• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Pine Bunting, Shropshire England ? (1 Viewer)

Yes if just taking a photo and making no effort to id at the time (taking notes, comparing size, shape, sound, behaviour etc) then yes, I think that's a bit lazy.

However, if you do as much as you can at the time and are able to take a photo, and have an idea of the species but want confirmation, then feedback from more experienced birders will help you for the next time.

Even for the more experienced this is useful for say gulls, or subspecies of wagtail or recent splits of stonechat etc

In both cases above the threads provide thought provoking discussion.

On this (off topic) subject I would add the value and importance of photographs has for me personally increased as two trends have come into my birding (been at it from under 10 to now over-60)..... namely improving digital optical equipment (and more money to buy it!), and deteriorating eyesight, and with the latter seemingly a decreasing ability to be really sure of features on a flying or rapidly moving bird.

I have been fortunate to have excellent eyesight for most of my life, and I am not bad at art/drawing so in my early years I did not find it difficult, even with glimpsed views or flying birds, to assess features and remember them clearly enough to record them. Now I need glasses to read, and although my eyes are still good by any standard, I find a few photographs that I can study at leisure are wonderful for confirming what I thought I saw in the field ..... and occasionally undermining it as well!

The photos are also by far the best way to record colour-rings.

I await with some trepidation the next trend - an inability to carry all this cr*p around with me ....:-C

Mick
 
On this (off topic) subject I would add the value and importance of photographs has for me personally increased as two trends have come into my birding (been at it from under 10 to now over-60)..... namely improving digital optical equipment (and more money to buy it!), and deteriorating eyesight, and with the latter seemingly a decreasing ability to be really sure of features on a flying or rapidly moving bird.

I have been fortunate to have excellent eyesight for most of my life, and I am not bad at art/drawing so in my early years I did not find it difficult, even with glimpsed views or flying birds, to assess features and remember them clearly enough to record them. Now I need glasses to read, and although my eyes are still good by any standard, I find a few photographs that I can study at leisure are wonderful for confirming what I thought I saw in the field ..... and occasionally undermining it as well!

The photos are also by far the best way to record colour-rings.

I await with some trepidation the next trend - an inability to carry all this cr*p around with me ....:-C

Mick

In praise of Bridge cameras!

Mick, reminds me of an hours train ride (couple of years ago now) through rural Hungary, straight railway line through plains, either side of which was an intermittent tall tree/short hedge parallel. Hanging out of said sliding window and espying "two separated" brown blobs in the field at almost 9.0'clock to my "standing up..rocking" position in the guards van (train doing a good 50-60mph).

Much in the manner of the way that press photographers attempt a shot with camera held high above the head firing blindly into the prison van window, hoping to get an image of the subject. I pressed the "film record" button aiming at the "blob" point, and compensating for the moving train (panning) to the said spot, hoping that there might be a break in the hedgerow for me to image. Further to this, I took lots more images of Shrikes,Turtle Doves,Storks etc before pulling into the terminus. It was much later that evening (having forgot about the film clip) when I suddenly remembered....to my total surprise two Great Bustards in the field clearly imaged....a Life Tick!

I would certainly (in all probability) have been unable to record those Bustards through bins only. I got about 4 frames (at 25 fps) barely an eye-blink!

I never leave home without it. :t:
 

Attachments

  • P1120792 (2) Grt.Bustard from the train, July '15..jpg
    P1120792 (2) Grt.Bustard from the train, July '15..jpg
    287.8 KB · Views: 185
Last edited:
I am not criticising the use of cameras per se; they can be useful for all the reasons mentioned. What is worrying, if that's the right word, is the increasing number of contributors who post large numbers of images and ask others to identify them so that they can 'tick' them and add them to their list! Just who is learning what here? Each to their own I know, but it does seem a bit of a waste for all concerned. It's a bit galling when skills have been learned over decades of birding while others seem content just to use this experience and not put in the effort to learn these skills for themselves. I'm sure that their enjoyment of birding would be greater but, when that all important 'tick' is at stake ...
 
I am not criticising the use of cameras per se; they can be useful for all the reasons mentioned. What is worrying, if that's the right word, is the increasing number of contributors who post large numbers of images and ask others to identify them so that they can 'tick' them and add them to their list! Just who is learning what here? Each to their own I know, but it does seem a bit of a waste for all concerned. It's a bit galling when skills have been learned over decades of birding while others seem content just to use this experience and not put in the effort to learn these skills for themselves. I'm sure that their enjoyment of birding would be greater but, when that all important 'tick' is at stake ...

