Cloning Nightmare

Here was the original straight out of the camera

Wow, that's some cloning job. I saw the small and opened the large and couldn't see any obvious sign of cloning. Then I scrolled down and saw the original and was absolutely flabbergasted at how much stuff you removed. Quite an effort to say the least. But I like the end result: A bird, feet extended for landing, with spread wings and tail. Super photo with great detail. Only you know if it was worth it, but I truly like the end result.

Excellent cloning work, a prime example of what's possible..
Especially when one has a uniform sky BG such as this.
Perfect for this WC, very well done Kurt

Whoa. I too was stunned. Job well done and worth it.

Super job on this, Kurt. Amazing transformation and perfect for this WC.

Kurt, I'm a lot like you when it comes to post production in terms of cloning. I usually limit my cloning to litter and other debris, but I think it was a good choice for you here. One thing you might want to consider is that, since you went to all the trouble, and since it's definitely not the original raw file, I would select another file with a BG sky with some interest, rather than the plain blue. With your "original" you could select the subject and perch, copy it to your clipboard, and then paste the subject onto the BG file. Only minor nit (which would be a non-issue with my suggestion) are some slightly darker artifacts around the bottom near the bird's tail.

I only have one comment, Kurt....OMG!!! The fixed version is a lovely, clean look at the bird's landing...I would probably have deleted the unfixed version in spite of the terrific pose of the hawk.

Amazing job Kurt. I was really impressed after scrolling down and seeing the original.
Bill

Wow! Great end result from all your hard work, Kurt. Like others, I liked your finished photo but was quite astonished when I then saw your original and realized how much work you went to. Works perfectly for this challenge, and is a great example of what can be done with some determination and skill.

That must have taken forever! You really did an excellent job on this - only thing I really notice is the branch that shoots straight down on the right side - the very tip of it has a little blue blended over it

What??? No way! How did you ever find enough blue in the original to get to this? That's what I would call dedication to a shot, my friend! And, what an outstanding result!

When I looked at the post, I said to myself "Ooh, nice shot! I wonder what the cloning was." The I scrolled down and said out loud "Are you kiddin' me?!"

Gotta admire your dedication and persistence in finishing this, Kurt. The end result is that you practically replaced the background, but this is still not the kind of "fakery" that some might suggest, where they take a background from another time or even another place (like pasting a picture of yourself on the summit of Mount Everest, or the popular practice of pasting a starry midnight sky on a twilight landscape, thus depicting a scene that cannot exist in real life). Doing something like that is actually easier than all the cloning you did, because you can now make very precise selections to choose anything in a picture, copy it, and past it on another background, or a blurred version of your original background. Selection software like those from Topaz and onOne do a remarkable job at this. Or, you can save money on plug-ins and just put your nose to the grindstone, like you did! Congrats on an excellent result.

The end result was worth the labor of love. Removing that many branches is a challenge for sure. The way I would attack the process would be to outline the bird and the branches you want to retain, select inverse, pick the color of the sky with the eye dropper and use the paint bucket icon to pour the blue over the unwanted branches, then clean up with clone tool, select inverse again and save. Still a chore, but probably less labor intensive.