testing effects, wht do you think?

[sako223]

[madmack76]

cool love wildlife pics

[JackOfAllTrades]

First photo is much easier on the eyes.

I hate all this digitized customization. A photographer that takes the time to learn aperature, shutter speed, use of natural lighting, angles of the shot, and timing as they relate to subject to be emphasized in the photo will get much more respect from photographic peers.

 

-Steve

[.Forty_One]

I also prefer the first frame- lower one being seriously oversharpened to my eye. I have a background in photography, though- so may be tuned in to that sort of thing too much.
Did you do anything to the blurring of the wings? Somehow it looks unnaturally swirly to my eye.
Awesome shot by the way!

[sako223]

The second pic is unsharpened in processing. Full screen viewed at a distance it looks kinda cool. The wing motion is natural being faster than the shutter speed. If I had another chance and knew what was coming I would set the speed up a bit.

[tlbradford]

First photo is great.  I like the wings blurred a little, since you capture the motion in the photo.  Maybe a little faster to get a sharper phot would have been good too.  I'm not too crazy about the effect in the second pic.

[Tom Reichner]

This is a special shot! 

As the others have said, I greatly prefer the first image.  The 2nd image appears to have the opposite things done to it - opposite meaning the opposite of what photographers normally try to do to an image.  Normally, people try to brighten up the dark areas of an image, and to darken the highlights, in an effort to even out the exposure.  In the 2nd image, it appears that the contrast has been increased - the dark areas are very dark, and the light areas excessively bright.  Normally, it is good to keep contrast at a minimum.  As was stated in the first response, it is best if contrast can be minimized initially - in the camera. 

Sharpening is also generally something to stay away from, at least for the most part.  If you can selectively sharpen a specific portion of an image (such as a moose's nose and eye), it can be an improvement to the image.  But when sharpening is applied to an entire image, the result can be nasty at times.  When a mammal's hair/fur gets sharpened, the result is normally nasty.  When vegetation such as grass or leaves gets sharpened, the result is nasty.  And when dirt/earth/pebbles/gravel gets sharpened, the result is equally nasty.  I would only sharpen if you have a program that allows you to selectively sharpen just a portion of the image.  I don't have such a program myself, so I generally don't sharpen photos. 

Saturation is another thing to stay away from.   

The first version is a real winner!

[Pathfinder101]

Nice pic.  The second frame looks like the first 23 minutes of Saving Private Ryan...

[Jeffrey]

What a fabulous capture for sure.  First photo here too!