I understand what is being said here as well as understanding the use of cameras to 'confirm' tricky IDs... or flag up records that would otherwise be missed (important to some, less so to others - not saying one is more valuable than the other). However there also appears to be a decline in the knowledge about, and recognition of, 'common' species. Do people not notice things until they 'become birders'? Therefore, by definition, everything is new - I've certainly experienced this in the past from acquaintances/work colleagues who have started to take an interest. Do people have no mentors any more, is birding something taken up on a whim without encouragement or inspiration from others ( I was lucky enough to have a couple of friends at school who nurtured my fledgling interest). Do people not look at field-guides any more? Posts asking "Is this a [insert species name]?" is good, posting images with "What's this?" suggests no effort at all has been made. One that particularly irritated me was "Please confirm the ID" with no suggestion as to what the bird was - what were we supposed to confirm?
Does all of this explain the plethora of Dunnock/Chaffinch/Blackbird photos along with the assertion "I've never seen one of those before"? Is it symptomatic of life these days, everything has to be 'easy' and all have to be spoon-fed? Slight rant over and I apologise to those who don't know me from Adam, especially as I'm not a regular poster outside my local patch threads.
 
I understand what is being said here as well as understanding the use of cameras to 'confirm' tricky IDs... or flag up records that would otherwise be missed (important to some, less so to others - not saying one is more valuable than the other). However there also appears to be a decline in the knowledge about, and recognition of, 'common' species. Do people not notice things until they 'become birders'? Therefore, by definition, everything is new - I've certainly experienced this in the past from acquaintances/work colleagues who have started to take an interest. Do people have no mentors any more, is birding something taken up on a whim without encouragement or inspiration from others ( I was lucky enough to have a couple of friends at school who nurtured my fledgling interest). Do people not look at field-guides any more? Posts asking "Is this a [insert species name]?" is good, posting images with "What's this?" suggests no effort at all has been made. One that particularly irritated me was "Please confirm the ID" with no suggestion as to what the bird was - what were we supposed to confirm?
Does all of this explain the plethora of Dunnock/Chaffinch/Blackbird photos along with the assertion "I've never seen one of those before"? Is it symptomatic of life these days, everything has to be 'easy' and all have to be spoon-fed? Slight rant over and I apologise to those who don't know me from Adam, especially as I'm not a regular poster outside my local patch threads.

Of course one always has the option of not responding!...Or possibly the images might be from a newbie whose prime aim is to show of their shots, or who lives ''isolated'' within a non birding culture....or as unimaginable as it might seem....sheer unadulterated stringers :eek!:
 
Or possibly the images might be from a newbie whose prime aim is to show of their shots, or who lives ''isolated'' within a non birding culture....

Both possible I guess, but most of the 'Dunnock' shots are requesting an ID not praise for the photo, reinforcing my point about the deteriorating awareness of common species... although nothing is that common any longer 😞
 
Both possible I guess, but most of the 'Dunnock' shots are requesting an ID not praise for the photo, reinforcing my point about the deteriorating awareness of common species... although nothing is that common any longer 😞

I think that many of the 'Dunnock' type requests are probably from casual photographers who don't own a bird book? I can't believe anyone who birds with any regularity would need to be told what a Dunnock looks like?

Photos are a great aid to many it has to be said, I find them especially helpfull on foreign trips with stuff like high flying raptors.


A
 
I imagine nothing has really changed - just in the olden days there was no such thing as friendly forums such as this where people who didn't know what something was could ask their questions.
 
I understand what is being said here as well as understanding the use of cameras to 'confirm' tricky IDs... or flag up records that would otherwise be missed (important to some, less so to others - not saying one is more valuable than the other). However there also appears to be a decline in the knowledge about, and recognition of, 'common' species. Do people not notice things until they 'become birders'? Therefore, by definition, everything is new - I've certainly experienced this in the past from acquaintances/work colleagues who have started to take an interest. Do people have no mentors any more, is birding something taken up on a whim without encouragement or inspiration from others ( I was lucky enough to have a couple of friends at school who nurtured my fledgling interest). Do people not look at field-guides any more? Posts asking "Is this a [insert species name]?" is good, posting images with "What's this?" suggests no effort at all has been made. One that particularly irritated me was "Please confirm the ID" with no suggestion as to what the bird was - what were we supposed to confirm?
Does all of this explain the plethora of Dunnock/Chaffinch/Blackbird photos along with the assertion "I've never seen one of those before"? Is it symptomatic of life these days, everything has to be 'easy' and all have to be spoon-fed? Slight rant over and I apologise to those who don't know me from Adam, especially as I'm not a regular poster outside my local patch threads.

