Hand of man elements?

[Fred Canter]

In the Avian section it is stated that minor hand of man elements are allowed. I've seen other sites or places state the same or no hand of man elements. Obviously some of these photos are easy to determine, while others are not. Where is the line drawn between a major and minor hand of man element?

Here is what I feel is a prime example. While this is not a photo I would post for critique, the setting does have opportunities.

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/fdcpr/6066398123/" title="Golden Light Least Sandpiper by Canter Photography, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6203/6066398123_f1f7da2814_z.jpg" width="640" height="407" alt="Golden Light Least Sandpiper"></a>

Now the bird was too far away and behind a stem of the plant, but a concentrated effort could produce a better shot. I just happened to notice this along one side and the light was nice enough to shoot a few shots.

The bird is standing on algae covered concrete, and the background is a discolored concrete wall. I lean to the side of calling this a major man made element even though it's not distinguishable as such.

Now this may seem a silly question, but for someone new to photographing avian species I at least hope it's a legitimate question. When I shot wildlife in the past I never had to ask myself these questions, as I was never close to hand of man objects when photographing.

[Mike Tracy]

I think a lot of bird folks are way too uppity in regards to this. Who cares. If the HOM element doesn't detract from the image leave it. If it adds to it so be it. All that matters in the end is do you like the image ?

[Jim Neiger]

I think a lot of bird folks are way too uppity in regards to this. Who cares. If the HOM element doesn't detract from the image leave it. If it adds to it so be it. All that matters in the end is do you like the image ?

I agree with Mike in principal, but the question was about the posting rules in the Avian forum. Since the HOM objects are not apparent in the image, I think this would not be an issue with this image. I don't think the rule would be enforced unless the image was dominated by HOM objects and there was not a compelling bird subject. If the BG was an obvious man made structure, then I think it would not meet the criteria for Avian.

[Arthur Morris]

I did not know about the "major/minor" distinction and if James Shadle sees this I hope that we can lose that. I am fine with all HOM elements being allowed in Avian. Do check out all the great snipe images we would have missed if we did not allow HOM at all in Avian. BTW, there is a Hand of Man category in the BIRDS AS ART 1st International Bird Photography Competition (http://www.birdsasart.com/competition/). There are 11 categories in all plus a grand prize winner--34 winning and honored images sharing prize pools totaling more then $2,000.

[Fred Canter]

I think a lot of bird folks are way too uppity in regards to this. Who cares. If the HOM element doesn't detract from the image leave it. If it adds to it so be it. All that matters in the end is do you like the image ?
Mike, I agree, but was looking in relation to posting, see Jim's post. Bottom line is the image only has to please the person taking it.


I agree with Mike in principal, but the question was about the posting rules in the Avian forum. Since the HOM objects are not apparent in the image, I think this would not be an issue with this image. I don't think the rule would be enforced unless the image was dominated by HOM objects and there was not a compelling bird subject. If the BG was an obvious man made structure, then I think it would not meet the criteria for Avian.
Jim, it still comes down to an opinion of someone. I guess it all comes down to the viewer, or the clarity of the objects.


I did not know about the "major/minor" distinction and if James Shadle sees this I hope that we can lose that. I am fine with all HOM elements being allowed in Avian. Do check out all the great snipe images we would have missed if we did not allow HOM at all in Avian. BTW, there is a Hand of Man category in the BIRDS AS ART 1st International Bird Photography Competition (http://www.birdsasart.com/competition/). There are 11 categories in all plus a grand prize winner--34 winning and honored images sharing prize pools totaling more then $2,000.
Artie, I'm fine with HOM elements to a degree also, just didn't, and still don't know where the line is drawn. I agree on the snipe images in that they are all great. But again, where is the line. Had these same images been taken on a steel post instead of a wooden post would that have crossed over into being too much HOM? Granted one is wood that has been shaped into a post and then placed into the ground, while the other has the material fabricated by man and then the rest of the process is the same. Don't get me wrong, I like those images and enjoy viewing them, just where is the line.
I've seen your contest, and you may see some of the dam images there if I can get what I'm after.

I've been slow responding here, covered up with work trying to catch up after the hurricane.

[Paul Guris]

Fred, I stumbled into the strong views on this topic when I first joined and agree with Mike's view that some are overly obsessed with avoiding man-made elements. I'm very much on the side of allowing then when appropriate. The example I brought up back then was seeing photos of grassland birds singing from rusted barbed wire. Some of the best images I've seen of Lark Bunting and Chestnut-collared Longspur have been like this, and the rusted (not new and shiny) wire definitely adds to the image. I've also seen shots of a Barn Owl perched in the hole of an old barn, pelicans on a boat at sunset, gulls on pilings, and a Kestrel on an old windmill. To my eye the man-made elements enhanced rather detracted from these photos.

On the flip side, I have a nice picture of a Western Kingbird perched on top of a brand spankin' new street sign. Does that improve the photo? Eeeeeeh, not so much. I would have been infinitely happier with a nice weathered snag. I think the most obvious case of an element to avoid is a feeder. I have shots of American Goldfinches perched on a clear plastic tube feeder taken almost exclusively to document their plumages (including some REALLY ratty ones). They are sharp but I would never post them here, put them in a program (except maybe to illustrate a very specific point), or hang them on my wall.

My suggestion would be that if you have an image that you're not sure about, post it and ask people what they think of the man-made elements in the photo. There's a lot of talented people here and it might be a real learning experience.

[Fred Canter]

Paul, sorry for not responding sooner but I took some time to consider this myself. It comes down to shoot what I want and share what others want to see. I took a shot of a Red-tailed Hawk during a break of hurricane Irene. While the image shows a soaked hawk drying out, the perch is a telephone cable. While I'd never post this photo, it's a good reminder of survival of that storm and I guess the line is drawn by each individual.