Yes, the taxonomy has been changed and falcons are now after woodpeckers, the Sibley being the first major field guide to adopt the new sequence (I think). I imagine most of the others will follow suit as their new editions come out; I certainly hope so.
-
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.
Sibley Guide, 2nd edition (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter jedigrant
- Start date
Yes, the taxonomy has been changed and falcons are now after woodpeckers, the Sibley being the first major field guide to adopt the new sequence (I think). I imagine most of the others will follow suit as their new editions come out; I certainly hope so.
I, on the other hand, was disappointed (although not surprised) that Sibley stuck with a strictly taxonomic sequencing. I don't want to plunge this thread off-topic, but I prefer the sequencing championed by Howell and others, and used in the Crossley guides, for example. It is very cool to find out that falcons are related to parrots and passerines moreso than hawks, but I don't think that sequencing makes sense in a field guide. Mention it in the family introduction (which Sibley does), but keep the order such that it is more appropriate for identification. My two cents.
Mike R. K.
Member
wow, didn't know that about the placement of falcons. :eek!:
I really was impressed with the new Sibley, I don't really understand half the "hoopla" regarding this latest edition.
the plates, upon actually looking at the book, are noticeably darker overall than the first edition. it shows up more with obviously darker birds but overall looks fine.
Love the 15-20% larger images, makes a huge difference. I haven't actually bought the copy yet but it seems to me the newer birds that sibley has painted for this edition (like the rare austral flycatchers) seem at least to my eyes slightly more detailed than his previous work, for instance the domestic wood warblers or sparrows.
has anybody else noticed this?
this was just my impression browsing the guide for 30 mins. in the store. To me Sibley has always struck a balance between realism and detail and impression of the gestalt of what you'd actually see in the field. Some painters can paint so exact that it looks like a photo and then you have Lars Johannson (sp?)
anyway, I look forward to getting this guide and using it at home and in the field.
I really was impressed with the new Sibley, I don't really understand half the "hoopla" regarding this latest edition.
the plates, upon actually looking at the book, are noticeably darker overall than the first edition. it shows up more with obviously darker birds but overall looks fine.
Love the 15-20% larger images, makes a huge difference. I haven't actually bought the copy yet but it seems to me the newer birds that sibley has painted for this edition (like the rare austral flycatchers) seem at least to my eyes slightly more detailed than his previous work, for instance the domestic wood warblers or sparrows.
has anybody else noticed this?
this was just my impression browsing the guide for 30 mins. in the store. To me Sibley has always struck a balance between realism and detail and impression of the gestalt of what you'd actually see in the field. Some painters can paint so exact that it looks like a photo and then you have Lars Johannson (sp?)
anyway, I look forward to getting this guide and using it at home and in the field.
Richard Klim
-------------------------
Rick Wright, Birding New Jersey and the World, 10 Apr 2014: The New Big Sibley.
Exactly right. If there had been no prior edition, the praise for this edition would be overwhelming. The color issue would be mentioned, but no one would be dwelling on it. But when the first edition was so good, the expectation for the new one was sky high. And when aspects of it (including the portraits of some birds I'm especially fond of) are not as good as they had been, then that's really disappointing.
Mike R. K.
Member
one thing that changed my mind for ordering the book was one of the review links where Sibley himself responded saying that the color wasn't going to be changed, it was planned that way basically, that some said the First Edition was washed out (I don't remember this comment) and that some minor things would be re-worked but not the coloring, that he was overall happy with it.
it's amazing to me the praise for Nat Geo. I had, up until recently, been using the 3rd Edition and within the last year bought the much needed 6th. Despite all the up-dating there are still some really poor plates. The gulls, terns, goatsuckers, spotted thrushes, spizella pg. 469 are great but take a look at the finches, the Melospiza sparrows, even when they've been up dated often it's only partially like the Ammodramus - the Grasshopper is clearly a different artist (Thomas Schultz) but the bottom two are the old style. The jizz on some of these birds is very off, very wooden. Just compare spizella on 469 with the previous plate.