Some shared sentiments here; we are obviously 'of an age'. It's particularly telling in Spring & Autumn when all the 'is this a Chiffchaff/Meadow Pipit (delete as applicable) or ...' posts start to appear, as they do with unfailing regularity. The poster then goes on to sign off with their list of latest lifers - be it Dusky Thrush, Sibe Accentor etc etc; ironic, no?
 
I think that many of the 'Dunnock' type requests are probably from casual photographers who don't own a bird book? I can't believe anyone who birds with any regularity would need to be told what a Dunnock looks like?

Photos are a great aid to many it has to be said, I find them especially helpfull on foreign trips with stuff like high flying raptors.


A

The occasional Dunnock-type request does come from an overseas birder who's never seen a Dunnock before, too. They're not necessarily the easiest bird for North Americans to identify, given that we don't have any accentors over here.
 
I think the bf identification section should be the centre of excellence for mentoring in this day and age. We are missing a trick here.

Someone posts a pic, and gets several one word responses, "Chiffchaff", "agreed", "thirded", ..
What is the original poster to do other than come back for help next time. With a slightly different looking Chiffchaff!

I think we should be mentoring people here.. not telling them what it is, giving them clues and tools so they can identify it themselves, and if they are interested, they'll be better equipped next time. The beauty is, you'd be mentoring dozens of people who follow the threads.

If there are people who just can't be bothered identifying birds themselves, they would either think twice before posting!, Or realise how much fun and rewarding, the challenge of finding and identifying wildlife is.

"Everyone can be a birder!"
 
I think the bf identification section should be the centre of excellence for mentoring in this day and age. We are missing a trick here.

Someone posts a pic, and gets several one word responses, "Chiffchaff", "agreed", "thirded", ..
What is the original poster to do other than come back for help next time. With a slightly different looking Chiffchaff!

I think we should be mentoring people here.. not telling them what it is, giving them clues and tools so they can identify it themselves, and if they are interested, they'll be better equipped next time. The beauty is, you'd be mentoring dozens of people who follow the threads.

If there are people who just can't be bothered identifying birds themselves, they would either think twice before posting!, Or realise how much fun and rewarding, the challenge of finding and identifying wildlife is.

"Everyone can be a birder!"

Speaking as a beginner who still struggles with CC/WW and Tripit Mipit for example (although who hopefully is learning because of some excellent responses in the ID section!) I couldn't agree more Peter!

Chris
 
I think the bf identification section should be the centre of excellence for mentoring in this day and age. We are missing a trick here.

Someone posts a pic, and gets several one word responses, "Chiffchaff", "agreed", "thirded", ..
What is the original poster to do other than come back for help next time. With a slightly different looking Chiffchaff!

I think we should be mentoring people here.. not telling them what it is, giving them clues and tools so they can identify it themselves, and if they are interested, they'll be better equipped next time. The beauty is, you'd be mentoring dozens of people who follow the threads.

If there are people who just can't be bothered identifying birds themselves, they would either think twice before posting!, Or realise how much fun and rewarding, the challenge of finding and identifying wildlife is.

"Everyone can be a birder!"

I wholeheartedly agree with this - and I try on the few occasions I am quick enough (and capable) of contributing to the ID forum to include the reasons why I think the bird is what I'm ID'ing it as. I also value the insight the experts there give into why it's a LSE, not GSE etc etc.

However I have found over in 'Gallery' different norms seem to apply - lots of photos are wrongly labelled and try to correct someone's ID, or even when an ID is requested and you try to give a tip as to why it is an 'x', and you can get some very terse responses - even told not to be so 'serious'. Not from all for sure - many are pleased for the input - but from more than a few. Seems there are lots who photograph birds but have no real interest in them, or at least about improving their ID skills - no problem with that I suppose, but equally mentoring will not have much value to them either.

Mick
 
Last edited:
I've just been chastised on twitter for pointing out to someone that their female Gadwall is in fact a drake! Shan't bother in future I'm afraid.
 
Fascinating discussion, I only started birding about 6 years ago and have a view - if I haven't taken a photo of it I haven't seen it. I learned to identify birds by taking photos and going through pages of books to ID the species. Next time I saw the species I knew what it was (mostly !). I'm still not good enough to say "that's a Pine Bunting" in a flock of mixed buntings but I am good enough to say "that bird is different" ! Take a photo, go home, look up the books to try to ID it then if I'm really still not sure ask on Birdforum. That seems to bother some people and I'm not sure why as surely the idea is to pass on knowledge. What I find most annoying is a single word answer like "Chaffinch" with no explanation as to why, that is pretty useless to anyone. Back to my original post, about 2 dozen people all said "that's the Pine Bunting" Some took photos, most left happy, and probably still are happy, that they had seen the bird. I wasn't sure when I got home and asked for help or reassurance. What I do know is that if the bird is a Corn Bunting then it was a bit different from the other Corn Buntings there. Fascinating discussion as I said !
 
