next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
ition, if you were that woodpecker, wouldn't you be scared guano
Hi Steve & All,
I think there is no reason to suppose it not to be genuine.
The angle of shadow cast by the wing, more like 35o from the image
horizontal when measured, means almost nothing because this angle would be
dependent upon the angle of the camera relative to true horizontal. One
would expect a loaded bird to fly with maximum angle of attack so as to
avoid an unscheduled pancake landing.
The foreleg, being small, against the bird, perhaps somewhat buried in
short feathers, with an edge of sparse fur to cast the shadow, the shadow
trace possibly dimmed by light reflected from the neck and just barely at a
greater angle from the image horizontal than the wing shadow would be
expected to cast faint or no detectable shadow. Even the shadow distal to
the foot is very faint.
This is in addition to the complaint registered by the passenger which
adds authenticity. Why would a non-existent passenger complain about being
treated unfairily ?.
Time will tell.
Yt, Dave Webster, Kentville
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Shaw" <srshaw@Dal.Ca>
To: <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 1:57 AM
Subject: Re: [NatureNS] BBC Article - Weasel photographed riding on a
woodpecker's back
> Hi Keith,
> I could only find one other shot, a low power pan with poor focus which
> therefore doesn’t resolve anything. Do you have a URL for other shots?
>
> If you look at the prominent bright area on the side of the bird’s throat
> which abruptly turns into a dark shadow on the breast just forward of the
> wing, this must have been shot in bright sunlight (in mid afternoon in
> February, apparently). From the angle of the shadow (caused by occlusion
> by the bend of the extended wing), sunlight would have to have been
> falling from the right, top, about 50 degrees off vertical, and roughly in
> the plane of the photo. I’m not sure, but am surprised that the sun
> would appear so high in a February afternoon in UK. For a 50° angle of
> illumination, it’s then surprising that the front edge of the weasel’s
> left leg doesn’t appear to cast any shadow on the woodpecker. Also, if
> you magnify the image on screen and focus on the bases of the left
> primaries, the clear regular pattern of alternating dark-light bands on
> the distal part of the primary feathers gives way to a rotated square
> pattern near the bases that doesn’t blend in and looks artificial. Next
> to this is an out of focus area that is surprising given the excellent
> focus on the ends of the primaries, which is where the most motion-blur
> would be expected if that’s what’s generating the poor resolution on the
> proximal wing.
>
> You can over-analyze images like this, and probably none of this allows us
> to tell for sure if it is genuine or not, but in aggregate it still looks
> very dubious to me. I also didn’t find his pitch particularly
> convincing — he really went out specifically to look for this species of
> woodpecker?
> Steve
>
> On Mar 3, 2015, at 10:43 PM, Keith Lowe <mythos25@live.com> wrote:
>
>> There are multiple shots of it. Some articles referred to it as "baby"
>> weasel. Here is a video of him explaining the circumstances.
>> http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-31722410
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca
>> [mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca]
>> On Behalf Of Walt Norris
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:28 PM
>> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
>> Subject: RE: [NatureNS] BBC Article - Weasel photographed riding on a
>> woodpecker's back
>>
>> As a photographer I would say this is a hoax .
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Walt
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca
>> [mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca]
>> On Behalf Of Stephen Shaw
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:52 PM
>> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
>> Subject: RE: [NatureNS] BBC Article - Weasel photographed riding on a
>> woodpecker's back
>>
>> Too good to be true? As with the recent tufty eared squirrel, I'd
>> suspect
>> some sort of photo-fraud.
>> The British green woodpecker is quite a large bird, about 12.5 inches
>> long
>> according to Peterson et al, and while a least weasel should be about
>> 7-8"
>> long, this one looks more like 6".
>> Has the weasel been photoshopped in? It doesn't look to be gripping the
>> neck of the bird and indenting the feathers there with any intensity, as
>> you
>> might suspect it would be doing in the circumstances.
>> Steve
>> ________________________________________
>> From: naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca [naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca] on
>> behalf of Burkhard Plache [burkhardplache@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 6:04 PM
>> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
>> Subject: [NatureNS] BBC Article - Weasel photographed riding on a
>> woodpecker's back
>>
>> In case you are interested to see
>> http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31711446
>>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2015.0.5751 / Virus Database: 4299/9221 - Release Date: 03/03/15
>
next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects