[Zig]

I've posted the "original" colour version elsewhere but wondered whether this type of shot would work in mono...what does the team think?
I was aware that "removing" colour would allow concentration on textures...and whereas these do come through on a large print-size, I'm still unsure as to whether a mono is valid unless the critter is doing something dramatic.
I went for something like a cyan filter, given the amount of reds/russets that would darken nicely...red filtration was blowing the reds to over-white; I decided to try for a split-toned feel to attempt to richen the textures.
Does mono "work" here...or is the suggestion of movement so slight that it really does need colour(as the shot itself might not be all that strong)?
What do you think? And even, are there mono alternatives that might work better, do you think? Please be as frank as you wish.

[matthew]

I know a few hard-core LFB ('Little F-something Bird') photographers who would be completely driven out of their skulls by this. The neutralization of the colours removes a lot of the bird-ness of the image, and the heavy conversion removes the environment. Those things alone should make me like it, but it's not quite working for me just the same. It is striking, and my laptop screen isn't the best, so I'll have a think and take a look at it on a better monitor tomorrow.

[Irma]

Hi Zig,
I personally like very BW in nature, actually I have a Set in Flickr where you can see my work about this theme.

I think your post processing doesn't match the idea the Robin delivers in general. Those are beautiful birds we related as friendly, sweet little things... and the conversion we have here would go better on a bigger and threatening bird... High key treatment with less contrast I would recommend for this one.

Lovely picture btw...

[Toad]

I think Irma has hit the nail on the head with her discussion of the processing not quite matching the idea of a small bird. The treatment is striking, however, and I would love to see it on a crow, vulture, or eagle.

[Wedding Shooter]

Sorry Zig - not working for me here.

[Zig]

Thanks all yous guys, really appreciate that.
Yes, I was aware there was a sort of "subtracting" going on rather than an addition, and I couldn't see why, but: Irma and Toad: excellent: You've put it into words for me and I quite agree, so thank you for troubleshooting. High-key and lo-contrast, of course, would have got me into the zone, matching lightness and delicacy of treatment with the subject..I entirely concur with "dramatic" lighting/pp as being more suitable for, say, a swan beating its wings or a bird of prey. Yep, I got it and you're spot on. Given that the shot was very much a grab, I'm pleased with the legs it has in colour, and I may well do a high-key colour version before I lose interest.

[matthew]

I think I might prefer this if the bird was a tad lighter, and if the background was consistently dark. The lighter green halo works well in the color version, but here I feel like the tones are breaking up. I would be tempted to drop the background out completely, just to see what happens, but I think a better option might be to move the brighter bits around to keep a mottled background. All of this, of course, depends on whether or not you think it's worth pursuing, but I (almost) always think that a strikingly different image can't really be evaluated without a series to go along with it.

[nia]

WOW! I loved it, so impressive... Thank you dear Zig,

with my love,
nia