• 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.

Quail? Charente/France, 17/08/2023 (1 Viewer)

It is for a lot of species though. You must have surprised non birders by iding something from a glimpse from a car or whatever at sone point. And that pool of birds grows.

First time I ever saw a corys shearwater was on a pelagic after seeing a few dozen greats. (Also for the first time). It was a second or two at medium range then gone but you could tell instantly it wasn’t a great. I couldn’t right now reel off the features that separate them but you could tell correctly it was a corys on sight.

I couldn’t do corys/scopolis but others are seemingly starting to be able too

And I’m a very poor birder compared to most I know in real life. I’ve been blown away by the ‘how do they know’ moments again and again only for them to be proven right. It takes a number of views but like I said with thekla it can be a relatively small number
 
It is for a lot of species though. You must have surprised non birders by iding something from a glimpse from a car or whatever at sone point. And that pool of birds grows.

First time I ever saw a corys shearwater was on a pelagic after seeing a few dozen greats. (Also for the first time). It was a second or two at medium range then gone but you could tell instantly it wasn’t a great. I couldn’t right now reel off the features that separate them but you could tell correctly it was a corys on sight.

I couldn’t do corys/scopolis but others are seemingly starting to be able too

And I’m a very poor birder compared to most I know in real life. I’ve been blown away by the ‘how do they know’ moments again and again only for them to be proven right. It takes a number of views but like I said with thekla it can be a relatively small number
I agree though I just do not like relying on memory or on quick glances. Or it might just be because I like having images of new birds to be able to prove to others that I’ve seen a species.

Honestly, the main reason why I love the camera is that I’m extremely self-doubting. Though that’s not only in birding, also plays a lot into school work.
 
I agree though I just do not like relying on memory or on quick glances.
The basic problem here is a camera image frequently will reveal a fraction of what available for an observer in the field - example here being both the sightings you mention in this thread:

- there was debate about the first images of your photographed bird, Quail, Woodlark or other lark. In reality, a briefest glimpse of the bird, especially once it flew and regarding behaviour/style of flight, should immediately resolve the quail vs lark question (if not to specific lark/gamebird sp). A camera image is going to struggle in many cases to make up for what you lose by doing less observation and more clicking.

- same with second example, the "group of seven birds that shot up from a ditch", I guess a photo would have been difficult anyhow, but probably any image would quite likely have been a blur of nothing much, but the actual field observation of behaviour here (and fact from a ditch rather than open meadow) very much points to partridge over quail.

I'd follow the advice to see a camera as a back up to concentrating on observation and thinking about behaviour, not a primary means.

Just my way of thinking
 
The basic problem here is a camera image frequently will reveal a fraction of what available for an observer in the field - example here being both the sightings you mention in this thread:

- there was debate about the first images of your photographed bird, Quail, Woodlark or other lark. In reality, a briefest glimpse of the bird, especially once it flew and regarding behaviour/style of flight, should immediately resolve the quail vs lark question (if not to specific lark/gamebird sp). A camera image is going to struggle in many cases to make up for what you lose by doing less observation and more clicking.

- same with second example, the "group of seven birds that shot up from a ditch", I guess a photo would have been difficult anyhow, but probably any image would quite likely have been a blur of nothing much, but the actual field observation of behaviour here (and fact from a ditch rather than open meadow) very much points to partridge over quail.

I'd follow the advice to see a camera as a back up to concentrating on observation and thinking about behaviour, not a primary means.

Just my way of thinking
I don’t actually know if the lark in flight is the same as the one on the ground- the lark on the ground was just something I noticed when looking back at the images- it was only when lot was mentioned that I remembered the lark that I had seen flying only a few minutes before.

Like I’ve said before, I really doubt partridge, I’ve seen them for years and the size was incomparable. I would likely take corn bunting as a more likely option then partridge though I still don’t think they are likely either. I actually never attempted to take a pic of the quail, looked straight into my bino’s but I wasn’t quick enough to catch them.
 
Just want to specify something/ the pics at the start of the thread weren’t pics were I tried to take a picture of anything- I just noticed something in the pics after the fact.

I also want also specify that I still don’t agree 100% with the making 100% identifications of birds with an only a seconds view in flight.
 
I also want also specify that I still don’t agree 100% with the making 100% identifications of birds with an only a seconds view in flight.
Nobody suggested any of us will make 100% identifications every time a bird is briefly seen.

