gold finch wine

this is a photo i had posted earlier, i was told by a member to apply

some fill flash, this photo is better than the original. comments are

important. so please take the time to comment, it helps

It looks like this very nice photo with its repetition at least three times of yellows/golds, probably has improved with 'fill flash' (was that a Photoflash plug-in?). If so it worked very well; judging solely from this photo -- no original to compare. I'll want to remember that as a plug-in if it's available.

Without trying to rain on your parade, I suggest you look at the original of this in Photoshop for 'tilt' It appears to have a very slight counterclockwise tilt or rotation, which is easily viewed. Go to 'view' in Photoshop (if you have it) and turn on grids and look at them compared to the glass stem) and if it needs a little rotation simply rotate a little bit and then replace this upload (after trimming appropriately. (No need to upload a third time). (write me if you need advice on how to replace an uploaded image.)

For what it's worth (FWIW)

I hope this helps. (Little things like tilt or out of rotation can be tough to put a finger on, but can detract a lot.)

With best wishes.

John (Crosley)

Joe,

I really like this picture -- great idea.

I have also looked at the original, and I have to say I think I like the original better. I didn't take the suggestion to add fill flash to mean adding it through digital manipulation. I think it was a comment on how the photo could have been improved if you could re-shoot it. The suggestion was to add some sheen to the feathers and a catchlight to the eye.

I would just leave the original as it was. In that shot, you got some nice colors on the bird and the sparkles of the crystal snap. By lightening the shadows, the unfortunate result was that some of the saturation was sacrificed, so the result looks a bit washed out.

The shot is very nicely thought-out and composed. Even though the bird (in the original) may look a bid dark to some, it is a memorable shot anyway, so my vote is to stick with the original.

Cheers,

Chuck