Sub division of the Nature thread

[digiman]

Re: Sub division of the Nature thread

Done.

Now that's good service!

[Nathaniel]

Re: Sub division of the Nature thread

I agree. Excellent service & thank you Robert.

[the black fox]

Re: Sub division of the Nature thread

and another thanks from me .well done robert

[Stan]

Re: Sub division of the Nature thread

There was a lot of discussion this time last year when Nat posed exactly the same question and most people then thought it was a waste of time so I am rather surprised that without a full discussion this time round, Robert has just gone ahead and split the sections based on the opinions of two or three members

to present a animal or bird on here or elsewhere for that matter with no explanation as to the circumstances i.e wild or captive is surely pure deception as unless you know you will just assume its down to the skills of the photographer when its more than likely just photoshop skills getting rid of the wires

I realise this is a reference to my posting of a red fox. Yes, I made no reference to the location etc but most people would realise it was going to be from the BWC and there was no deception intended.

As to skills, particularly with animals, whilst I agree that the locating of them is far more difficult with wild rather than captive, once located there is just as much skill required by the photographer to get a shot

[Nathaniel]

Re: Sub division of the Nature thread

The sub division was brought about to avoid any sort of confusion as to where the subjects were taken from. It is pure deception to post BWC and other captive subjects in a divison which is bound to mislead members. I was quite often misled by some of the pictures that had been posted in the wild animals/birds section when they were taken in tame places like BWC & Birds of Prey centres where the animals and birds do not have to forage for their food but are fed daily by the owners. To me these are tame shots,irrespective of the photographic skills necessary to take good pictures.

[the black fox]

Re: Sub division of the Nature thread

The membership has grown since then Stan ,also we are getting a lot more people posting photos and also commenting on them .and while some of us AVID wildlife photographers realise that the shots were taken in a captive environment others just assume you have taken them in the wild .
I have posted one today from a few years ago of a stoat with a rabbit in its mouth I remember the day well I had to walk around the reserve looking out for them ,about a 3 mile hike approx ,till I spotted this one along the river bank I then had to run for a quarter of a mile along the bank keeping up with it taking photos the whole time and then wait till the kits appeared about two hours later .
Where as you can just walk into the centre go to the stoat enclosure and take your photos . Same result but to not state that it's a captive animal is wrong ,even more so when people are congradulating you on your capture of it .
It's not slating your photography skills or photoshop abilities which are really good .its just being to economic with facts which I think prompted nat to post the thread

[Nathaniel]

Re: Sub division of the Nature thread

Perhaps, I am the oldest or one of the oldest forum member still walking about and taking photographs, I might pull a bit of rank here and say that it was a big effort for me last week. First of all I had to get up early (I am a late riser due to my medication) & meet up with Jeff & walk with him to take the pics of the snow bunting in the wild. I had to find a gentle slope , slowly climb up a parapet wall, when Jeff simply jumped on to it, and then walk along a narrow ledge, get down to the shingles beach and walk some distance on the shingles.Even then I couldn't spot the bird until Jeff, with his Lynx eyes,spotted it. So it was a big effort for me and then I did manage some decent pictures which I am very very proud of. These I have already posted on the "birds" thread.

Hence, without any disrespect to any member, it is only right for real wildlife pictures to appear in the proper wildlife section. I do not know why there should be any fuss about this.

[AndyMulhearn]

Re: Sub division of the Nature thread

The membership has grown since then Stan ,also we are getting a lot more people posting photos and also commenting on them .and while some of us AVID wildlife photographers realise that the shots were taken in a captive environment others just assume you have taken them in the wild .

While there has been an increased in membership, it's somewhat telling that none of the new members felt it necessary to comment in this thread. As far as I can tell, no one posted in this discussion that joined after 2012.

Anyway, it's fairly moot as the change has been made.

[AndyMulhearn]

Re: Sub division of the Nature thread

Perhaps, I am the oldest or one of the oldest forum member still walking about and taking photographs, I might pull a bit of rank here [snipped[

I don't recognise your right to pull rank Nat. Whatever made you think anyone should or would?

[Nathaniel]

Re: Sub division of the Nature thread

No offence intended but I thought I would let members know how difficult it is for me at 80 years plus, to go out and take pictures in the wild and I still enjoy doing it as it gives me a certain buzz.

[antoeknee]

Re: Sub division of the Nature thread

This forum is principally about photography with Canon cameras and I understood the divisions were just a way of making it easier to find the type of subject that interests you.

Most other forums I'm on seem to make a distinction between wildlife and nature photography where clearly captive work goes in nature.

At this rate well have subsections for trains/planes, those in collections and working trains/planes (this is a tounge in cheek comment before anyone froths at the mouth).

Seriously though I think generally the narrative or title has been used to indicate how the image was obtained.

[Tigger]

Re: Sub division of the Nature thread

Seriously though I think generally the narrative or title has been used to indicate how the image was obtained.

agree, in most of the threads I've seen the poster has detailed where the shot was taken

It does seem like a forum change has been made without more feedback from members and surely a better way would have been a poll asking members for yes or no to a change and this would have allowed more members to offer feedback even newer ones that maybe didn't want to post a comment but would feel better about ticking a yes or no

I would be in the no group and think its a shame its been changed without everyone having there say .....Oh well its happened ;o((

[Stan]

Re: Sub division of the Nature thread

This forum is principally about photography with Canon cameras

and as such, as I mentioned in my red fox thread, it is about improving our photography by means of critique and advice irrespective of where a photograph was taken

I would be in the no group and think its a shame its been changed without everyone having there say .....Oh well its happened ;o((

perhaps its not too late given how speedily the change was made following comments from just two or three members so perhaps Robert could just as speedily change it back with a similar m=number (so far) of dissenters

Stan

[Nathaniel]

Re: Sub division of the Nature thread

I may be getting old in years but my mental faculties are right on the penny. I cannot understand,why for the life of me,any one should make a fuss or raise objection to a simple CLARIFICATION of a nature thread- between photos taken in the wild and in captivity. The present sub division is very clear cut and leaves no doubt in anyone's minds about where the picture was taken. Why would anyone object to a classification that better explains to all and sundry in which capacity the picture was taken? -unless it is to misrepresent/mislead members. I am completely lost here. Is better classification good or bad?

[Columbarius]

Re: Sub division of the Nature thread

Damned if you make a change, damned if you don't. I feel really sorry for Robert in all this.