Posts for: billbarcus
Mar 4, 2019 21:32:49 #
davidrb hit it right on the head!
Mar 3, 2019 00:06:37 #
Ron, this is your statement in your 1st post: "Wow, very nice shot. I read all the posts hoping someone would say for sure what kind of hawk it is. Only one guessed redtail ..."
It stands to reason that you, and likely others, being curious as to the ID of this hawk, and hoping someone would say what kind of hawk it is ... is [exactly] what I did; identify the bird for the folks reading and complimenting on Ayesart's fine photo. And, it is a fine photo!
This UHH site is about sharing and learning. I learn photo tips and applications from others here regularly. If I didn't want to share and learn, and just wanted to be on a day-to-day, social media chit-chat forum, I'd be on one.
I'm not a graduate wildlife biologist, I'm a wildlife/nature photographer and lay biologist. In order to be a good nature photographer we must have keen knowledge and understanding of our subjects. If I photograph a subject that is an unknown to me, then I research the subject and make it a known - especially before I share or market the image. And you, as well as other UHH's, can note that all of my photo gallery posts identify the subject.
Just saying. IMHO of course.
It stands to reason that you, and likely others, being curious as to the ID of this hawk, and hoping someone would say what kind of hawk it is ... is [exactly] what I did; identify the bird for the folks reading and complimenting on Ayesart's fine photo. And, it is a fine photo!
This UHH site is about sharing and learning. I learn photo tips and applications from others here regularly. If I didn't want to share and learn, and just wanted to be on a day-to-day, social media chit-chat forum, I'd be on one.
I'm not a graduate wildlife biologist, I'm a wildlife/nature photographer and lay biologist. In order to be a good nature photographer we must have keen knowledge and understanding of our subjects. If I photograph a subject that is an unknown to me, then I research the subject and make it a known - especially before I share or market the image. And you, as well as other UHH's, can note that all of my photo gallery posts identify the subject.
Just saying. IMHO of course.
Mar 2, 2019 03:12:35 #
I'm always amazed by folks on this site that post images of wildlife - especially birds of prey - that haven't a clue - or, could care less - as to what species they're photographing, much less viewing. One poster did guess this hawk correctly, but ended the comment with a ? mark ...
This hawk is a young - juvenile - Red-tailed hawk. Buteo jamaicensis A Buteo is the larger of the two classifications of the hawk families, the other being the Accipiter, as in the smaller Sharp-shinned and other smaller hawks.
It's likely that Ayesart was able to approach and photograph this hawk to within four feet due to the fact that it hasn't yet learned to fear humans - the first clue that it's a youngster.
This hawk is a young - juvenile - Red-tailed hawk. Buteo jamaicensis A Buteo is the larger of the two classifications of the hawk families, the other being the Accipiter, as in the smaller Sharp-shinned and other smaller hawks.
It's likely that Ayesart was able to approach and photograph this hawk to within four feet due to the fact that it hasn't yet learned to fear humans - the first clue that it's a youngster.
Feb 28, 2019 02:02:17 #
I always enjoy your photos Joe. Your web is a pleasant journey as well. A Black-capped chickadee, I believe??? Wondering what camera you're shooting?
Feb 28, 2019 01:37:44 #
Re: BROWN TRUCK IS HERE. Good choice on the refurb D750 - very nice camera, you will enjoy! As for your lens question ... totally endorse the Nikon 200-500 f/5.6E For the money - especially since you're scratching for dough, like most of us - this a superb lens. I.e., it's one hell-of-a-lens for a 5.6 and delivers sharp as a tack images, especially when used on a tripod. You won't be disappointed.
Oh, yeah ... the Brown Truck will be at my house tomorrow with an addition to the arsenal, a D810 - will have a hard time sleeping tonight.
P.S. There were two Nikon 200-500's posted for sale here in the classified in the last few days ... both really good deals ... would have bought one, but already have the lens.
Oh, yeah ... the Brown Truck will be at my house tomorrow with an addition to the arsenal, a D810 - will have a hard time sleeping tonight.
P.S. There were two Nikon 200-500's posted for sale here in the classified in the last few days ... both really good deals ... would have bought one, but already have the lens.
Feb 26, 2019 22:06:00 #
The grand enormity of Flat Iron significantly dwarfs the saguaros of the foothills - and saguaros aren't small by any means. As an Arizona native, I enjoyed and appreciate your photo of this Icon mountain.
Feb 23, 2019 12:45:10 #
Sir, it was not my intention to offend or discount your photo skills, nor anyone else on UHH. I actually like photo no.1 Please allow me to explain my position regarding PP processing. Also understand that, there many of us here on UHH that came out of the hard film world and graduated into the complex world of digital; many out of necessity for various reasons. You may be one of those folks too?
Pointing back to a time in the film world, where there were no such things as computers, nor even cell phones. A computer during those times (70s & 80's) was that little micro battery-powered gizmo we carried in our shirt pockets or purses to balance our check books. I graduated to digital out of necessity - and after some years of absolute temper tantrums and throwing milk-gravy fits in learning digital, I have grown to absolutely love it!
I do have Photoshop Elements ----- for the explicit purposes of eliminating those pesky Sensor Dust Spots that appear in photos, which are common to DSLR cameras & the common problem of 'dust' that accumulates over time within lenses. I bought PS 7.0 in 2004 when doing aerial photography for high-end land developers and real estate moguls; I could eliminate junk cars and other unsightly 'trash' from the photos before sending them off for payment - those type of clients didn't want that kind of refuse showing up in photos for which they paid big bucks and displayed to their clients. Haven't used 7.0 in years and found Elements does the same job for a lot less money and doesn't require a PS master's degree to figure out.