Just the general comment has been that some of us would say your birding skills are likely to become stronger by concentrating more on observation, less on trying to get a photo. At the end of the day though, most important is to do your birding how you like best, be that with camera or without 👍
 
Nobody suggested any of us will make 100% identifications every time a bird is briefly seen.

Just the general comment has been that some of us would say your birding skills are likely to become stronger by concentrating more on observation, less on trying to get a photo. At the end of the day though, most important is to do your birding how you like best, be that with camera or without 👍
I understand this but I still believe that observations cannot be made from milliseconds of flight. I don’t think it would be appreciated in any other science, just my opinion though.

It’s still just a back up but if the bird is only in flight for a couple of seconds then the prefer to take a quick pic. I will still favour bino’s for most other cases though.
 
There’s an argument to be had about it. The idea of someone flushing and someone ready to take photos to clinch id isn’t that unusual. I’ve seen it done with a barred warbler at spurn and heard of it in a Shetland context too

But that’s subtly different. I know I’ll get bins on a flying bird far quicker than a workable camera image. Admittedly my bins are a lot more high end than my camera and some peoples camera and camera skills are far better than mine.
 
They can.
Then let’s agree to disagree, I call that overconfidence- some species are just to hard to separate based on milliseconds in flight.

Obviously, some species are much easier then others a I am specifically talking about the species that are much harder to separate- tree pipits from meadow pipits etc.
 
There’s an argument to be had about it. The idea of someone flushing and someone ready to take photos to clinch id isn’t that unusual. I’ve seen it done with a barred warbler at spurn and heard of it in a Shetland context too

But that’s subtly different. I know I’ll get bins on a flying bird far quicker than a workable camera image. Admittedly my bins are a lot more high end than my camera and some peoples camera and camera skills are far better than mine.
My camera is much more high end then my bins.
 
Then let’s agree to disagree, I call that overconfidence- some species are just to hard to separate based on milliseconds in flight.

Obviously, some species are much easier then others a I am specifically talking about the species that are much harder to separate- tree pipits from meadow pipits etc.
Then let’s agree to disagree, I call that overconfidence- some species are just to hard to separate based on milliseconds in flight.

Obviously, some species are much easier then others a I am specifically talking about the species that are much harder to separate- tree pipits from meadow pipits etc.
It’s not overconfidence, it’s decades of experience of looking at birds.
 
Then let’s agree to disagree, I call that overconfidence- some species are just to hard to separate based on milliseconds in flight.

Obviously, some species are much easier then others a I am specifically talking about the species that are much harder to separate- tree pipits from meadow pipits etc.
You didn't say you were referring specifically to harder to id species, but just 'observations cannot be made from milliseconds of flight'.

You will find in good time that there is no magic wand, some birds will be difficult to id on brief views, some will remain difficult even with prolonged views. Getting photos will help in some cases, think the recent shearwater ids, but still overall nothing beats observation and understanding behaviour etc ...this will be borne from experience
 
You didn't say you were referring specifically to harder to id species, but just 'observations cannot be made from milliseconds of flight'.

You will find in good time that there is no magic wand, some birds will be difficult to id on brief views, some will remain difficult even with prolonged views. Getting photos will help in some cases, think the recent shearwater ids, but still overall nothing beats observation and understanding behaviour etc
I did- I mentioned thekla/crested larks and acknowledged that this obviously isn’t the case for other birds such as blue tits etc.

Though you might not have seen it as it was much earlier in the conversation. Also ‘behaviours’ in milliseconds of flight? That seems more erroneous then anything.

My argument is that cameras can be ‘a magic wand’ and in certain cases, I have some images that it took of a montagus that quickly rose and dropped far in the distance- with my bino’s I would of never had the time to do all the proper identification protocol in the milliseconds available.

If there’s any doubt in your identification of a species then I think it’s better left unidentified, this is my whole argument! I like to be ‘sure’ rather then well it has high probability of being that bird.
 
Also ‘behaviours’ in milliseconds of flight? That seems more erroneous then anything.
What's milliseconds? Long enough to photograph? If yes, then yes, long enough to get flight pattern and other points that will more often help id than a single fuzzy photo of the backend of a disappearing bird 😅 Not to forget they quite likely also call which will id many of these difficult species.

Nothing erroneous, just different perspective.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top