and then there's the layout. I have guides from India, Africa south of the Sahara, Mexico, Ecuador, Peru, Costa Rica, Europe and they all manage to, for the vast majority of plates, put the birds in the same direction and sensible layout, much like Sibley. Adult here, juvenal here, etc. This is far easier on your eyes and much more pleasing. And yet one of two of the top North American field guides doesn't follow this. I understand to re-work and re-commission costs money but to page thru Sibley is an utter delight on the senses, everything in place where it should be, easy comparisons between species, age classes, and obviously consistent images. One can really compare the real differences a field birder needs to separate the spizella sparrows. What really is the difference and what to look for on juv. Clay colored vs. Chipping for instance.
Sibley was revolutionary in this for a North American guide - but it shouldn't have needed to be in the year 2000. And there are improvements with showing the gulls in flight in that upward 45 degree angle patter that's even more eye pleasing and easier to follow. Showing the auklets and others flying away as this is how they are most often see on pelagics.
the Nat Geo was done by many artists, but then again, so are most field guides. Most of my foreign guides have this format as well but honestly, I feel the range in style of artwork in NG is at a minimum as great or in most cases actually greater than any of the foreign guides I own. I would expect more from one of the two de-facto leaders in field guides for NA.
If you were to say which is the most complete and portable guide, then the answer might be NG pre Sibley 2 but even with the color change I feel an updated Sibley is a stunner with 111? new birds, over 600 new paintings and even greater 'side bars' for ID discussion.
if Sibley 1 set a high bar of quality what must you really think of Nat Geo? To me the two guides are not even in the same "ballpark". Sure, Sibley is a bit heavier but it's worth it overall. I wouldn't let a few, in your words, "relatively minor points" interfere with the overall guide that Sibley has produced again. The color thing most birders will get used to and not notice as much after some days and weeks. The advantages far outweigh the negatives for myself.
which portraits are you not fond of in sibley 2? keep in mind I only had an opportunity to browse a copy for about an hour so I'm curious. Perhaps you're just talking about the darker images.
see my previous comment about some of the newer NA birds included in S2 (austral flycatchers) seeming to me to be painted more "realistic" than the past birds. It looked to me like the Kiskadee hadn't changed for instance but I could be wrong.
I do not have a copy of Sibley 2 yet. Given the weight, I have so far preferred to bring NG and leave Sibley 1 at home when traveling to the states -- last time bringing the Sibley app on my ipad mini.
I am hoping that the few (3-5?) plates that are too dark (admitted by Sibley in the same comment) and especially that ridiculous but very modern pale grey text will be corrected when the app corresponding to this version of the FG comes out. I am undecided if I want to purchase the book.
Niels
I am hoping that the few (3-5?) plates that are too dark (admitted by Sibley in the same comment) and especially that ridiculous but very modern pale grey text will be corrected when the app corresponding to this version of the FG comes out. I am undecided if I want to purchase the book.
Niels
Mysticete
Well-known member
I still really like the National Geo...the coverage of subspecies and rare vagrants is superb. I do prefer Sibley for some groups, but comparing the size of the two books, if I am going to go to an area with lots of new species and high vagrant potential, I pretty much always take my Nat Geo with me.
Richard Klim
-------------------------
Yes, the subspecies mapping provided for many species is a truly outstanding feature of the NatGeo guide – an extremely useful resource that in itself justifies having a copy for reference. It's a pity that the Sibley Guide doesn't offer at least the same given its greater size/weight.
LabradorDuck
Well-known member
I flipped through a Sibley 2 at the bookstore today, and it does have subspecies-ish maps for Dark-eyed Junco and Fox Sparrow, at least. I didn't run across any others but I wasn't looking carefully. I say "-ish" because the maps are for distinct geographic forms with only an English name provided; some of these may include multiple described subspecies.
