Including birds with tails and front legs.
You guys have to go outside to see wildlife?Meanwhile, here I am indoors in my bed watching tits.
>>4474472Cute, you should do some setups with that.
Chilly mornings in England now!
>>4474457>Including birds with tailsI sure hope so, most birds have tails
>>4474470>>4474481Great shots
Taken this morning
>>4474493
>>4474495Rolling shutter moment
>>4474498
>>4474493>>4474495BeautifulHow long did you wait and how far were you positioned?
>>4474501>How long did you waitA dozen minutes after I spotted him. I could hear his high pitched calls but all I could see was a blue dart crossing my FOV at incredibly high speeds>how far were you positioned?I was in a birdwatching post. After a while he landed on a branch next to the window about 3 meters away.
>>4474502>a dozen minutes, 3 meters awayI envy you, I've had one come 12 meters away after half an hour and then tried at a different (closer) spot multiple times, waited for 6-7 hours in total with no luck. Cheeky bastard finally cam right when I was done packing up. That makes me want to try it again! Great shots in any case
I love tits so much
Genuine question, how do I edit this to be more tasteful? Or should I take these shots differently?I don't often take birdshots, so I'm a bit out of my comfort zone.
>>4474540No idea it looks fine to me, I'd say that what would make the shot better would rather be a different pose to see a bit more of the bird and a larger dof
The image quality was not good, the position of the sun really messed up the image, but I couldn't move to another position cuz it was very difficult to photograph one of these still.
>>4474503Kek. They're very easy to spook and they move a lot. I just had enough time to take my pictures before he took off. Then he was chilling about a hundred meters away, right in front of me but he was too small and too far away to get a decent pic even at 640mm (pic rel)Good luck next time
>>4474516Luv me sum long beaks
>>4474566>small tits vs. long peckersto each his own
>>4474542Thanks man, I appreciate the feedback.This is the one other picture I took, I'll look into playing around with dof so it looks less flat.
got a bunch of squirrel pics this morning but unfortunately all the photos where the squirrel is doing anything interesting suck as pictures
>>4474594Damn, I can smell this picture. A lot of my childhood was spent around pines like this.
>>4474700
this guy was very shy. pretty bird though
>>4474566oh you lucky bitch
peep season is sadly coming to a close. hoping to get a close shot of two winter birds this year: horned lark and snow bunting. Anyone ever get close to these guys?Anything else fun to go after in the winter? There are some cool ducks on Ontario but I've never had luck getting close and I feel like i could kill myself real easily fucking around down by the water
There were like 20 people watching this fucking thing, so i didn't want to get any closer than this. This is 600mm and heavily cropped.I want to respect their view so i didn't get any closer, but why they gotta stand like 200 feet away. Peeps run right the fuck up to you, they don't care.
>>4474809>>4474810>>4474811>>4474812>>4474813>>4474814god damn these are nice
>>4474819Thanks, beautiful shot you have there anon.
>>4474815>>4474815should i just ignore the people who say don't approach megafuana?I don't really care if i die, I just don't wanna habituate them or whatever, so then they get shot.since we doin other shit now here's one of the minks of sandpiper island
>>4474828>megafuanaAnon ... are you a time traveler?
>>4474828Everything is always scared here and runs away, and I avoid places with human activity besides me. Ignore everyone.
>>4474835sick photo anon
We doing this too?
>>4474840TY
stop spamming retard
>>4474857Be new somewhere else.
>>4474833it just means big animal, like >100lb
>>4474871I enjoyed your dump greatly. you're not the film guy right?
>>4474888>checkedCheers. Not sure which film guy you're referring to but I do shoot mostly film nowadays, I just don't digitize it anymore. The last film shot I uploaded here was probably 2 years ago, all of these were with DSLR. Good shot, by the way.
Are the photos you're spamming shot by yourself or did you gather them online?
>>4474836>>4474822>>4474818Best ones. Rest are snap shits, although interesting animals. >>4474857 anon is right. Stop spamming. Post quality, and at least add some flare in pp...
>>4474836All the pics you posted are fantastic but this one has me intrigued, how did you pull off the bokeh surrounding the squirrel? >>4474945>>4474953You guys (or guy) are jealous and/or new. Most likely jealous of the based tripfriend. Had he posted them anonymously you wouldn't be trying to derail.
>>4474957Didn't even notice he was tripfagging, and I simply asked a genuine question without judgement yet, although spamming is annoying. The photos are definitely great.
