A comment by Neil Rossmiller on yesterday’s blog post reminded me of my years of active participation in a nature photography critique forum and how much I learned while I was there. Since I often have folks ask me how they can improve their photography I thought the subject was worthy of some discussion.
Occasionally a situation with low potential can unexpectedly result in a nice flight shot, or even two.
I’ve been watching this female Belted Kingfisher from afar for several weeks now but in typical kingfisher fashion she has been unapproachable. But yesterday morning she partially atoned for her bashful ways and performed some interesting behavior for my camera.
Sooner or later every serious nature photographer must confront the question – How much image alteration during processing is ethically “too much”?
One of the advantages of a telephoto lens is its ability to concentrate on a pleasing feature and leave out or blur less attractive elements into the bokeh.
I’ve known for years that extremely cold temperatures can make many birds “stickier” – easier to get close to. Two days ago I learned that this maxim also applies to woodpeckers.
Occasionally I just have to vent about some of my photography frustrations.
Every nature photographer has them. Landscape photogs spend countless hours waiting for just the right light and dramatic clouds which often never materialize, those specializing in wildlife (especially mammals) often cannot even find their subjects, macro nature photographers have to deal with slight breezes that can ruin their shots and those who focus on flowers have a limited season.
But bird photographers may have the most challenging subjects of all (perhaps my bias is creeping in here, but I doubt it).
Baiting birds into close proximity for photographic purposes is a highly controversial subject, especially when it’s done to raptors. Often live bait such as store-bought mice are thrown in front of the photographer so that photos can be obtained of the bird in flight as it swoops down for the rodent.
Many raptors are “sit and wait” hunters, which means they often hunt from an elevated perch instead of “on the wing” and Red-tailed Hawks are well-known for this practice. An elevated perch provides good views over a large area and no extra energy need be expended in flight while looking for food. Typically these birds will use the same productive perch repeatedly over long periods of time, which presents a challenge to the photographer – poop (hereafter referred to as “whitewash”). Whitewash consists largely of crystalline uric acid (it’s more complicated than that but I’ll try not to stray into a discussion of the functions of the cloaca), which tends to be bright white. That whitewash can create some aesthetic and ethical conflicts between a “natural shot” and an image that has been “Photoshopped” to death, primarily by use of the clone tool. Many photographers routinely clone out whitewash and/or droppings and I’ll admit that I’ve done it before, but for me it’s an ethical dilemma because I much prefer to leave my images as natural as possible since I consider myself to be a “nature photographer”. In fact, right now I’m struggling with a series of Horned Lark images that I really like, but there’s a large, fresh and very conspicuous dropping right in front of the birds foot that most would find distracting. I could clone it out but every time I looked at that image I would know what I’d done. Canon 7D, 1/4000, f/5.6, ISO 640, 500 f/4, natural light, not baited, set up or called in A couple of days…
Most bird photographers prefer their subjects to be on natural perches. We are, after all, nature photographers. The definition of just what is “natural” becomes a slippery slope for sure but for my purposes I’ll define a natural perch by exclusion – it does not include buildings, telephone poles and wires, chunks of concrete, signs, or most anything else that is obviously man-made. Now for my exceptions. Some objects that are man-made and have a “rustic” quality are often acceptable. Weathered fence posts, old barns and rusty barbed wire would be examples. One of the major frustrations of bird photographers is to be able to finally get close to a beautiful subject in good light but the bird has chosen an ugly or inappropriate (for us) man-made perch. It is typically very difficult to approach many bird species close enough to get excellent detailed photos, even with big expensive lenses. So it can be aggravating in the extreme to finally get close enough but the bird has chosen an unappealing perch. Some folks choose to largely avoid this problem by shooting at “setups” where the bird has been unnaturally lured into an artificial situation by provided food with attractive perches arranged close by. To many of us this is not nature photography but more like studio or zoo photography. Good bird photography ain’t easy. If it were it wouldn’t be nearly as satisfying when I do finally get the shot I’m after – even though the pursuit has often been frustrating. Below are some of the situations where I’ve been frustrated by these unattractive, unnatural perches. Most bird photographers know…