As for the color issues: the gray text was apparent, but I could read it at arm's length without straining (at least in the store's lighting conditions). The greens were very green and the reds looked a little odd in places, but I'm not sure I would have noticed if I hadn't been expecting it. Some of the hawks looked too dark. The infamous Scarlet Tanager was bothersome, though. Its red looked dull and dark compared to the Summer Tanager on the facing page, which is the opposite of my experience in the field.
Mike R. K.
Member
here's a link to a November 2013 interview of David Sibley conducted by Birdwatching Magazine about his latest guide.
http://www.birdwatchingdaily.com/bl...es-to-look-for-in-his-revised-guide-to-birds/
here's an answer to one of my questions regarding the more exact detail in some of his paintings...
What was the hardest thing about revising the book?
Trying to blend the new work with the old. The original paintings were done in one marathon session about five years long. There’s a difference between the earliest and latest work in that time, but my style, the colors I used, and the flow of the work were unified.
It’s been almost 15 years since I finished those paintings. My painting style has changed, the colors on my palette have changed, my eyesight has changed, and so much more, but I was still trying to create new paintings that would blend with the old ones, and I was doing a relatively small number of new paintings in small batches, not the continuous stream of work week after week that I did for the first guide
It was an impossible task: I couldn’t really match the old paintings. When the new ones didn’t quite match, I was faced with a choice — revise the old ones to try to bring them closer to the new, revise the new ones, or just let them be different. I think I chose each of these options at different times, and, hopefully, the contrast of styles won’t be a distraction to readers.
http://www.birdwatchingdaily.com/bl...es-to-look-for-in-his-revised-guide-to-birds/
here's an answer to one of my questions regarding the more exact detail in some of his paintings...
What was the hardest thing about revising the book?
Trying to blend the new work with the old. The original paintings were done in one marathon session about five years long. There’s a difference between the earliest and latest work in that time, but my style, the colors I used, and the flow of the work were unified.
It’s been almost 15 years since I finished those paintings. My painting style has changed, the colors on my palette have changed, my eyesight has changed, and so much more, but I was still trying to create new paintings that would blend with the old ones, and I was doing a relatively small number of new paintings in small batches, not the continuous stream of work week after week that I did for the first guide
It was an impossible task: I couldn’t really match the old paintings. When the new ones didn’t quite match, I was faced with a choice — revise the old ones to try to bring them closer to the new, revise the new ones, or just let them be different. I think I chose each of these options at different times, and, hopefully, the contrast of styles won’t be a distraction to readers.
I list some specific illustrations in my initial review - http://www.birderslibrary.com/quick_picks/sibley-guide-second-edition-initial-review.htm
It's not so much that all the images are darker, and not even all the reds (although reds seem to be particularly affected). Some in particular: Scarlet Tanager and Chipping Sparrow (that crown!). And then there are some that you can't just say are too dark, but have a different color altogether, like Worm-eating Warbler (the most troublesome illustration to me).
But, as you mentioned, some do look better, such as many of the flycatchers.
stonechat1
New member
lewis20126
Well-known member
Oh well, I should have waited - I've just bought a copy. How did that male Scarlet Tanager get past the proof review?? A great book and an excellent new edition. I'm not sure the Blue-and-yellow Macaw was required through!
cheers, alan
Richard Klim
-------------------------
Alan, did you buy the North American (Knopf) or the European (Helm) version? If the latter, then you're presumably confirming that it has the same rather dark colour tones...?
lewis20126
Well-known member
I bought it from Amazon UK, so assume the European version (Helm) and yes the male Scarlet Tanager is more of a "Plum-colored Tanager", so I think the dark printing affects both versions. That said 99% of the book is fine - rather like the Large Format Collins guide and its pink-headed Starling.
cheers, alan
Richard Klim
-------------------------
lewis20126
Well-known member
How bizarre. I'll have to check - it's certainly the one with the Magnolia Warbler on the front!
cheers, a
Richard Klim
-------------------------
Amazon makes publishers' territorial rights effectively meaningless! It's crazy, but imports from North America are typically cheaper in the UK than the equivalent UK versions.
Similar threads
