Birding at this point is largely about ticking off a box so your epenis (ebird) numbers can go up. What do you think?

If you have a zoom or enough res then you can just get both shots, it's interesting to see birds in their surrounds and interacting with it and other birds as well as seeing the up close detail of them. You're not limited to just taking one photo.

>>4351689
Birbing is just filling your pokedex

File: file.png (761 KB, 975x727)

761 KB PNG

>>4351686
Completely agree anon, like this picture for example... woah it's a close up picture of a bird! The same as a million others out there! The worst thing is people will spend hours waiting for this one picture. Don't get me wrong, it's a great picture, it's just also boring as fuck

>>4351704
It’s only boring as fuck to everyone else. When you reach maturity as a photographer you reach the birding stage, because you are no longer shooting for others approval, you are shooting the longest most difficult unpredictable unlikely shots just because it is the most challenging application of the culmination of all your skill, tech, determination and patience, so when it all comes together in the 1/8th of a second that a fucking bird actually sits still, and you actually get a good shot, it is a reward entirely for yourself. Also most people find birds pretty and as living things slightly more interesting to look at than corners of buildings, so you can actually share your shots and people won’t think you’re quite as aspie weirdo as the average photographer.

>>4351708
Macro is far more challenging than bird photography, fight me

The most challenging application of photographic skill is aerial photography of vessels at sea from low level fixed winged aircraft in various air forces and maritime patrol agencies. 1.5 seconds to see, compose, focus, pan and shoot, typically while strapped into a five point harness, travelling at 300-500km/h, shooting through a curved pane of perspex, needing to compensate for the placement of the aircraft by the pilot and if you don't get the shot, you fuck up a prosecution or don't gain critical intelligence of a new device or fail to obtain identifying markings or faces.

That or school portraits. Those motherfuckers who shoot school portraits are fucking animals.

>>4351719
Sometimes they’re fucking the kids, tied up in their basements. I saw Jewel from Firefly getting some of that action on the X Files.

>>4351722
Animals.

>>4351686
>actual substance or story.
Streetfag cope.
Telephotos are needed for birding because otherwise you simply don't get the detail you want.
If the background/environment matters, and that's a big if, then sure, maybe you want a shorter lens. But otherwise, fill the frame with the bird.

>>4351708
>you are shooting the longest most difficult unpredictable unlikely shots just because it is the most challenging application of the culmination of all your skill, tech, determination and patience, so when it all comes together in the 1/8th of a second that a fucking bird actually sits still, and you actually get a good shot, it is a reward entirely for yourself.
That's basically Pokemon Go, photography edition.

See the thing is, even if you gave most photographers some magic 10-900mm f/2 lens, they're still going to default to whatever they think is most impressive or worth to shoot. Wildlife has this fucky thing where you have zero guarantee you'll even get a single chance let alone two, so I totally get the idea that you want to get a super detailed up-close, because they're fucking awesome. Other areas of photography give you more opportunities to experiment and such. Your shot is nice. Framed and cropped in a pleasant way. But if I'm doing wildlife there's just normally way too many variables that you could easily fuck up a good shot trying to incorporate more than just the zoomed in subject.

Tl;dr, you're talking about hard-mode wildlife. Arguably more impressive in its own way.

>>4351739
ur2slow >>4351697
cum on keep up

Its basically this >>4351689

Wildlife photography is gearfag+birdwatching

>>4351708
Ok, boomer to english

When you lose your job as a wedding photographer, you remain addicted to buying high end gear, so to excuse it you get into bird "photography" so you can finally buy $1500 m43 lenses and $2500 FF lenses again

>>4351686
>ITT: People who don't do a thing share their opinions based on their inexperience doing that thing

so, typical day in an internet comments section then

This anon >>4351775 gets it. All the rest of you shitheads you of you shitheads are behind the times and/or on the outside looking in.
Here is a clue for the tards in this thread: Bird phitography has changed. Pictures of birds doing nothing whether close up or with a background don't mean shit anymore. It's about action now. That's right. Birding is an action photography now. A bird doing something unique is what in en vogue/cuttting edge. Go enter any bird related photo contest and the judges will pre cuss everyone out about sending in photos of birds doing jack shit. In contests now, if a bird picture shows a bird doing nothing the photo gets thrown out automatically.

>>4352849
"typos

>>4352849
I doubt this is anything new. just google "bird photography is boring" and you'll find thousands of forum threads full of hobbyists having a personal crisis because they've starting to finally question if birding photos even look that good. Yes, Jimbo has only just realised after 10 years and $25,000 in gear that his ultra-closeup of a raven on a perch is not compelling material. What amazes me is the genuine sense of shock these people have: "What do you mean bird photography is BORING?!"

Most birders liken their craft to hunting, not art. They enjoy the ""chase"" (i.e. 800mm zoom) and then achieve sexual release upon hitting the shutter only to never look at the photo again. Don't worry about these people.

File: file.png (443 KB, 1280x853)

443 KB PNG

I completely agree. Traditional close up portrait-ey photos of birds are completely boring to me.

Sure, it takes a lot of skill, patience, research, field craft, experience, and gear to take those impressive photos... but that's it, they might be technically perfect, but often lacking artistically in my eyes.

And that's why I try to look for inspiration elsewhere. If you want to do the same, I suggest looking at wildlife photography contests and looking for those ones that push the boundaries of what's possible.

Pic related: it's a runner up from last year's Nature Photographer of the Year (NPOTY), a black and white photo of cormorants with ICM (intentional camera movement). Take all of your bird knowledge, skill, gear, etc, but add some creativity, and you can get photos like this.

I look through the galleries of contests like NPOTY, WildartPOTY, BirdPOTY (and even order their books) to look for ways to be creative with my bird photography.

File: file.png (699 KB, 800x1067)

699 KB PNG

>>4353431
Another one, 'Between Two Worlds,' by Henley Spiers. This was taken underwater, when the cormorant was just starting its dive down. I am always in awe when I look at this photo.

I've heard from a podcast that European photographers tend to lean more toward artistic photos compared to American photographers, who take more "traditional" wildlife photos, so maybe there is some value in seeking out these photographers.

File: file.png (2.65 MB, 1330x892)

2.65 MB PNG

I think many of the best wildlife photos are when the photographer incorporates techniques from other genres of photography. This one, another photo from the NPOTY contest, seems to have some landscape composition techniques, with the bird in the photo being incredibly tiny.

It is definitely more difficult to achieve these photos, but they are so much more memorable. These are the types of photos you would display at a gallery or at home, not those boring bird portraits.

>>4351741
It's POKEMON SNAP, you uncultured troglodyte.

>>4353436
that is a nice one, but birders are autistic and if you can't see the cloaca its a shit photo