I find that a comeback with a (worded nicely) "Why?" usually get a slightly longer response, sometimes from the same, sometimes from a different member.

Niels
 
Fascinating discussion, I only started birding about 6 years ago and have a view - if I haven't taken a photo of it I haven't seen it. I learned to identify birds by taking photos and going through pages of books to ID the species. Next time I saw the species I knew what it was (mostly !). I'm still not good enough to say "that's a Pine Bunting" in a flock of mixed buntings but I am good enough to say "that bird is different" ! Take a photo, go home, look up the books to try to ID it then if I'm really still not sure ask on Birdforum. That seems to bother some people and I'm not sure why as surely the idea is to pass on knowledge. What I find most annoying is a single word answer like "Chaffinch" with no explanation as to why, that is pretty useless to anyone. Back to my original post, about 2 dozen people all said "that's the Pine Bunting" Some took photos, most left happy, and probably still are happy, that they had seen the bird. I wasn't sure when I got home and asked for help or reassurance. What I do know is that if the bird is a Corn Bunting then it was a bit different from the other Corn Buntings there. Fascinating discussion as I said !

Identifying anything from poor, hastily taken images can be a risky business, especially when it comes to difficult and/or easily confused species. Quite often, identifications are requested/expected from a single, blurred, distant image, complete with digital artifacts; equally worrying, some responders profess to be able to identify to species with certainty from these images! When it comes to Phylloscopus warblers for instance, good, sharp images showing primary projection, emarginations etc are often required to make a certain ID and even then it can be difficult. Arguably, your time would be better spent watching the bird, making notes & developing your field skills rather than blundering about trying to get photographs which might not come to anything anyway! The same problem exists with insects, where very few certain identifications to species can be made from images and even when they can, the images must be sharp, preferably macro shots taken from a variety of angles so that all features & combinations of features can be assessed. Don't kid yourself that photos can never lie!

RB
 
I take exception to the expression "Blundering About" ! That I do not do and I know most if not all of the regular British Species ! My problem is with some vagrants. I do know that photos can be misleading but there is no substitute for taking a photo then identifying the bird later if you are not sure. Personally I have no idea how people can go birdwatching without a camera, only that way do you have a record of what you have seen !
I have a sense of pre-digital camera birders not liking birders with cameras but I hope that I am wrong. Sorry but your comments really annoyed me !

Identifying anything from poor, hastily taken images can be a risky business, especially when it comes to difficult and/or easily confused species. Quite often, identifications are requested/expected from a single, blurred, distant image, complete with digital artifacts; equally worrying, some responders profess to be able to identify to species with certainty from these images! When it comes to Phylloscopus warblers for instance, good, sharp images showing primary projection, emarginations etc are often required to make a certain ID and even then it can be difficult. Arguably, your time would be better spent watching the bird, making notes & developing your field skills rather than blundering about trying to get photographs which might not come to anything anyway! The same problem exists with insects, where very few certain identifications to species can be made from images and even when they can, the images must be sharp, preferably macro shots taken from a variety of angles so that all features & combinations of features can be assessed. Don't kid yourself that photos can never lie!

RB
 
I take exception to the expression "Blundering About" ! That I do not do and I know most if not all of the regular British Species ! My problem is with some vagrants. I do know that photos can be misleading but there is no substitute for taking a photo then identifying the bird later if you are not sure. Personally I have no idea how people can go birdwatching without a camera, only that way do you have a record of what you have seen !
I have a sense of pre-digital camera birders not liking birders with cameras but I hope that I am wrong. Sorry but your comments really annoyed me !

Wow I'm finding this increasingly bizarre. Of course there is an alternative to taking a picture - put the time in, pure and simple. If you choose to twitch then read up on the bird beforehand.
Spend as much time as you can on a local patch to ensure you're confident with regular species and read a field guide in any spare time.
When you do twitch watch the bird for as long as you can or at least until you are satisfied with your identification. Watching for an hour or two then sodding off uncertain but not bothered because you have a photo - well, that's not twitching or even birding as I did it or would ever want to. I believe some people carry a camera but not a scope these days. There must be some point I'm missing but wtf????
Dave
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top