This is far from a typical image from me and to be honest I almost deleted it before I looked at it more carefully. There are two things about it that are similar to photos that generally have very little appeal for me:
- the bird is smaller in the frame than I usually prefer
- typically when I see a “nature photo” that is monotone or black and white overall but the subject (or part of the subject) is brightly colored that photo has been manipulated during processing to artificially produce the effect – for example, a photo of an insect crawling up a stem where the insect is brightly colored but the rest of the naturally green setting has been altered to black and white or sepia. Photo art is photo art but it isn’t my bag…
1/5000, f/6.3, ISO 640, Canon 7D Mark II, Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS II USM + EF 1.4 III Extender, not baited, set up or called in
This Short-eared Owl was perched in a large patch of completely dead sagebrush yesterday morning. It wasn’t very close to me but I trained my lens on it in hopes it would take off to fill more of my frame with its wings. It never did so I took a few shots and then left the area figuring I’d delete the photos when I got home. I never “chimp” in the field and this was an example of one of the many reasons I don’t do it (chimping is deleting photos “in camera”).
Once I arrived home and worked up the image on the big screen I was very surprised by how much I liked it even though it’s “different”. The overall monotone appeals to me, the setting is natural though not classically beautiful, I like the looped perch and the background bokeh, the bird is well isolated from the sagebrush and both of the owl’s “short ears” are erected which this species doesn’t often do.
And to top it all off those beautiful yellow eyes really pop against the sea of relatively colorless dead sagebrush, even with the owl this small in the frame.
All that with no artificial manipulation of the photo. All I did during processing was crop, resize, sharpen, make a minor exposure adjustment and add my copyright watermark – there were no color or tonal adjustments made.
I realize that the image is unlikely to have universal appeal and that’s fine. But it works for me.
Ron
Fabulous photo!
I like this one a lot. It’s the kind of image I get through my binoculars that stays in my head forever.
I think it is great as is too.
Stunning! It’s amazing how much her eyes capture you!
I think so too, Mary Ann. Thanks.
So glad you didn’t delete this photo…I think it’s great!…Thank you..
Thank you, Steve.
It appeals to me😃
🙂
Muted, mostly monochromatic magic.
Thanks, EC.
I love those alliterated owls!
EC is full of all kinds of little word tricks…
I like it, glad you kept it. I shows the harshness of the environment, a healthy looking survivor on dead sage.
It was fun to see you and Mia yesterday morning. Did you find this shorty in the area where all the sage is dead across from the old farmhouse? I have always wondered why the one side of the road is lush and green and on the other side of the road all the sage is dead. I went on further then your travels yesterday, I saw a lamb being born, and 2 adult chukar with 23 young. Do you think they were all their offspring or do they have babysitters like Canada geese?
April, yes this owl was in that huge patch of dead sagebrush. I suspect it has been sprayed. This is the bird we were on when you first came over the hilltop by that old corral I mentioned to you (where I cut Galileo out of the barbed wire).
I’m unaware of chukars using “babysitters” and BNA says that cooperative breeding in the species is “unknown”. 23 in a clutch seems slightly large for a single female bird (though there can be as many as 21 based on what I found) so I suspect they belonged to both the birds you mentioned and they were just all together. Both of them must have been females because males don’t help to care for the chicks.
We enjoyed seeing and talking to you very much. We always do!
I like it VERY MUCH. What I noticed right away is that the background “bokeh”., as you call it, fell into a whorl that surrounded and framed the owl’s body. Its softness further points up
the beautiful focus on the subject…… a definite contributor to the strength of this very classic image !
Interesting observation about the background, Kris. Thank you.
I LOVE this image…the monochromatic setting, silvery, spikey sage, the arched perch and the pop out bird. With its warm, browns and golden eyes…the composition itself is so pleasing…a real winner!!! Even the sof t, blended colors in the background…nice, nice, nice! (Not sure you csn be trusted with culling if this one almost got cut..trusting you with this has always been iffy anyway!)
I’m always interested in your artistic take with images like this one, Patty. Thanks for providing it.
The owl looks like it knew you were there and was trying to strike the most attractive pose for you that it could. This is definitely a fashion model (mowldel? 😜) pose with the side view, the turn of the head, one leg slightly forward, erect ear tufts, and those eyes! Wow! Also, with such a muted surround, all those lovely browns and creams in the feathers become a focal point.
I agree, Marty – the pose of the bird adds a lot to the image.
This image works very well for me. The basic coloration reminds me of a thunderstorm, the kind of light you get before or after such a storm. Plus, I have long been a fan of well-done monochrome. The sharpness of the owl, compared with the softness of everything else is what make him pop for me. It’s a gorgeous photo and I am very glad you didn’t delete it.
Susan, it was the influence of one of my early mentors, Richard Ditch, that helped me to appreciate monotone images. Thanks, Richard.
I like it. Well composed, good balance, nice background and those luminous eyes in an otherwise drab scene. There are various opinions of a successful bird photography. Some take the position that pictures of eyeballs might be best and others might like the “environmental” shot. I like eyeballs, but more lately I like to include the environment of the subject and that calls for more consideration of composition. I’m glad you decided to make it a keeper. Thanks again for the posts Ron. Have a good one!
Frank, over the years I’ve moved a fair amount from “eyeballs” to the environment side of the continuum but for me an image has to be pretty special for the bird to be very small in the frame.
So glad you don’t delete in the field! I love this one! I only see Shorties in the winter, usually at dusk, and this photo, with the dead sagebrush, captures the way I see them- even though it was taken on a June morning. Love it!
Agreed, it sure doesn’t look like an early summer morning.
Beautiful pose, great shot.
Thanks, Dick.
I liked seeing the ear tufts up. And, yes, those eyes!
Me too. Getting both tufts up at the same time doesn’t happen all that often, Arwen.
Gorgeous! I love the composition, the tonal effects and the dead sage brush which adds to the dignified drama of the owl. The owl appears to be lit from within.
Thanks for mentioning the composition, Robert. I dinked around with it for quite a while before making my final choice.
Lovely, and I learn so much when you share your reasons for doing things your way.
If you might be willing to look at a photo of a young SEOW from that same area, I would value your opinion. There is something going on with the young owl’s eye and I wondered if you had seen anything like it before?
Sure, Suzanne. I’ve sent you my email address.
It WORKS! 🙂 🙂 🙂 Just enough contrast for the owl to show well, the looped branch it’s perched on and “those eyes”! 🙂 Glad you kept it!
It was close, Judy – it almost died a quick death in my delete bin. Thanks.
I don’t know about you…almost deleted it???
What can I say…
Well, I say, “Vive la différence!” Definitely a keeper in my book.
Thank you, Robyn.
Oh my! That is beautiful! Those two ears…I usually only get one. This photo would have shouted ‘keeper’ to me immediately. Everything melds together perfectly. 😍 I guess looking at it I never would have surmised is was adjusted because I find this ‘monotone’ look so appealing but I know exactly what you mean. I have so much to learn about post-processing that I pretty much avoid the issue…the only things I do is basically what you did with this, a few minor adjustments. I don’t like the ‘bluer than blue’ sky or photo-shopped perfection but then it’s only my opinion.
“This photo would have shouted ‘keeper’ to me immediately”
Kathy, I’ll be the first to admit that sometimes I’m pretty dense. 🙂
And I’m with you, “photo-shopped perfection” leaves me cold. Thank you.
Amen!’n