These two images were taken just minutes apart from nearly exactly the same place. They do have slightly different perspectives. I really like the undulating hills in the foreground, and how the distant hills are indistinct so as to not compete with the foreground. I did do a bit different treatment of them in PP. I'd like feedback on them, please. Do you like one better than the other and why? Are the buildings along the river too distracting? Any other comments you'd like to make would be appreciated.

Creating great photographs used to require an understanding of light and of composition. Mastering the functions of your camera was essential. For nature photography putting yourself in the right place at the right time, along with a measure of good luck, was also required. Sometimes the results were good, often they were marginal, and occasionally they were great. Great patience was required.

Now we have cameras that will automatically focus on the eye of an animal - even a bird in flight. Taking a 20-shot-per-second series of photos of a bird in flight allows the "photographer" to select the best of dozens of photos - perfect timing, the ability to keep the bird in focus, or good luck is not required. I see snippets taken from what is essentially a video or posts of a sequence of multiple photos of a bird landing or a bird taking flight and I think to myself: "If I wanted a video I would have gone to YouTube".

The last few days we have seen folks singing the praises of sky replacement. Maybe "bird replacement" or "model replacement" will be next (certainly done in the advertising world). But should such dramatically altered photos be posted here without disclaimer? This is a long way from dodging and burning.

Some Hoggers love to splice in a sunset or sunrise into a photo where none previously existed. This is frequently not acknowledged - I always look closely at the light and shadows in the rest of the photo and when I see light and/or shadow that are impossible given the angle of the setting/rising sun I cannot decide whether to laugh or be angry.

Call me a Luddite if you will. Maybe I am slightly envious of the final results of such deceptive skills. But I try to resist the lure (well... I admit that the eye-focus thing gives me a little GAS...)

I’m always excited when I try to capture the osprey as it leaves the water after a dive (fish or no fish), and does it’s mid-air shake to rid itself of the excess water to fly lighter. This young bird wasn’t successful on its dive, but rose towards me and did its shake fairly close to my lens. The closed eyes and unique head positions are what makes the shake so interesting to me. Try the downloads, please.
Shot at shutter speed of 1/3200, Sony A1, with 100-400 lens (without the teleconverter…which I think made the images sharper) .

Clouds began to form late this afternoon. Real clouds, I mean; clouds that you could tell were actual clouds, not the vague amalgam of smoke and bad dreams we've recently had. Temperature began to dip, too. It was down to 104 F, and it looked as if there might be rain. And, I knew, it would be cooler still, once out of the valley and a thousand feet higher. And cooler it was, down to a balmy 95 F.

And rain it did. Enough so that for a moment, I actually used my windshield wipers. It was short-lived, though. Over the next several hours, all I saw was virga. Like here, near Merrimack Butte.

If I had superman reflexes and vision I could have gotten a BIF of this Kingbird chasing down and snatching a dragonfly out of midair.

As it was, I feel privileged to have been there and witnessed it, and once the bird had flown to a nearby branch I was able to get a photo.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51258970119_d336d585e7_o.jpgKingbird18Jun2021_053 by Marshall Smith, on Flickr


Eastern Kingbirds are one of my favorite birds. They really live up to their scientific name: Tyrannus tyrannus


Marshall