>>4474957>how did you pull off the bokeh surrounding the squirrel?My guess is that it has been cropped. As for the rest of your post. It's not that they aren't quality photos of wildlife, it's that they are for one, mostly out of season, two lack interesting composition, or even an artistic flare, like this one >>4474823, they're just good quality photos, that's it. We've gone through this with the birders many times.
>>4474962You mean flair? Because the composition is quite artistic to me. >My guess is that it has been cropped. It's clearly telephoto, what intrigues me is the way it's surrounded by white bokeh. Either some lens effect I don't know or something white right behind it framing the squirrel which would be amazing.
>>4474962I'm also suspecting that he's not the author of these photos, which isn't a problem but should be specified. The spamming tells me that he doesn't care about feedback.
>>4474953>>4474962nigga you are really fucking jealousartistic flare, lmao
>>4474965Where's the jealousy? It's called criticism. I can Google these animals and see thousands of similar quality photos. They just aren't unique that's all. There's no playing with shadows or lighting, they're all just photos of animals taken in mid day.
Crow being an annoying prick
>>4474968yeah yeah, sure you can but the reason you'll have to google instead of showing everyone your artistic flare, shadowplay n' lightwork, is because you've never shot anything like this in your life and are just making up empty criticismsu jelly
>>4474973Well at least you admit you only see this as playing Pokémon with a bazooka lens and fancy camera.
>>4474809Why are you posting pics you found on the internet? What's the intent?https://giulianodomenichini.com/2025/06/06/%F0%9F%93%8Dquando-la-natura-chiama-in-silenzio/https://giulianodomenichini.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/fagiano.jpg1000x668 is exactly the size of the pic from this article.
>>4474974at least you admit you are a nophoto fraud pretending to be le artiste du jelliehere's some advice, friendly critiquestop that shit and start taking photosthen maybe, after years of hard work and dedication, you will be able to post anything half as good as what this tripfag postedboth in terms of quality and la artistica visione.
>>4474962Interesting composition is secondary when you're birding, doughbeit. Shooting animals and shooting mostly static scenes are very different styles of photography.Same with sports photography, composition doesn't matter that much.
>>4474977I posted two of my relatively recent photos itt from my last trip out. Went out for birds, but got nothing worthy of sharing. Lots of chipmunks tho. >>4474696>>4474695I can easily give critical analysis of these photos, for one, can be sharper, always. Two second one is a bit bland, I should have spent more time in post working with highlights. But notice how I tried to frame the little guy picking his head up with foreground, I thought that was kinds neat. >>4474978You're just documenting animals at that point. Which is fine, but it's not interesting or photo contest worthy or even attempting to make a photo of something you'd want on your wall.
>>4474980These threads are about photos you took recently and want to show to other anons, it's not a photo contest. Maybe they're great, maybe they're just uninteresting pics of pigeons, who cares, it's about showing photos you took yourself.Then we hit image limit, thread dies, we create a new one. Rinse and repeat.I won't blame anons for posting "uninteresting pics", at least they can get inspiration from more skilled anons. Though I will blame retards for posting photos they stole somewhere on the internet, it defies the point of these threads.
>>4474980jesus christyeah, maybe decades not years
>>4474982I agree and I even mentioned about the recent part, most of those photos aren't even recent, unless it's spring or winter where they live right now. And yea, stealing photos doesn't make sense... posting here suggests you the poster took the photo. All I was saying initially was there were a few really good photos out of the many that were dumped. >>4474983What?
>>4474974>Pokémon Chaffinch and blue tit facing off with a yellowhammer watching
Ambush: the man who can cause a shitstorm just by posting his photographs on a photography board. The legend is true, he really is this powerful
>>4474953>just fake your shit with photoshop and aifound the soulless and talentless zoomer
>>4474995>ai.No.>photoshopNo. Photo editing software like lightroom are the norm nowadays. Get with the times old man.
>>4475000If you can tell a photo has been post processed you're doing it wrong, you need to have some restraint and develop better taste. I know you are used to desperately polishing turds but more experienced photographers see right through your efforts. You will too with time. You'll look back and cringe.
>>4475012Increasing exposure and altering some white balance isn't going to be noticed. All that shit can be done in a camera nowadays anyways. Besides mirroless does all the work for you, there's literally no differnece anymore unless it's heavily edited, which is usually done to have fun and alter the photo completely. Post processing has always been part pf the photography experience even in film.
