And why do the catch lights in her eye look… unusual?
1/1000, f/7.1, ISO 400, Canon 7D, Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS USM + EF 1.4 III Extender, not baited, set up or called in
This is an older photo of a female American Kestrel on a favorite kestrel perch at Farmington Bay WMA. She had been scratching her face but when I took the shot I caught her looking down her nose at me sideways as if I was a suspicious looking character (which may be a distinct possibility). The photo amuses me but I’ve never posted it before, probably because the double catch light in her eye has a strange look about it that I think is a little distracting. I find myself pondering her catch lights rather than enjoying other things about the photo.
In certain situations double catch lights aren’t unusual. For example a bird on or in the water will often have two (or more) of them – one a direct reflection of the sun behind the photographer and the other a reflection of a reflection of the sun off of the water directly in front of the bird. But this double catchlight seems unusual to me for two reasons:
- There was no water or any other reflective surface that I’m aware of between me and the kestrel. This sign post is on the edge of a dirt/gravel parking lot with no water anywhere nearby. So what caused the second catch light?
- When there are two catchlights in the eye of a bird the brightest most dominant one, which is the direct reflection of the sun, should be the one on top. Each time light from the sun is reflected it loses some of its intensity so the least dominant catch light should be the one on bottom. But here the most dominant catch light by far is the bottom one. Why?
I can only speculate about the answer to both questions. The second catchlight may be a reflection of the sun off of one of the reflective surfaces of my pickup that I was shooting from – perhaps my chrome bumper or a shiny painted surface. Believe it or not my usually dirty pickup does occasionally have shiny surfaces.
But why is the brightest, most dominant catch light the one on bottom? My only guess is that the curved surfaces of my pickup disperse the sun’s reflection over a larger area in the bird’s eye and make it appear larger and more dominant.
To many of my readers all this may seem like much ado about nothing but to photographers catch lights are nearly always essential elements of a quality bird photograph so I like to understand everything I can about them..
Over the years I’ve deleted thousands of otherwise excellent photos because they lack light in the eye – catch lights are often that important.
Ron
I sure would rather see the photo posted than not just because of the catch light.
In some cases I’d agree, Mary. But not very many…
Probably from your truck. I had a portrait of a bison and it had strange catch lights when I enlarged the eye the 3 extra catch lights were all from my car. mostly from the driver side windows, one from the hood.
That could very well be the source, April.
What a great pose and a great shot! I’ve got nothing on the double catch light, though once noticed, it does grab the eye when I’d rather focus on those cute little talons sticking out from behind her feathered chest — but still, what a great shot! Call that a double compliment, if you will. 😬
I’ll take it as a double compliment. Thanks, Chris.
Yet another beauty. Rather than looking at you as the suspicious creature you undoubtedly are perhaps she is saying ‘let him work THIS one out’. And snickering quietly to herself.
Knowing kestrels. snickering wouldn’t surprise me, EC… 🙂
This is a fascinating puzzle! A reflection off a convex surface (e.g. your bumper) would be fainter than a reflection from a flat surface, precisely because the light would have been spread out more, so less light would have reached the bird’s eye. Was the sun low enough in the sky that there could have been a mirage (behind you, where the sun was, not between you and the bird)? The catch lights are very nearly aligned vertically, which implies a horizontal reflecting surface, such as a mirage.
Phil, the sun would have been fairly low behind me but that direction is east where there are nearby mountains. I don’t think the reflection could have been off the mountains…
First the obvious: Cutest damn Kestrel photo I’ve ever seen (although I think there are some contenders from your previous posts).
Second: this is very far-fetched and way above my ornithological knowledge, but, do Kestrels have a tapetum lucidum? And could the double reflections be from this as well as the cornea?
Thank you, Lyle.
I’m not sure if kestrels have a tapetum lucidum but if I remember its function correctly it reflects light back through the retina but not back to the outside of the eye so it shouldn’t be responsible for a double catch light. I don’t think…
While her pose is delightful and I wonder what’s she’s thinking, I too find the double dots of lights a bit off-putting. Why is the eye so easily drawn to the “flaw”? And then the mind can’t let it go? Regardless, this little kestrel has enough character to make the photo noteworthy!
PS: Even faces made of mosaic have eyes with catch lights!
“Why is the eye so easily drawn to the “flaw”?”
Good question, Jamila. I think the presence of a catch light is something we often don’t notice consciously. But when it’s missing we notice its absence much more easily.
And you’re right about mosaics, at least many of them.
Great photo as usual, Ron. I don’t know how you consistently get great photos, but I am very happy you do. On thelight side, I think my wife looks at me that way.
My wife used to look at me that way too, Brian. She’s now my ex-wife. 🙂
Aren’t conundrums fun? Yes, they’re sometimes maddening, but residing in the ‘why?’ and ‘what’s going on there?’ makes the day a good time for me! I can play in my bookshelves and maybe then online, searching for an answer when sometimes there just is no answer. We humans haven’t figured that question out yet! 😉 And when you surmise a possible answer, that often brings up a dozen more questions! I LOVE that about having an inquisitive mind!
And yes, you ARE a “suspicious-looking character!” You’re human. You’re funny-looking/ugly and your mother dressed you funny! Look at yourself! You don’t have any feathers. You can’t fly/no wings. You’re blind as a bat and what are those sorry excuses for talons? To top it off, what’s that ugly thing coming out of your face (camera/lens)? Seriously? Of course she’s looking at you sideways! LOL!!
“You’re funny-looking/ugly and your mother dressed you funny”
Ha, I still dress funny Laura. As evidenced by my recently posted photo of my feet in sandals and white, yes white, socks.
Really enjoyed your comment. Enough so that I read it twice.
Laura for the win!
What’s that old cliche? Your guess is as good as mine? I think she is saying – lets see if I can position my head just right to get a double catch light for this guy and see if he catches it.
I got up very late for me at 6:55 and am just getting my firs sip of coffee so I don’t think I would have even noticed a double catch eye.
Beautiful Kestrel photo though.
Everett, if that’s what she was trying to do she succeeded.
I slept in this morning too – until 4:20. Felt good.
What a beauty! A shy coquet just barely waving…I love the look. 😍 Those little spots of light are so important. It took me a while to figure that out when ai started this hobby. I had some terrific photos of hawks hovering but there was something lacking…that ‘it factor’ if I can call it that. Now I call the ‘zombie or flying dead’ effect. No catch light…no spark of life. That’s probably a bit sharp but what a difference that tiny dot makes. I know there are times where it is lacking for valid reasons and the photo is special but it’s in a different category for me.
“No catch light…no spark of life”
Exactly, Kathy. I think your entire comment is well said.
If birds have light colored eyes I don’t think light in the eye is so important but most birds have dark eyes that appear lifeless without catch lights.
I suppose you would have noticed if the lady had a damaged cornea that could have caused the double light.
Probably, George. I was pretty close to her.
Cute! I do notice “catch lights”, but not to the extent you, and probably many others, do. 😀
Judy, I often don’t particularly notice their presence but I sure as hell notice their absence.
Charming. Reminds me of the poses of Burrowing Owls in your photographs.
Thank you, David.