• 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.

Most Comprehensive N Am Photo Guide Yet? (1 Viewer)

J

Jim M.

Member since 2007
Supporter
United States
Coming in Oct is yet another photo guide to N Am birds. This one is by the Stokes, who I associate with beginners guides, but the specs sound impressive. Might be the first N. Am. photo guide with serious appeal to more advanced birders.

See here: http://stokesbirdingblog.blogspot.com/2010/08/stokes-field-guide-to-birds-of-north.html

Interview here: http://cs.birdersworld.com/brdcs/bl...llian-stokes-about-their-new-field-guide.aspx

Among the intriguing features are comprehensive treatment of subspecies (though the claim to have photos of all subsp. is, I think, likely an exaggeration, e.g. because many aren't identifiable in the field), inclusion of more photos for the harder to identify birds, treatment of all code 4 and many ABA code 5 birds, all photos indicate time and place they were taken, and an attempt to treat more Id features than any other guide (including obscure points raised in focused ID articles). Reportedly six years in the making, and also longer than any other N Am guide I know of--over 800 pages.

Jim
 
Last edited:
Looks like they took a list of all the criticisms of other photo guides and tried to remedy them--a commonsensical approach that seems to be rarely taken for some reason.

A few slight disappointments in the specs: while I applaud their opting for a larger format, and greater length, than other photo guides, it's dissapointing they didn't go all the way to say, the page size of the big Sibley or the new Peterson. At over 800 pages it's not something many birders are going to be carrying in the field, so why not just bite the bullet and accept that you are producing a car/reference guide? Also, they refer to showing "migration routes". Think Sibley's approach of showing migration range is more helpful.

Jim

P.S.: I love to review books and movies before they are released--it's so liberating not to be constrained by the details of the actual content! ;-)
 
Last edited:
Jim, the "migration routes" are actual colors, just as in Sibley. Thankfully, they aren't arrows or anything. A larger trim size would allow the photos to be a bit larger, but I'm not sure it would have made the guide any thinner. As it is, the photos are still larger than most other field guides. I'm definitely not a designer, but I'm not entirely sure a larger size would improve it. But that's just my initial impression.

I'm planning on posting a detailed look at the guide as soon as I can.
 
jedigrant said:
Jim, the "migration routes" are actual colors, just as in Sibley. Thankfully, they aren't arrows or anything. A larger trim size would allow the photos to be a bit larger, but I'm not sure it would have made the guide any thinner. As it is, the photos are still larger than most other field guides. I'm definitely not a designer, but I'm not entirely sure a larger size would improve it. But that's just my initial impression.

I'm planning on posting a detailed look at the guide as soon as I can.
Click to expand...

Sounds good Grant; but I'm sure a larger size would have allowed inclusion of more photos, and that's always a plus in my view. As it is, they are averaging appx. 4 photos per species (3400 photos/854 sp.); the big Sibley averages considerably more depictions per species.

I see the book is now listed as "in stock" on Amazon, so more than reviewers can get it now. Noticed this odd bit of hyperbole on the Amazon page, however: "Don and Lillian Stokes are widely recognized as America's foremost authorities on birds and nature" I imagine the publisher dreamed that up; did not see a similar statement on their blog.

Best,
Jim
 
Last edited:
I've got an initial review of the Stokes guide up on my site. A more detailed review will follow.

Jim, you're right about the Sibley guide - it does include more illustrations per species (one of the main things I love about it). But for a photographic guide, the Stokes does include a lot of photos per bird, on average more than any other photo-based guide. And it gives just as much coverage to the rare and range-restricted species, something that many other guides don't do (Smithsonian and, especially, the Princeton guides, for example).

The Stokes guide is very attractive overall, with great, large photos and a good layout. I'd say that the Princeton guides are the only ones more attractive, but they don't include as many photos per species.

The text is ok. I like the attention paid to shape. However, I wish that a behavior section was included. Notes on important behavior (like tail-bobbing) is included, but buried within the Adult plumage description. The section on subspecies is fantastic. Personally, I'm going to be using this a good bit to double-check ranges.

The range maps should be about the same as those in other recent guides (all use data from Paul Lehman). I do wish they were a bit bigger, and the dotted lines can be hard to see.

Overall, I like the guide. It will probably become my general photographic guide of preference.
 
It looks like a very interesting effort; arguably, from the review, the best photo-guide to birds currently on the market. Certainly we don't have such a quality photo-guide in Europe. What I liked about the blurb was the promise to allot space on the grounds of the difficulty of the ID - why don't all guides do this?

However, how long will it hold on to 'first place'? The forthcoming Crossley guide - see http://www.crossleybirds.com/ and http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-Crossley-ID-Guide/Richard-Crossley/e/9780691147789 - looks a very strong contender for the position. On the evidence available it appears to show more plumages and, personally, I prefer the 'look' of Crossley's plates (many won't). Both the Stokeses and Richard Crossley have both put the philosophy behind their books "on the record" and their approaches are very similar.

Fortunately, I won't be back in America until both are in print so I can afford to wait. I wonder, though, how long it will take a European bookseller to come out with a similar guide. After all this is a well established pattern in field guide publication - you Americans innovate and then we Europeans catch up! Sometimes, though, the pupil outshines the master - no American field guide yet comes close to the all round brilliance of the 'Collins guide' by Svensson, Mullarney & Zetterstrom (published, I think, by Princeton in the USA),
John
 
I have a number of photo guides. Most of them fail to give a simple side view of every bird. I need that for bill length. Kaufman is pretty good about that, I would now prefer a bigger page size, though it does travel well.