>>4474975As I suspected. If the goal is posting photos taken by other people do it on >>>/an/ or make a different thread desu. Good thing he's namefagging so he can be filtered easily
>>4474945It's called a photo dump. They are mine. Calm down, everything's ok.>>4474953>ppI shoot RAW so they are all processed. I process them to look how they did in reality while I was looking through the finder... that's what I want so that's what I do.
>>4474957That was taken with a 70-200 f/2.8 on a FF body up close. I don't usually go for too much bokeh but sometimes it's nice. Squirrel was in the center of the branch so everything else was well in front of or behind it. Made it easy to isolate like that.>>4474975>some random esl on the internet stole my photoImagine my shock.>>4474990The power isn't with me, it lies in the emotions of the children that pass through this board.>>4475012This, but people should also just do what they want. Be a Ken Rockwell tier slider masher if you want, I don't care.Also OP said nothing about recent photos, that's just the aforementioned children making up arbitrary rules mid-tantrum. I have some recent shots but they'll be going in their own thread in the spring.
>>4475022>in the springAnon it's not even winter...
>>4475019holy cope lmao. fuckin newfags man
>>4475021>>4475022You posted some fucking awesome shots, thank you! I hate to use the term 'butthurt' because it's so dated but nothing else comes to mind when I see some of the responses here. Ignore them, they are just extremely jealous and will now be actively trying to ruin your life every waking moment instead of taking photos lol.
>>4475022>some random esl on the internet stole my photoIs that the best you could come up with?
>>4475034I'm sure he's gonna post the raw to make you shut up
>>4475022They're all about 1000x668 in size, which is in line with what you can find on that website.If those were your pics, you would post the originals, in various sizes if they are crops, and not some "[4chan_filenumber].jpg" that are all conveniently formated for wordpress publishing.>Some Italian back in June stole a picture I posted in October!!!!Kek
>>4475037He stole even more and even named the species incorrectly:https://giulianodomenichini.com/2024/10/02/falco-pellegrino-il-rapace-piu-veloce-del-mondo/>calling an osprey a peregrine falconIf you haven't had your shit stolen by a 3rd worlder with brown eyes yet, I don't know what to tell you.>you would post the originalsI think you just proved why I don't post originals, anon.Picture, if you will, how funny it is to see someone kvetching this hard over your own photos. You are more emotionally invested in someone stealing my work than I am, kek.
Cool thread, have a duck.
>>4475040Damn, even a year ago he stole pictures you posted only today????>I only post 1000x668 pictures that are perfectly formatted for wordpress articles instead of the originals so they can't be stolen!!!Can't make this up. You could have at least claimed to be the owner of that website, it would've been more believable.
>be me>on a 2 week boating/hiking trip>get a cell signal on day 5>what's /p/ up to?>oh, a wildlife thread>post some pics to kill time before sleep>sleep>wake up>thread has gone to shit>people calling each other names>find out some italian stole your shitKek, /p/ never disappoints.>>4475037They are numbered like that because I pulled them from my last thread that I posted them in. I am not at home. I have network access but the drives that most of my photos are on are not NAS so just pulled from archive.https://archive.palanq.win/p/thread/4255241/I used to make yearly photo dumps of new shots, but then just started making little drops in the RPTs scattered throughout the years. I've been posting on /p/ since at least 2011. I'll be making another thread in the spring though. There won't be as many shots as there used to be though since I shoot mostly film now and don't digitize it. I print it and hang it on my walls. Digital is usually reserved for very low light situations, that's what I'll be posting.
>>4475050>a year agoYou can find my archived posts from a decade ago:https://archive.palanq.win/p/thread/2621506/#2623322>1000x668https://archive.palanq.win/p/search/tripcode/%21%21zJbpV0948%2Bw/width/1000/height/668/
I applaud you for trying to uphold some level of standards here, but if you're going to sleuth you could at least begin with our own archives... also you just learned that photo theft exists. It's a thing that you'll have to be ok with if you want to stay sane. Take it as a compliment, even if it's coming from a hollowed out NPC with no life in the form of theft and deception.
Not the other butthurt anon but I suspected they weren't your shots precisely because I had a feeling of déjà vu (quite understandably). I still think spamming and namefagging are gay but whatever. Great shots in any case but I'd rather see something new even if it's not great.