South Georgia Predators: Giant Petrels

Canon 7D, 500mm f4L IS, 1/250th @f5.6, ISO 100

There are two species of Giant Petrels patrolling the Southern Ocean, known simply as Northern and Southern Giant Petrels. It would be great of course if their names actually meant there was some delineating line between the two, unfortunately, there isn't. They are of the same size and general shape, and their plumages are similar and they are often found in the same places. Separating the two, particularly at sea, is not always an easy task. Northerns have an orange tip to the bill and the eye is usually pale. While the Southern has a greenish tip to the bill and a generally dark eye.

So there you go, got that?

So what's the bird in the image? The bill is out of sight, tucked into the back feathers of the bird. But the eye, conveniently is open. The color? Gray. Thus, Northern Giant Petrel.

There is your birding tip of the day. Enjoy.

Now these things are the size of albatross. 6 feet from wing tip to wing tip and can be absolutely wicked predators. Primarily the Giant Petrels are scavengers, feasting on whatever nature provides, but occasionally they will cooperatively gang up on and kill things as large as elephant seal pups. It is unpleasant at best to watch 15 of these hulking birds reaching into the guts of a dead seal, blood smattered across their pale feathers and gore dripping from their beaks. In action, it is hard to believe that these birds are the same ones that nap so contentedly on the beach. Their long sharp bills tucked daintily into the soft feathers of their back.

If however, you are an injured or dying seal, many pairs of those lovely gray eyes will be the last thing you ever see.

Striated Caracara: Steeple Jason Island, Falklands

Canon 7D, 17-40f4L @ 40mm, 1/400th sec/ f10, ISO 200, handheld while laying on the ground

Steeple Jason Island, as well as being home to the largest colony of seabirds in the western hemisphere, is also home to numerous pairs of Striated Caracaras. These birds are exceedingly bold. Living on islands as they do, without any predators, they are accustomed to being the top of the food chain. They are quite unwilling to allow something as inconsequential as humans to change that. Striated Caracaras are scavengers for the most part, but also prey upon penguin and other seabird chicks when the opportunity arises. It is their scavenger nature that makes them most interesting from a photographic perspective. Let me tell you the story:

This bird, and two others, were scratching around in the dirt and heather, taking occasional dust-baths when I and a group of clients walked up. Now tourism etiquette in the southern ocean requires that we don't approach an animal closer than 15 feet. Of course the animals themselves are under no such restrictions and are perfectly allowed to approach you. When I saw these birds, I laid down on the ground to snap a few low-angle portraits with my 500mm. I didn't get to snap a shot, because as soon as I laid down this bird looked at me and bounded straight over. There I was, on my stomach, with a large, endangered, and highly photogenic raptor about a foot away, with a 500mm lens on my camera. It couldn't have been more worthless for the situation. So I decided to just enjoy the moment and watch. The Caracara hopped about, I slowly sat up, it came over and eyed my foot, wondering surely if I was yet dead enough to eat. Eventually, I could take it no longer and slowly removed my camera backpack, unzipped it and pulled out the 17-40. Every movement I made the bird became less sure I was about to die. I was certain that before I managed to get the lens on the camera that the caracara would decide I was too alive to consume and fly off, it's head down in disappointment.

Gratefully, my slow and occasionally jerky movements perhaps resembled death throes and I was able to get the lens on while not losing the bird's interest. I snapped a few from a sitting position before lowering myself again to the ground for this low angle, wide perspective of the Caracara on the rock with the mountains of Steeple Jason in the background.

I managed to snap off a few shots before the poor bird realized that this clicking, breathing, and occasionally brightly-flashing human was not, in fact, food. Finally it did arrive at the truth and flew off to look for something a bit closer to death.

Sorry to disappoint.

Return of the Winter Birds

Canon 7D, 500mm f4L IS, Tripod mounted, 1/80th @ f5.6, ISO 800.

I mentioned a few days back how, now that winter is arriving, the light is long and sweet for most of the daylight hours. Well its true, but in exchange, we have many fewer hours of light. In fact today we declined down to 8 hours and 28 minutes of possible sunlight, a loss of about 6 and half minutes over yesterday. But that is all beside the point. Yesterday I took advantage of the last hour of daylight to shoot the birds around our feeders. I've been trying for awhile to get a really excellent image of a Boreal Chickadee, but I still haven't attained it. The one above is fine, but not much more than that. Getting the perfect image takes a lot of time and effort, and I'll be working on this one for awhile. I think part of the problem is that I'm having a hard time visualizing exactly what I want from the image. This part of the creative process of photography that is most difficult for me. Determining what I want before I go out and try to get it. It is best to have some idea of the story you want to tell. In this case, I want to say something about the bird, its natural history and habitat, its ability to survive the cold. The image above does none of those things. Rather is a simple portrait, eating a sunflower seed no less. Hardly a natural food source here in Fairbanks.

My point in all this rambling is to think about your photos before you go out and try to make them. Ask yourself what story you want to tell and then think hard about what image will tell that story, then work to make the image. I'm still struggling with this myself.

OK- Bird Photography

Beware! The following is a long, opinionated, and possibly blatantly wrong series of thoughts on the art of bird photography.

