Imm. Red-Should. Hawk

This looks wonderful as presented in the larger version. A strong composition. Nice subject. Lovely perch adn setting. Good colors.

Nice detail on the hawk. Overall, very natural.

There is no visible noise in this as far as I can see, and there is no reason to apply NR to the image at this size IMO.

To clarify my own image prep fpr posting at NPN:
- open the raw file in Adobe Camera Raw component of photoshop
- make minor adjustments to white balance (if needed) and tweet the histogram to fine tune the exposure
- open the tweaked file in Photoshop for any dust spot removal, possible tweak with levels, possible contrast increase with curves, small increase in saturation - all with adjustment layers
- flatten all layers and convert yo 8 bit tif
- crop for composition
- create a 1600 px tif and a 720 px tif, plus other sizes if needed
- selectively apply smart sharpen to the subject in the 1600 px version (if needed) and 720 px version
- add signature
- save a copy as jpeg

If I feel that an image needs NR I do that selectively on a duplicate layer at thr 1600 px size. That way I can fine tune NR with the mask and with the layer opacity.

Barbara-
Here,s my two penceworth. It maybe  not much use as I don't use any Adobe stuff  or shoot in RAW but the processes are similar.

Pic out of camera at full res JPEG (24 megapix) Sometimes High Dynamic  retouch in camera used if lot of shadows)
Noise reduction if high ISO used (usually over 800)
Image opened in Paint Shop Pro7
Sometimes Vimas image adjustment used on shadows/highlights.
Levels/Curves adj if needed.
Crop if needed Spots removed etc. Copy of original saved.
Image resized for this site -make sure bi-linear not bi -cubic!
One round normal sharpen after re sizing.
Name added.Copy saved.
 Cheers
John

Barbara, this image looks very nice. Great composition and the techs looks good.  Having said that, I would move the hawk a bit lower in the frame. Image processing can be a very deep and opinionated subject. Personally, what I have tried to do is incorporate what works for me. I have learned a great deal here on NPN and a great deal from other sources. I usually take what I read and try it out. Sometimes it works for me, sometimes it doesn't. I have a couple criteria that I use when deciding on a processing action. First, it has to be relatively straight forward and not enormously time consuming. Secondly, it must produce "natural" results. I would encourage everyone to take it all in and then keep what works for you.

A very nice image, Barbara. Your processing looks great, a very natural look. You captured a nice a pose of this juvie.

Barbara:

A nice image.  Processing looks just fine.  You've received some interesting feedback on processing.  When I teach my classes or do individual consulting on processing I emphasize two things.  There is not a single recipe that works for all images.  There is a general workflow, but not a recipe.  I'm also adamant that you should never do destructive processing.  That means that if you come back to the image tomorrow, next week, next year, you will be able to eliminate, reverse or modify any adjustments that you make via a layer based workflow in Photoshop.  All Raw processing is non-destructive so you can always reverse any edits done in RAW (either via Adobe Camera RAW or LightRoom Develop - they use the same underlying code).  
I never flatten images as that is a destructive edit that would cause me to have to revert back to the original if there was something I was not happy with.  A also never convert images from 16 bit to 8 bit.  Doing so may not have an immediate visual impact on the image but any further edits will be hampered by only have 8 bits per pixel to make adjustments.  What that means numerically is that instead of have 65536 possible tonal values per pixel with 16 bit images, an 8 bit image has 256.  

The final output step of creating a jpeg does convert the image to an 8 bit image for display on the web, but that file is tossed in the trash as soon as it is uploaded.  

Good points by Keith there.
JohnR

Hi Barbara, one other small thing to add, just ensure that your camera is set to Adobe RGB as the 'Working space' ditto LR & PS, in that way you will not have any miss alignment in your Workflow, only convert the embedded colour profile sRGB for when you post on the web or projection. A lot of people take their cameras out of the box and miss this point. Do as much 'in camera' as you can and avoid hefty crops this will hammer the IQ and try to shoot the way you wish to present, why shoot landscape when you crop portrait and through all that data away? Always shoot Raw and not Raw & JPEG, it just fills your card up and what would you do with the JPEG when you have a RAW file????? 

Make sure your monitor is properly calibrated, probably once a month or when it tells you, laptops need more and let the monitor warm up before calibrating, minimum half an hour I would say. Avoid truck loads of ambient light and make sure your monitor is not facing a window as the light from behind will alter your viewing.

I like the setting with the spanish moss hanging and the perch Barbara, I don't see any noise. 

Very nice, Barbara.  The sharpening/NR system you used worked nicely.  I used to use pretty much what Richard described, but changed it when I started using LR for my RAW processor and file management.  Now I use the LR EXPORT function to create my web files and have been quite satisfied with its default sharpening for final web presentation.

As far as composition on this one goes, I would probably crop some from the bottom to slightly under the first fork in the perch, but that is definitely a matter of taste.

Looks great to me Barbara. I really like the air plant and the mosses along with the sharp details of the hawk. Thanks everyone for sharing some of your editing processes.

Barbara,
Great image, well processed.
I can give no advice on processing as I rarely follow a set pattern!