Birder, Bird Photographer or Both.
Why do you consider yourself one or the other?
Printable View
Birder, Bird Photographer or Both.
Why do you consider yourself one or the other?
I am definitely both! I just finished a "Big Bird Photo Year" for California 2010! Chasing birds to get any kind of recognizable photo for a competition with a handful of other birder/photographers. I shot about 40K frames and drove about 30K miles! Don't ask how much it cost! I ended up with 387 species photographed for the year! Here's a link to my BBPY gallery on smugmug http://naturestoc.smugmug.com/Birds/...10973419_nnFku
Since joining BPN (1 year now), I have become both a birder and a bird photographer. My main photographic interest had been macros of flowers and butterflies, but after posting my first image of a Northern Flicker on the ETL forum, the feedback was so encouraging I wanted to keep on shooting birds! Now, I plan my vacations to include birding. Its fun and challenging, and a great way to keep learning.:S3:
I said both but I much prefer to look at a bird through my viewfinder:w Seeing birds and other wildlife is always a pleasure but its so much more enjoyable with a camera in hand. I'm personally not a ticker but I do like to see new species. I have know idea of the number(very few relatively speaking)
Both...but more of a bird photographer now. I started birding in India when I was 14 yrs old. Really enjoyed it and did a lot of it for many years. After moving to US( first to Tucson and then to Dallas), continued doing it. Didn't have any bird photography equipment for all those years...which probably was a good thing from a birding standpoint :-) didn't think so at that time, of course.
However, for the past 1.5 yrs that I have been doing bird photography, am doing less and less pure birding. Would love to change that but finding time to both is a challenge. At times, the birder inside me nudges me to walk more and check out whats there in the trees....but the photographer tells me that the light is great so stay put and wait for the least sandpiper to come close. The drive to get more keepers is winning over the drive to see more species. Personally, an excellent shot of a common bird gives me more pleasure than an average shot of an uncommon bird....so going by that, yes, I am probably more a 'photographer who shoots birds' now than a birder :-) am hoping that with time, that will change and I'll be able to strike a balance.
Well said, Kaustubh. I am the same. I do both for the enjoyment, but photographs allow me to share that enjoyment with others. I don't like to turn birding into a competition or work, with county lists or chasing a single bird thousands of miles.
I forgot to add that I also keep an ABA life list that stands at 694, and a photo life list that stands at (roughly) 647, ABA area also.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Brown
ABA is the American Birding Assoc's described area which includes North America north of Mex. but not Hawaii.
I've been a birder for roughly 38 years (started at age 12) and a bird photographer for 16 months. I find that it unless the weather is awful, it's very difficult to go birding without the camera hanging off of my shoulder. Personally, the challenge of photography pairs great with the fact that I and my wife both have to move more slowly than we used to due to our health issues.
Kaustubh's comment "an excellent shot of a common bird gives me more pleasure than an average shot of an uncommon bird..." resonated with a a LOT. We've done more than our share of bird chases and have reasonably large ABA area lists, but getting a really nice or unusual shot of something at the feeder has become more rewarding than another notch on the old binocular strap. Of course, that's not going to stop us from trying to get Ferruginous Pygmy-Owl this spring for my wife's 700th ABA bird on her birthday. Hopefully we'll get good pictures!
I agree with Paul, I CANNOT go birding without my camera, even in the rain (sometimes)! And, getting a quality image is much more satisfying to me than just seeing a new lifer! Getting a quality image of a lifer is over the top!Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Guris
Where's the landscaper button I keep looking for:2eyes2:.....in all seriousness, I don't have a list.......and will take an image of the common bird if the light is right.......so just bird photographer.....er landscaper, macro guy, wildlife photographer.....bird photographer......in order of difficulty of course:D!
I am a bird photographer but not a birder. I am a professional ornithologist and have rarely felt a need to chase birds for a list. I LOVE birds and have done since I was 7. I'm now 58. There's nothing wrong with being a birder, it just doesn't do much for me. I will echo sentiments above- a great photo of a starling hands-down beats a crap photo of a Siberian Rubythroat, made famous by Bill Oddie in his "Little Black Bird Book".
I'm with Roman. I'm a wildlife/landscape/astro photographer who also likes birds. The poll results will be a little (a lot) skewed because few birder-only don't folks hang out here. Besides the "where is the landscape button," where is the astrophotography button?:S3: But my main profession is scientific imaging. Well, I like all photography, but I say I don't do people. People just complain about they way they look in photos, while birds don't.:w3
Roger
Both, but now I am more of a bird photographer. I was an avid birder since 2nd grade and became a bird photographer when my father gave me my first SLR for my 18th birthday. Since then, I have combined my love of both.
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Chardine
John,
I'm clearly a bird photographer.
