[Quick Shot]

WOW

[thackney]

BTTT

[Professional]

Where I live, we have lots, and lots of Bald Eagles. They never go ground level, I’ve only seen an eagle on the ground one time, and that was when it was released from a cage at a native ceremony. Neat picture, but I don’t think it’s real.

[sodpoodle]

Speechless;)

[listenhillary]

Very nice.

[HereInTheHeartland]

Amazing photograph

[Kartographer]

WOW!

[two23]

Sorry, I do Photoshop and I can see a lot of jpg artifacts around the edges of the eagle (and no where else) and its my opinion that this is fake...but I like it.

[xenob]

I don’t know why but it looks photo-shopped to me, even CGI like. Could he have drawn the scene in 3D modeling software? He could then be able to provide several shots/angles by manipulating the “camera”. So it wasn’t Photoshopped but instead a completely computer generated scene.

Suppose not, and it’s a cool picture. It just looks “funny” and not just the eagle.

[PMAS]

*

[xenob]

How about a better "real" photo... Way more emotional IMHO...

[Albion Wilde]

Beautiful ping!

[I Drive Too Fast]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2741278/posts

[Keith in Iowa]

Shock and awe that the Red Star & Sickle would print such a picture that might stir patriotic feelings...

[rottndog]

NOT FAKE....read the article...:

"Not surprisingly, there were few readers who insisted that the photo was a fake. The bird was too big, they said. There's an aura of light on one side that reflects the use of Photoshop, said others.

"It's not Photoshopped," said Glick. "I did crop it [as did the newspaper]. If I had Photoshopped it, I wouldn't have the eagle's tail covering the name."

He also may have put the eagle on a different headstone to make the composition perfect, he said. "It's a good picture, but it could have been a much greater picture."

Glick took the photo with an older Nikon camera and a multi-purpose lens. He took more than 60 shots of the bird at the cemetery, from different angles and locations. Some are sharp, some are blurry. Some are not very well composed.

"But I just like the feel of this one."

Star Tribune photographers studied the original that Glick sent me and said there's nothing conclusive to say whether it is faked. They also looked at a photo of the bird from the front and said it seemed legitimate, and consistent with the other photo.

As for the size of the bird?

The tombstones rise about 22 inches from the ground. Eagles can grow to 37 inches tall. So the proportion seems right.

[Shqipo]

What a moving photo. It's a shame things that are full of wonder now make us wonder in it's authenticity. The techno revolution has had it's disadvantages.

[fatima]

Thanks DManA.

[Kartographer]

To those worried about if the picture was faked or not:

Hub:"Sometimes the things that may or may not be true are the things a man needs to believe in the most. That people are basically good; that honor, courage, and virtue mean everything; that power and money, money and power mean nothing; that good always triumphs over evil; and I want you to remember this, that love... true love never dies. You remember that, boy. You remember that. Doesn't matter if it's true or not. You see, a man should believe in those things, because those are the things worth believing in."
From the movie 'Secondhand Lions' (2003)

To me you either believe in what the picture represents or you don't. If you believe then the picture is awesome, if you don't then it really doesn't matter if its fake or not.

[Sawdring]

The glow just to the right of the eagle makes it look photshopped.

[3D-JOY]

I saw this a few days ago and was delighted with it.

To all the doubters I say,” I would like to just be happy with the image”, real or changed!