Everyone is built differently, but that is definitely too high for me
If it works for you, that is all that matters.
To me, the balance is messed up mounting that high. Feels top heavy with the pic/ring combo. I took the scope off and am getting some lower ones to curb that. As a previous comment said, I should be able to get a good cheek weld without a pack. I don't have a high comb, so it just needs to be lowerI replaced the Talley lightweight rings on my Weatherby FiberMark with a pic rail and medium Ken Farrel rings. The scope looks the same height as yours, but cheek weld is perfect and the height is perfect. As others have stated, it depends what works for you, and it might not look right. I would rather mount it according to functionality and not looks.
ThisIf your cheek pad gets your head up high enough and still gives a consistent cheek weld, it is fine.
Personally, it is too high for my preference.
It's literally middled on the receiver. Eye relief is 5" on low mag and 3.7 on high.Yeah, looks goofy. Too high and too far back as well.
Where it is in relation to the receiver is of no concern. With 3.7" eye relief your head would need to be way back on the stock for your eye to be at or near the back edge of the eye box the way you have it set now. Maybe your stock is too long for you. I think you need to visit a stock fitter. Competitive shotgunners understand all this, rifle shooters not so much.It's literally middled on the receiver. Eye relief is 5" on low mag and 3.7 on high.