next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
> about 10am. I glimpsed it from the rear fir --000000000000592c5a056cddd73d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The old-fashioned method of ID-ing rare birds, or birds of uncertain ID, was to "collect" (shoot) them and then study them feather by feather. The medium-fashioned way was to look carefully, try and draw a diagram in the field notebook you always had with you, and describe the bird feather tract by feather tract. The new-fashioned way is to take a photo, and assume that records committees, e-bird etc. trust your honesty re: where and when etc. The problem with just taking a photo and then asking What is this?, as many beginners (especially Facebook users), seem to do a lot, is that it does not ingrain into consciousness any sense of the bird's biology, behaviour or relationships etc. The FB group on hawk ID has the right idea - when someone posts a picture asking for the ID, any answer has to include the reasoning behind it, not just the name of the bird. I usually try to do that when I answer queries on line. The other issue is that while a good photo can be diagnostic, a single photo only shows one aspect of the bird, and in a particular light - which can often be misleading - one reason why I think field guides with idealised drawings, e.g. Sibley, are better than photographic field guides. And ..... instead of simply posting a picture and asking What is it, I think everyone interested in bird ID should purchase a good field guide and learn how to use it properly, as well as read the ins and outs of the ID process, and at least come to a tentative conclusion before asking the question. But perhaps I'm preaching to the choir on this forum. Richard On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 7:48 AM, Paul Murray <pwmurray.murray911@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi All, > Further to the discussion of pros and cons of bird ID via photographic > means and the theme that direct observation, experience and avian knowled= ge > are the preferred methods for bird ID and educational reasons: I would > like to support the bird/nature watchers amongst us who rely on our camer= as > to ID what we see in nature. > > Some of us who rely heavily on our cameras for bird (and wildlife in > general) ID due to personal infirmities or handicaps probably would not b= e > bird watchers or observers of nature were it not for the benefit of the > camera and associated long lenses. I envy those with good colour vision, > eyesight and hearing who can easily pick out a red bird from green foliag= e > or see directly all the various colour differences of a bird's plumage > within a species or, who are able to hear the high frequency song a bird > makes when no direct sighting is possible. For those of us who are colour > blind, have poor eyesight and/or defective hearing, the enjoyment of > looking for and identifying birds is impossible without a camera. For us= , > the camera and a long lens is mandatory if we want to enjoy the "sport" a= nd > ID of a bird species after the fact via our photographs is usually the on= ly > way we can identify what we think we observed - it might not have been a > bird but a log that looked like a heron from a distance. LOL > > So, when you see us in the field with our cameras and long lenses, please > be mindful that the use of such equipment may be the only way that person > can take part in the hobby that you love. > > Paul Murray > Dartmouth > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 8:14 PM, Fritz McEvoy <fritzmcevoy@hotmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi All, >> I've been bird watching around my home since the late 90's and have >> a good knowledge of how to ID birds, but have almost never sent in a rar= e >> bird submission without an accompanying photo. >> I bought camcorder many years ago and think it can be just as good >> a tool as binoculars for identifying birds as well other species. >> A knowledge of field marks, flight times, range and habitat is >> important but a good quality photo or video (particularly with audio) is >> better for ID purposes. >> There are a few tricks that make using a camera a better tool >> for ID'ing birds none more important than positioning yourself so that t= he >> sun is behind you. I find a HD camcorder with a high power optical zoom = and >> image stabilization plus an ability to view and edit the video frame by >> frame is best. >> On a related note a camera has replaced collecting for many, like >> me, who watch and report on Lepidoptera. In this case I've found >> - being the contrarian that I am - collecting to be a much better means = of >> identification for moths and butterflies. >> There is nothing wrong with being old school as a bird watcher bu= t >> I think we have to accept that most people aren't interested in learning >> the finer points of bird identification; they just want to know what the= y >> saw. That's why sites like iNaturalist have become so popular. All the b= est. >> Fritz McEvoy >> Sunrise valley, CB >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca <naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca> on >> behalf of Laviolette, Lance <lance.laviolette@lmco.com> >> *Sent:* May 22, 2018 2:35 PM >> *To:* naturens@chebucto.ns.ca >> >> *Subject:* RE: [NatureNS] Acadian Flycatcher on Brier Island >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your point of view), >> photographic equipment has become so advanced and taking photographs so >> inexpensive that =E2=80=98shoot first, identify after=E2=80=99 is a tech= nique that is >> gaining favor. I know a number of birders who have hung up their binocul= ars >> and now carry only a camera with long lens. Their gear allows them to sh= oot >> many photos a second so they point, shoot and look through the photos on >> their camera=E2=80=99s view screen to identify what they photographed. >> >> >> >> The obvious plus is that they always have photographic evidence of a >> sighting. The negative is that I=E2=80=99m seeing more people starting o= ut their >> birding =E2=80=98career=E2=80=99 by taking photographs without learning = the basics of bird >> identification. They repeatedly submit photographs of the same common bi= rd >> to Facebook pages or web sites asking others to identify it for them. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> >> Lance >> >> >> >> Lance Laviolett