Stupid branch...

[mjs1973]

Took this close up of the same bald eagle from this thread this morning. I'm really happy with the sharpness and detail I captured, but I hate the OOF branch. Does the branch bother you?

[paulnj]

Distracting , but I am not a fan of removing branches

[PWhite214]

The photo looks great to me. Just one more part of a natural setting.

Phil

[billy320]

Clone it out (if you have photoshop) I do it all the time, I clone out feeders alot

i see it's copy righted can I take a shot at cloneing out the branch ???

[Loupey]

Sure it would nice if the branch wasn't there; but as it is, it's still a great shot (branch adds depth).

I certainly wouldn't remove it. It's a pet peeve of mine - I only clone out dust spots.

[mjs1973]

Thanks for the feedback everyone. I did try a quick clone job earlier but didn't take the time to do a good job so I left the branch.

Mahopac, go for it.

[Frog]

I think the branch gives depth and perception.
Could be sharper though.

[billy320]

[Eric D]

Sure it would nice if the branch wasn't there; but as it is, it's still a great shot (branch adds depth).

I certainly wouldn't remove it. It's a pet peeve of mine - I only clone out dust spots.

I am with Loupey!! I never clone anything...I prefer the shot as captured! What would we have done in the days before digital?

[billy320]

I only do it when there is something in the shot that is annoying.

[mjs1973]

I'm not against cloning things out but if they avoidable at the time of capture, I feel it is my job to get the composition right in the field to exclude those things. I do have some other shots of this bird without the branch, but this was the sharpest one.

On a side note, I think this would be a good image to test out the new content aware fill function of Photoshop CS5.