Rod Sorensen

Mark, I like it.  How did you take the IR image and add the color to the tree/sky?

This is two different images, correct?

What kind of dog is this?  I have a rescue dog that looks very similar and I have wondered what his mix is.

I love the picture with the contemplative/suspicious look.

Beautiful image that portrays both "the UP" and "fall in the midwest" marvelously.  Now I'll be looking for this spot until I find it.  :-)

I couldn't stop looking at this.

Just an amazing image.

As a computer assisted work of art - 6.5/7.

As a photograph - 3.5/7.

I just have a hard time getting excited about creating this kind of an image with the computer when the camera didn't show anything close to this. Gross overconversion in my opinion.

This almost looks like a Georgia O'Keefe painting. I don't usually get drawn in by this sort of image, but I did this time. Very nice.

I want to clarify a few things:

1. Vincent, the backgounds of the two pictures are NOT identical. They may be sequential pictures, but the backgrounds are NOT identical. And for what it's worth, I haven't made up my mind. I don't know anything about Shawn's expertise, but I'm hoping your judgment of him came after you saw and refuted his evidence, because the rest of us can't get his image to open.

2. I think Miguel's portfolio is awesome. I think he is an incredible photographer and artist. I believe it is more likely than not that this particular image has not been heavily manipulated.

3. As opposed to others, I would not be unhappy to be named POW and have to endure some scrutiny. Most of us that have raised questions about this image are not in any way trying to denigrate the photographer. What we are trying to do is ask the questions that are appropriate (perhaps even necessary and responsible) to ask in this era of digital technology. And if the image lives through that scrutiny and proves itself genuine, then both the image and photographer are further proven. I dare say that Miguel will be happier in the end if the discussion doesn't consist entirely of oohs and ahs for his image.

4. We don't have to agree with each other, but it would be nice to be civil and be careful when judging motives.

I'm not as sure as a lot of other people seem to be about the "second picture in the series". If it is the one at Miguel's website, it seems to me that it could have been taken at an entirely different time - at least many seconds later. I have spent a lot of time looking the the two pictures at his website and I would not have interpreted them to be sequential pictures. I can't open the image he posted here, so it may in fact be a different image that he is talking about.

Can someone answer one other question I have on the image?

Why are there snow flakes all over the left side of the picture including above the eagle and only a few low snow flakes kicked up by the right sided eagle. The physics of this don't make sense to me. I don't think the speed or height above the grouund of the left sided eagle could create this snow pattern and clearly the snow isn't coming down from above unless it's a very localized storm.

Part of me says WOW! and part of me says HUH? I don't have to explain the WOW feeling as many of you have expressed reasons for it. So I'll explain the HUH? feeling. Somehow when I look at the image I keep asking myself what's not right about it. First, it doesn't seem to me that the body languages and positions of the eagles quite match up. Secondly, it seems like the upper left eagle is further away than the foreground eagle. Admittedly, it's hard to tell when there is motion blur. Lastly, when I look at the edges of the upper left eagle it just looks odd - not like edge blur from motion. I am no expert on determining composites, but it certainly entered my mind also. So, WOW! or HUH? So far the WOWs have it.