The new Stokes is still worth the wait, I think.
 
Last edited:
optical confusion and cumbersome use

I don't like the concept of books made like the new Crossley guide. To me they are kind of a nervous overstimulation. I usually lose the overview and can't really concentrate on one illustration after the other on the same page. Though I find the books of this kind attractive at first sight. I really wonder how many people who buy such a book will also use it as a major FG in the long run. The ones I have that are made following such a concept have all been relegated to some secondary shelf space.

Books like the new Stokes guide are fine for a limited group of birds like warblers, shorebirds, maybe raptors. But it's hard to get a sufficient overview over say all the species of North America or Europe to quickly use it in the field. Just too many pages to leaf through. Thus, they are fine if one already pretty much knows which few species one has to consult.
 
Swissboy said:
Books like the new Stokes guide are fine for a limited group of birds like warblers, shorebirds, maybe raptors. But it's hard to get a sufficient overview over say all the species of North America or Europe to quickly use it in the field. Just too many pages to leaf through. Thus, they are fine if one already pretty much knows which few species one has to consult.
Click to expand...

I think this is an inherent advantage of painting-illustrated field guide over photographic ones. They can include more illustrations per species, and yet still format the guide in such a way as to allow easy comparison. I think Sibley and Collins, for example, do a great job with this. The Stokes guide includes a lot of photos per species but, as you said, it's more difficult to make comparisons. On the other hand, Kaufman and the Princeton photo guides make comparing easier, but you get less views of each bird.

This is just my personal opinion, but I think the best approach is to use a painting-based guide (like Sibley, NatGeo, or Collins) as your true field guide, and then back that up with a photographic reference. Right now, I think the Stokes guide may be the best such reference (although I'm still not sorry to also have all the other recent ones).

I, too, am very curious how it will compare to the Crossley guide. One thing that really surprised me is that Crossley says somewhere that rare birds won't get as much space. I guess we'll have to wait and see if that will be an issue. His overall approach has a lot of promise, I think, and I hope that it translates well.
 
I like photos both for sparrows and warblers, if they are well organized. The drawings of sparrows in Nat Geo make no sense to me at all. The birds I know are certainly recognizable, but I would paint them Sibley of Peterson style.

Each volume of the old Stokes books, East and West, had 900 photos, with some overlap. With the two, you got maybe 1500 photos, so this is now twice as many and one volume.
 
Last edited:
I've been advised that my copy is in transit and I'm looking forward to receiving it, looks good in the review
 
Well, it is quite thick, nearly 800 pages on pretty smooth paper. Very nice paper for the photos.

I am looking at the two dowitchers. The 7 and 8 pictures each are plenty. I would prefer one larger picture and maybe 6 small ones.

Peeps are fine.

Not sure how much of the text I will use. In fact I still don't know which book I prefer for text. Kaufman usually gets right to the point, if there is a point to be made.
 
Wow, heavy is an understatement!! I do think the photos are great, but honestly, I don't know that is any better than Kaufman's or the Smithsonian that came out in 2008. I am normally one who thinks that I always can use another field guide, but for some reason my desire is to return it to Amazon rather than keep it.

Like Kaufman or the Smithsonian (or Peterson's, Nat'l Geo), this one also doesn't show juvenile/immature of quite a few species (only 6 for 23 species of woodpeckers) and for quite a few species, there are only 2 (excellent) photos - Ovenbird comes to mind.

I did think that they did well by the gulls, shorebirds & raptors though, especially for a general field guide.

Still waiting for the ultimate field guide!!!
 
On the other hand it is better than the old stokes, limited to one or two photos per bird. Some hawks showed juvenile only!
 
Tero, I completely agree with regards to the improvement over their previous field guides. As I said my previous post - for a general field guide they handled the raptors, gulls and shorebirds very well.

When I first started birding the stokes guides were my first purchases, however, I quickly found that I preferred to use other guides in the field - Kaufman's mainly. I spent last night comparing this new guide to Kaufman's and the Smithsonian - still not sure I am going to keep it. It is definitely a "desk" book - too heavy to casually hold and skim through!
 
The maps are not my favorite. I have mostly better maps. I rely on the recent Peterson editions to see details on the maps.

However, it is not a deciding point. I will find something to do with this. Probably stay in my car till next May, try for Warblers for sure.
 
Must say I'm quite impressed for the money. Compliments my numerous other North American guides quite well, won't carry it in the field but will be useful in the hotel at night for checking on species seen during the day. As others have said, not a stand alone guide but useful
 
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.

Similar threads

D
Field guides Nepal (birds and mammals)
Replies
5
Views
1K
MiddleRiver
MiddleRiver
P
Are Guided Birding Holidays fun?
2 3
Replies
44
Views
4K
Jon Turner
Jon Turner
G
New Swarovski Smart Binoculars
Replies
5
Views
2K
Dyrlege
D
C
AX Visio: is it really as bad as some reviewers claim??
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
7K
Canip
C
JRP01
How did this started for all of you? (And my little story of how I got into this amazing hobby)
Replies
12
Views
1K
Patudo
P

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top