceyG Loc: SW, Fl.

WOW, Thanks so much, for all the info, and I love the one with the clouds! Is Xara a large program? I would imagine it would be. I have aperture, viveza 2, neat image, was debating on Redynamix, but Xara sounds like a good program. Is it fairly user friendly?

PapaJon Loc: Oregon Coast

I don't have a problem with removing the hawk from the light blue background, BUT, now the bird is lost. The background is way to busy and to close in the colors to the bird, in MHO.

PapaJon Loc: Oregon Coast

I also would be interested in knowing some more about Xara.

Also, I don't agree that your photos are not sharp. MHO.