Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

I realize that BIF and BOW are a bit different and more challenging than birds setting still.
So, I was wondering about....birds "in" water....birds "near" water....birds "over" water (perched)....or simply water birds, say, on a beach.
Since this is sort of a bird section, would these be allowed? I'm certain this section does not want to be inundated with every kind of bird imaginable but, certain birds such as Egrets or black and white birds present their own set of problems to get right. Also, many here use and are well versed with long zooms. Pulling from the wealth of info from experienced bird shooters here, would be a great advantage.
What bird shots are allowed and which ones are discouraged?

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

The idea of BIF/BOW is to share & teach long-lens photography techniques for moving birds. Nearly any camera-owner can photograph a bird standing on land, standing on a branch, or standing in shallow water, so no real technique to learn or share. Flying birds are naturally faster and harder to track, whereas swimming birds are more likely to abruptly change direction. Neither problem exists with stationary birds.

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

Not so sure. Some birds can run/walk pretty fast :|

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

Sounds like subjects for the Photo Gallery. Or you could always start Birds-on-the-Run section. :roll:

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Follow the K.I.S.S. principal = "Birds"

martinfisherphoto Loc: Lake Placid Florida

I think they will let you slide with A running bird, but much harder than in flight in my opinion.

(Download)

EnglishBrenda Loc: Kent, England

You mean like female prison breaks?

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

GREAT shot !

birdpix Loc: South East Pennsylvania

As the moderator of the BIF/BOW forum, I have always tried to have a liberal outlook as to what qualifies for the section. If someone posts a series of 4 photos all of which are of a bird in flight except one that shows it just before take off, I will not object. The non flying shot is part of the story and should be included.

The definition of a bird in flight is generally pretty clear. The definition of a bird on the water is not so easy to delineate. A swimming duck is pretty easy to accept but what about an egret wading in shallow water or even mud? A Sea Duck that is being moved around by the waves might be difficult to photograph but an Egret can usually be quite stationary and easy to capture. And what about a Sanderling on the beach that one minute is knee deep in the run out from a wave and the next just on wet sand. Does that mean that only the one showing his toes in the water is acceptable?

The truth is the BOW part of the section was added because it was felt that the BIF part was too narrow a focus not because of any perceived difficulty in photographing birds on the water. In my opinion, this forum
is still too narrow and should include all bird photography.

This forum gets little traffic and there are several reasons for this. Firstly, bird photographers don't go out with the intention of just shooting BIF's. They will photograph whatever is available to them and when they get back and decide to post to UHH they have a mixed bag of shots. It is much easier to post them all to the Photo Gallery and not divide them up.

Secondly, because there is so little traffic, a post will generate very few views and comments. Isn't that what we are looking for: someone to see our work and give us positive feedback? In fact, some of the best bird photographers on UHH never post to BIF/BOW despite the fact that they take a lot of appropriate shots. The BIF/BOW section averages only 1.25 new topics per day. The photo gallery averages 105. Many, not all, posters have learned to game the system to keep their posting near the top of page one by responding to each and every laudatory post individually with a thank you and timing them to prevent their topic's movement to page two. We all know that once a topic moves off to page two it is forgotten.

Lastly, This and other "Specialty" sections are buried under the "All Sections" heading on the home page. Many people don't even know they exist, especially newbies, and they certainly don't know they must subscribe to them. Honestly, some of the specialty sections are doing quite well but would "True Macro" or "Close up Photography" do as well if they only allowed shots of spiders on webs? No, you would say that is too restrictive.

Given the fact that nearly 50% of all the posts on the "Photo Gallery" are pictures of birds should tell you that there is a tremendous interest in the subject. Having a section devoted to it would only serve to increase interest in it. It is so large a group that it deserves to be right up top with all the permanent sections.

What say you?

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Just plain "Birds" makes more sense.

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

Martin, you have always set bar high in the True Macro section and the images you post here are no exception :wink: :-)

The squabbling Coots are outstanding :thumbup:

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

Brenda, aren't you a cheeky one :lol:

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

I know quoting this whole post will drive Douglas crazy(er). I generally snip out what I'm not replying to but, in this case, I think all of this was worth quoting.

This is more the kind of answers I was looking for and more. Since traffic is so slow here, perhaps making it more inclusive would be a good step.

The True Macro and Close-up are closely related but, completely different. If they were both lacking in traffic, it might be worth considering combining the two, however, they are each doing very well on their own. The True Macro section will occasionally let a close up slide by if it relates to, and is included with a True Macro shot.

If this section were simply birds, with the objective of learning to achieve really good bird shots of all kinds, than seems it would be a good thing. I suspect that those just looking for a pat on the back or an "attaboy", will continue to post in the Gallery.

I hesitate to post in the Gallery because I want learn. I don't learn from "attaboys".

Perhaps, see what the regulars here think about opening up this section to more types of bird photography.

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

Especially after what "birdpix" said (posted):wink:

EnglishBrenda Loc: Kent, England

I agree with the title 'Birds' or similar. Birding is a tricky genre and I think many of us would benefit from mutual help and support. I would post here whereas I don't at present.