But I need help with the birder part. I spend more time afield studying birds and bird behavior than I do photographing them. I am a bird and environmental advocate.
However, I do not have nor will ever have a "list"
What am I?
Is a list what defines a birder?
James
ha ha! Roger, a man after my own heart! Would say photographer that also doesn't do people!
For some reason, because I own a long lens, I keep getting asked to do weddings! Give me birds any day!
regards.
Stu.
I am definitely a bird photographer first. Though to do that well, you become a birder by osmosis and default, to some degree.
I think the only time I've been birding without a camera has been for owls after dark.
I am both (one subject matter to me), started as a bird photographer and have fallen in love with them. I enjoy watching them do their thing and capturing the images.
D - None of the above
I am a Bird photographer that enjoys watching birds and the study of most species in the natural environment,
I have never understood hardcore birders and lists but I stand elbow to elbow with them a lot. Have had many great conversations with most of them.
I can ID most waterfowl or upland games species by call or on the wing because I used to be an avid hunter I think that gives me an edge with photographing birds because by observed behavior I can sometimes predict what they might do.
Bird photographer or just about anything else that catches my eye, especially old barns
James,Quote:
Originally Posted by James Shadle
That sounds a lot like my own dilemma. It's pretty obvious that one can be a birder, without ever being a bird photographer. Whether one can be a bird photographer (a good one, anyway) without being a birder in some sense of the word, is another matter. We have to know our subjects-how to identify them, their nesting, feeding and other habits, their migration patterns, and so on, to be really successful in photographing them, and in that regard I find that like you, I spend much more of my time in the field observing and studying, than actually taking photographs (I'd say that's true of the other animals I photograph as well). I'll make some field notes, at times, but I have no interest in "life lists" or anything similar. So, does that make me a birder, or something else?
It's the same question you have: is "birding" all about "lists" or is there a broader definition of the term? I'd think the latter, but then, John's a professional ornithologist and doesn't consider himself a birder at all, and I've had local birders I know ask, "You really don't keep a list?" with a rather incredulous expression on their faces.:2
I usually keep a list when I go to new places. Often just to get a grasp of names. However, I am not pedantic about lists. While these days I lean towards birds overall, I would describe myself as a professional biologist (evolutionary ecologist) and a hobby naturalist who revels in capturing on camera the beauty and interactions that occur in the natural world.
Ok, may be "trying to capture" :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben_Sadd
Hi,
Interesting thread! I have been a birder for years. I used to be a competitive lister, but after a few years realized that my occupation, family commitments etc. would not allow me to take time off to go chasing rarities, so then I became more interested in watching and studying birds and their actions, habitiat etc. I have always also been interested in photography, but with birds it was generally for "record shots". However in the last few years I have become at least as interested in getting good photos as I am in seeing the bird. I'm not sure tht I am yet at the stage where I will concentrate for hours on geting 1 outstanding photo of a bird while all kinds of rarities are flying by just out of camera reach - which is probably one of the field marks of a true bird photographer. But I always feel very proud if a photo of mine gets into a local magazine, or a calendar, or does well in a competition, and especially if it gets at least faint praise here on BPN!
Richard
That's me! I'm a bird photographer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaustubh Deshpande
Bird photographer, but I like to ID what I'm shooting.
Peter
Over 30 years ago I started as a birder, first traveling around the US and then traveling around the world. Birding for me is a fantastic way to enjoy being outdoors with a focus. It has only been in the last 6 years that I have added a camera to the binoculars I hang from my neck. But that camera has powerfully pulled me into the photography world. Viewing bird images from my travels has added greatly to my understanding of birds and places. As I look and edit each image I consult handbooks for more information. I see feathers and colors I could never see as a bird flitted past my binoculars. Each year as I learn more about photography I "see" more around me. Particularily from BPN I see how others view their world through the camera and it has opened my eyes. Wow...there are all kinds of things and ways to photograph! It is wonderfully exciting! I do keep a life list. Now that I am over 5,000 birds I need a list to jog my memory. I plan to always keep a list as it organizes my experiences and gives me a reference to my travels. So I am now both, with camera and binoculars hanging from my neck at the same time, and sometimes I'm not sure what I want to grab first!
Wildlife, Landscape, outdoor sports photography and really new to bird photography , I guess that makes me a NEWBIE
I was always interested in birds, and even have a "life list" - which is rather limited as it was mostly local for all those years. I was never into chasing rarities (even local ones), or going to half a dozen locations to pad a day list...I was always happy just staring at the yard feeder for long lenghts and just enjoying the chickadees, sparrows, and nuthatches go about their daily business. Listening to loons at night still gives me chills, and always will.