Arthur Morris. There you go. That name says a lot about the current state of bird photography. Artie, as he calls himself, is an extremely talented photographer who has made his reputation with his own “brand” of imagery. His trademark is close shots, often portraiture, of wild birds in low angle, over the shoulder light. Very sharp with clean even backgrounds. It is stylish and simple. It WAS a distinctive look. I emphasize the word WAS because Artie’s work has become so synonymous with good bird photography that it seems every photographer shooting birds is doing their damnedest to imitate his style. Close. Sharp. Clean. As a result (and this is where my opinion rears its ugly head) run of the mill bird photography has become very, very, boring. The birds are beautiful and photographed in nice light they are usually in profile (ideally with the head turned 15 degrees toward the camera). The images are technically perfect and they all look exactly the same.

This striving for the “ideal” shot has led to a remarkable reliance on Photoshop. The program is used to clone out distracting elements (even very minor ones), to clean up non-uniform backgrounds, to remove unwanted parts of the image (other birds, evidence of humans, etc.), and even, in the more extreme cases, to replace parts of the bird that are not shown in ideal conditions with parts from other images. Thus it is possible to find shots of birds where a closed eye has been replaced by an open eye from the next photo in the series. A clipped wing may be replaced with one copied from the opposite side, feathers re-arranged, dirt removed from bills, feet placed in more aesthetically pleasing positions… WHERE DOES IT STOP?

At what point have we stopped portraying nature as it is and turned it into what we want it to be? I don’t think this is just a philosophical question. Nature photography has been criticized in the past for portraying nature as an ideal and not as reality. The late, great Galen Rowell received a scathing critique from an art critic who said that he was misleading the public through use of “colored filters” to believe that nature was a bright and colorful place when in fact it was mostly, brown, green, and gray. That critic was obviously wrong and I pity them for having spent so little time outside not to have seen the colors the world can produce. But if Galen’s true to life images could give that impression, what would that critic say about the kind of manipulations now common in bird photography?

But Dave, you say, we are talking about art not reality. In which case I say “touché…BUT…” photography is different. I’m sorry, but it just is. People, the viewing public, look at photography very differently from other forms of art. People BELIEVE photography in a way they don’t with other art forms. And when it comes to nature photography, well, I think nature should be appreciated in all its diverse forms, and our images should represent this, not just showing all the rare moments when our avian subjects appear in perfect light with clean backgrounds with their bills pointing exactly 15 degrees off of perpendicular. OK that was an off-subject tangent. My point is not that bird photography shouldn’t be viewed as art, but rather that bird photography shouldn’t all look the same.

The strange part is that I think many bird photographers recognize this in their gut. Because when the rare image appears on the Bird Photographer’s Network that has truly broken away from the formula like this one HERE. It gets rave reviews. Others, that I think are rather stunning with hidden textures and surprises like this one HERE, get notably mixed reviews because, in the eyes of many photographers, the image is close enough to being “correct” that it is wrong.

Now, after I wrote all this, I must acknowledge that I do love a good clean bird photo. These shots are easy to appreciate, and given the right situation and equipment are technically easy to execute. They illustrate the written word very well, but they are rarely memorable. The simple, the clean and sharp, may be the bread and butter of the wildlife photographer, but it should never be the only images made. As photographers we must remember to expand our vision beyond the normal. It is outside of the norm where we will find the truly exceptional.

Rant over.

Opportunism

Some more candy today. I've developed what is beginning to seem like a network of folks keeping their eyes open for cool bird photography opportunities. And today, before I headed into town, a friend called to tell me she had a flock of Bohemian Waxwings hanging out in the choke cherry trees behind her house. So I made a short detour on my way in this afternoon and spent a half hour shooting from her deck. These images are just quick and dirty post-processing of the jpegs. I haven't dived into the RAW files yet, perhaps I'll have a chance to work on them a bit more this evening. Then I'll post a few of the "finished" images so you can see the differences. This should give me the chance to start talking a bit about bird photography. I've got some thoughts on the subject, so beware.

For your viewing pleasure here are a few more:

Back to the basics

For all my blather about art, vision, and the creative process. I still really enjoy just taking my camera, my big lens and and finding a nice cooperative bird to photograph. It doesn't take a lot of effort to frame, compose or light. You just arrange yourself in the best possible location for the sun, think about the background and the depth of field and start shooting. It's a bit like eating candy. Fun and easy to consume, but too much of it will make you sick. Still, for me, wildlife is a big part of my income. Many of the magazines I write for are birding and wildlife publications and these straight-forward images are the best accompaniment.

Anyway, this shot of a Great Gray Owl, I made yesterday afternoon about two miles from my house. The bird was very cooperative and perched in the same tree without flying for the hour I spent with it. I would have liked to get some flight shots, or something with a bit better background than the hazy blue sky, but I can't always have everything I want.

More backyard photos

I'm not in much of a mood to write today so instead thought I'd share a few images from this afternoon, shooting birds at the feeders. Needless to say there isn't a whole lot of variety in terms of species, but the light is getting nice and I've been enjoying standing out in the snow making images.

Common Redpoll. These guys are visiting in droves and devouring about two pounds of sunflower chips a day.

Boreal Chickadee. These are fairly common around the house and a few visit the feeders each day. They've got a thing for peanut butter.

Gray Jay. A family group has been visiting daily. They are something of bullies, scare the other birds off and the then proceed to devour whatever isn't bolted down. You can see some unmentionable disappearing down the gullet of this fella.

Black-capped Chickadee. Everyone's favorite. I had a friend a few year ago who used to say "If Chickadees were as big as Jays, no one would go into the woods." I think there is some truth to that.

Another Common Redpoll. Like I said, they are common.

No real secret to the images. They were all made with my 500mm f4 and Canon 40D. Tripod mounted using my Whimberly Sidekick Gimbal-type adapter.

Hopefully, I'll be feeling a bit more like writing tomorrow.