As for cropping. I will crop on rare occasions if need be - usually in-camera while shooting the scenes. Other than removing dust spots from photos and rare, if any, cropping that's the extent of my PP software usage other than inserting my by-line. As for lens aberrations and correcting white balance. Well, I don't shoot RAW, and don't mess with the white balance settings in the camera. Lens aberrations and corner distortions; some of this comes with the territory of particular UWA lenses. Live with it, or sell the lens and dig deep in the pockets for a better one.
Bottom line - To me, the use of PP software to 'enhance' (as some might think it to be) a photograph is NOT photography in the correct sense of the term, as well as the true sense of all the applications of the ART of photography - done in person, one on one; the actual, in-the-field encounter with the subject.
We are living in a generation of Computer Photographers & Smart Phone Photographers who wouldn't know the True Art of composing a genuine photograph in the field if it bit them in the Ass!!! There are so many "photographers" today that let the camera do all the thinking for them; all they know is Auto Mode. They are not photographers ... they are button pushers. The same goes for the computer photographers; they are computer geeks ... not photographers.
Even here on UHH I continually see what would be, otherwise, absolutely stunning photographs of eagles, other creatures, landscapes, et. al. that are totally disfigured and ruined with PP software. I am repulsed by such images. They might be 'trendy' to hang in somebody's den ... but, not mine.
In closing, some here will call me a curmudgeon - so be it. I will always remember a recent quote by a knowledgeable and talented mentor who inspired me from the very day I picked up a 35mm film camera back 'in the day.' Here is his quote:
"Photoshop doesn't make a bad picture good; it makes a bad picture BIG." --- John Shaw
Pointing back to a time in the film world, where there were no such things as computers, nor even cell phones. A computer during those times (70s & 80's) was that little micro battery-powered gizmo we carried in our shirt pockets or purses to balance our check books. I graduated to digital out of necessity - and after some years of absolute temper tantrums and throwing milk-gravy fits in learning digital, I have grown to absolutely love it!
I do have Photoshop Elements ----- for the explicit purposes of eliminating those pesky Sensor Dust Spots that appear in photos, which are common to DSLR cameras & the common problem of 'dust' that accumulates over time within lenses. I bought PS 7.0 in 2004 when doing aerial photography for high-end land developers and real estate moguls; I could eliminate junk cars and other unsightly 'trash' from the photos before sending them off for payment - those type of clients didn't want that kind of refuse showing up in photos for which they paid big bucks and displayed to their clients. Haven't used 7.0 in years and found Elements does the same job for a lot less money and doesn't require a PS master's degree to figure out.
As for cropping. I will crop on rare occasions if need be - usually in-camera while shooting the scenes. Other than removing dust spots from photos and rare, if any, cropping that's the extent of my PP software usage other than inserting my by-line. As for lens aberrations and correcting white balance. Well, I don't shoot RAW, and don't mess with the white balance settings in the camera. Lens aberrations and corner distortions; some of this comes with the territory of particular UWA lenses. Live with it, or sell the lens and dig deep in the pockets for a better one.
Bottom line - To me, the use of PP software to 'enhance' (as some might think it to be) a photograph is NOT photography in the correct sense of the term, as well as the true sense of all the applications of the ART of photography - done in person, one on one; the actual, in-the-field encounter with the subject.
We are living in a generation of Computer Photographers & Smart Phone Photographers who wouldn't know the True Art of composing a genuine photograph in the field if it bit them in the Ass!!! There are so many "photographers" today that let the camera do all the thinking for them; all they know is Auto Mode. They are not photographers ... they are button pushers. The same goes for the computer photographers; they are computer geeks ... not photographers.
Even here on UHH I continually see what would be, otherwise, absolutely stunning photographs of eagles, other creatures, landscapes, et. al. that are totally disfigured and ruined with PP software. I am repulsed by such images. They might be 'trendy' to hang in somebody's den ... but, not mine.
In closing, some here will call me a curmudgeon - so be it. I will always remember a recent quote by a knowledgeable and talented mentor who inspired me from the very day I picked up a 35mm film camera back 'in the day.' Here is his quote:
"Photoshop doesn't make a bad picture good; it makes a bad picture BIG." --- John Shaw
Feb 23, 2019 00:28:26 #
Feb 22, 2019 23:55:46 #
Feb 22, 2019 23:32:45 #
Feb 22, 2019 23:19:14 #
Nice photos of the two Saguaros ... looks like SW Arizona where I grew up??
Feb 22, 2019 23:14:59 #
Tis a great way to draw a crowd in Ireland - am sure some of my clan, the O'Fahey's are there. Enjoyed the grand tour of your photos.
Feb 22, 2019 23:07:21 #
John, these are nice quality close-ups - good job with good gear. No matter where one gets the opportunity to photograph these magnificent birds, it's always rewarding - they have a certain awe to their personality. I never tire of photographing eagles, anywhere, anytime.
Feb 22, 2019 22:59:19 #
Great photos Cindy, enjoyed them ... my deer herd is always eager for free handouts too. Since we are relatively close Montana neighbors, a word of caution about our [eager] (pun intended) Game & Fish & Park rangers - there are some that are not reasonable at times and love to dish out $500 tickets.
Feb 22, 2019 22:42:04 #
Paul Sager! - you are one hell-of-a fine photographer with an amazing eye for composition and detail. I always enjoy your work; your photos are worth more than a thousand words.