• 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.

Putting The Art Back Into Birding... (1 Viewer)

Have to admit I like to see a bit of illustration (art) in bird reports etc. Line/Ink/Cameos distributed throughout, whatever. The tendency for a full colour photo section in the middle doesn't actually really do anything for me tbh. Often only of record shot quality only, rarity/scarcity photos can always be seen elsewhere on the internet, and possibly add a lot to the price of said reports??
 
Anyhoo...

As "illos", as we in "The Trade" call 'em, are so rare these days, let this thread become a "RARE ART ALERT".

PLEASE POST ALL SIGHTINGS HERE!

And, if it's YOUR stuff? So much the very better! :t:B :):cat:

Ps This thread is aimed at ALL who can pick up a drawing/painting tool and offer back their experiences to the Birding World...

Whoever, wherever, whenever!

It is also a market research tool to find out if "grass roots" recording through art is still existing in this moment of time?

AND if penniless local groups need our artwork?


I can't see that a small donation of personal brilliance on anybody's part will do any major harm??? ;)
 
As an Art Thread, it also needs examples of what has been posted!

Too many words. Not enough examples?

Until we receive some?

Make do with these please!

None of them were submitted to local sites. And I have a "shed-load" more. At the time I didn't think the Birding World would be interested, as the advent of "Available Photography" had begun. Perhaps now the change may come.

Ps Oh! And have a GOOD week! ;)
 

Attachments

  • semi p dawlish 1.8.97.JPG
    semi p dawlish 1.8.97.JPG
    62.5 KB · Views: 79
  • Kentish Plover Dawlish.JPG
    Kentish Plover Dawlish.JPG
    60.5 KB · Views: 82
  • BNGrebe CvL.JPG
    BNGrebe CvL.JPG
    70.9 KB · Views: 70
  • Leach's SB 25.11.09.JPG
    Leach's SB 25.11.09.JPG
    137.5 KB · Views: 81
  • Waxwings Worle.JPG
    Waxwings Worle.JPG
    38.5 KB · Views: 98
Why not ask your friend to post a 'Request For Illustrations!' thread up here. I'm sure he'd get a few takers.

I think he wants me to do them;) (I already get a copy of the annual BR and NLs anyway so that's no incentive!). Anyway, I'll post up any that get done if their 'good enough' - I did do him one over the summer but it wasn't really a serious effort - the 'brief' was a bit of a laugh from him and I was told to, 'do a WTE being mobbed by two Shelduck' since that was something I'd seen and related to the article being attached. Hopefully, the line drawings he wants will be a bit better executed - it actually looked better once it was printed in the magazine (because it was smaller probably!)
 

Attachments

  • NLsummer edition.JPG
    NLsummer edition.JPG
    79.6 KB · Views: 116
superb piece, lots of action and tension - and an interesting scene. Shelducks are strange in that they mob plenty of things - have seen them going after osprey before.
 
It would be nice to see a Deborah thread. Here.....

I would gladly contribute to that!

Must've been fantastic to see what you did Deborah!
In Poland, nothing will go near WTE. Because they all know it will be The End.

Another fantastic example of what has been documented by a gifted artist. But not by a camera.

Superb work!
 

I so wished you hadn't done that Tim ;)

Back on thread .. the request is for pen and ink 'realistic/recognisable-to-the masses' drawings of particular species asked for ... b&w only and something I'm not enjoying doing tbh .. I really don't like drawing in pen & ink!
'commissioned' for the next edition: Shorelark and Rouzel:(something's seem to have gorn a bit awry in the scanning)
 

Attachments

  • shorelarkDeb1.JPG
    shorelarkDeb1.JPG
    112 KB · Views: 65
  • RO2.JPG
    RO2.JPG
    167.5 KB · Views: 68
Last edited:
Thanks Tim!

Read the thread Deborah, and just had to comment! ;)

Great work! And the 2 above.

They will look nice in the report! :t:
 
I just realised we are all putting Art back into Birding, by getting involved in the Art Forum!

It is encouraging those who are unsure to have a go.

With all the Sisters and Brothers, and Fine Comrades here to provide support and encouragement, we can, together, do this!

Anyone got anything into a report, magazine or "recording website" lately, in amongst the photos?

Are we gaining any ground by degrees....? I hope so!
 
I received a timely email yesterday. It included the draft of a small publication to help ID birds at a water district in California. Someone there had asked me for a drawing more than 6 months ago. So I did it then never heard back. When I did it I was under the impression that it would definitely be used. After I sent it I heard it might be used. So I just forgot about it, assuming that they'd decided not to use it.

Then yesterday I got a copy of the draft booklet. It's a nice introduction to visitors who probably are new to birding. But I couldn't find my piece. Then I realized that maybe they had taken it and then doctored it drastically to fit the style of the other illustrations! That was the only explanation for the drawing that was supposedly mine.

The whole process has been so bizarre I don't know what to make of it. There I am with a large type credit at the end of booklet and yet my drawing looks nothing like what I originally did. I'm tempted to ask them to remove the credit.

But since the intent of the booklet is good, educate non-birders about local birds, I don't really want to raise a stink. But it is the oddest way to treat the art and artist.

In any case the experience seemed appropriate to this thread.;) Since the drawing looks nothing like mine I'm not including it here. Way back in May my thread probably has the actual Long-billed Dowitcher I did.
 
That's tough Ken! Hope it hasn't put you off. A very odd thing for someone to do!

Hey Phil. No it's not put me off. I still think it's a great idea. I just chalk it down to the vagaries of bird art. It's not the first. I'd guess for everyone who's contacted me online about buying/commissioning a work, less that 33% work out. But I have to say this is the oddest!!

My guess is that he just doesn't know that an artist might not like his work doctored in such a way. But as I said it's all for a good cause and hopefully it will draw in some new birders and environmentalists in that part of California.
 
very strange Ken! If the image wasn't what they were after, I'd have at least thought they could tell you to let you have another go on it or decide not to have it included. Being credited with something you haven't done isn't always a good thing - though it's always nice to see your name in print.

Have infiltrated the LPO website with my peregrines from the other day: http://franche-comte.lpo.fr/index.php?m_id=54&mid=5522
 
. Being credited with something you haven't done isn't always a good thing - though it's always nice to see your name in print.

Yes I did wonder about whether I should just ask them to remove my name since as you say being credited with something you haven't done isn't always good. I did more investigating and figured out that what they're planning to print is an example they sent me of what they'd like it to look like. The pose was so much like mine I thought that they'd just modified it.

In any case I've now responded to them telling them that it isn't even my drawing. So I hope that will straighten it out. Either they can put my drawing in or remove my name from the credits. The whole process has been pretty sloppy on their end but I don't want to complain because they're just trying to do something to get more people interested in the birds and environment at their location.

Now back to look at the peregrine. Ah, very nice!
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 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