I would borrow my dad's film SLR often (and still have those 4 x 6 prints I did as a young lad) so the photography bug was already in me. I do still get excited in seeing a new species for the first time, but I get much more excited when I get a satisfying image of a common one, even if "just" a chickadee or gull. When I saw on the web what bird photographes had been doing for years I knew that's what my new hobby would be. Besides, I rather observe and photograph a single accomodating common individual for an hour or more than to view a tiny speck in a scope for a few seconds:S3:
For question #1, you are most definitely a birder. You seek out birds, ID them, and study their behavior. That's birding, whether you keep a species count or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by James Shadle
For question #2, a list defines a birder in the same way "the clothes make the man." For some men, clothes really do make them ... because they are shallow and boring people who are easily outshined by their clothing.
The same is true of lists. You can have somebody with a fantastic amount of bird knowledge with virtually any sized list. The list does not make them a birder. On the flip side, I have met pure listers who have racked up big numbers and can't ID much of anything. When I went to Attu back in the 80s, it was eye opening. They are birders too, but some are people who I describe as "being obsessed with birding, but not particularly fond of birds."
Sorry, I lost track of this interesting thread and should have responded earlier.
James poses the question "is a list what defines a birder?" I will take the position that it does.
You could take an all-inclusive view that a birder is simply someone who birdwatches, a little or a lot. Birdwatching is an extremely popular pastime and takes many forms from casual to ultra serious. Some are happy to watch their feeders through their living room window a few days a year, others spend $10000s to see rarities and are out all the time. This inclusive view is not very useful because almost anyone could be called a birder.
I hesitate to generalise but in my experience a "birder" is a special kind of birdwatcher who "birds" (I know, a terrible verb!). Birders spend significant amounts of time and possibly money "birding", travel to "bird", are strongly motivated to see and ID rare species and specifically track-down rarities at various geographic scales from local to international, and as an end-result of all this keep lists of species they have seen. Lists can be annual, lifetime, country, county, or regionally specific down to your back yard or feeder, TV birds (yes it's true), and it goes on. A central theme in birding, which has been recounted to me by several birding friends is that it is akin to hunting, without, of course the final, fatal blow. Many birders are collectors, and collecting is another strong underlying motivation for birding. I have noticed over the years that many birders are quite uninterested in bird behaviour or biology, but are minutely aware of every nuance of colour and tone of every feather on a birds' body. These attributes do not apply to all birdwatchers, but in my experience generally do to the subset of birdwatchers who "bird". There is nothing wrong with all of this so long as the birds themselves do not suffer from it, and generally I think they don't.
Incidentally, I've never known a birder who does not love birds.
Finally I'll say that birdwatching has a connotation of "amateur" and ornithology of "professional". These days however, the distinction is blurry. "Citizen science" originating ultimately from birdwatching is proving to be a very valuable source of information for bird conservation. One classic example is eBird (http://ebird.org/content/ebird), where bird lists are now being put up on the web for all to use rather than going mouldy on a shelf somewhere and eventually being thrown out.
OK I'll come clean, I have a bird list so that makes me a birder too I guess.
Definitely a birder who’s trying to learn to take pleasing pictures from birds. Until joining to BPN I did not understand what the difference was and the last six months have been a real eye-opener for me. Now I consider myself a person who has split personality. I love to take pleasing photos from birds and post them over here but I also still take photos, which are technically not as good as I wish, yet they reveal something from a bird which I know other birders would want to see. Therefore I post these photos to another forum which is more for hard-core birders than for bird photographers.
Which brings me to my question; can someone explain to me why I see so many bad photos from birds in birding publications? I see photos which are not correctly exposured, with a bad head-angle, with awful BG etc. Why this, as there must be thousands of better photos from where these publishers can choose from?
Cheers,
Mikko
Regarding this topic, I thought you all might enjoy an interesting perspective from Roger Tory Peterson:
“I am not an obsessed lister; but bird photography is my therapy, and I would rather shoot a roll of film on some relatively common species than add a new bird to my life list. Well, almost. It depends on the species--"trash bird” versus rarity." —Roger Tory Peterson.
From: Bird Watcher’s Digest, July/August 1985, reprinted in All Things Reconsidered, My Birding Adventures, p. 44. 2007, Houghton Mifflin Company
This is a must read for anyone interested in bird photography. It becomes clear that he absolutely loved bird photography.
Keith
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith Kennedy
I have that Peterson book and have read it - thanks for reminding me about his love of photography.
Imagine you're on a trip of a lifetime to Central America, but you're only allowed to take one piece of equipment, binoculars or a camera but not both. If you pick the binoculars, you're a birder. :-)
Well that's just sick! :w3Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliotte Rusty Harold
I just checked out your SmugMug Gallery and I have to say I am impressed with breadth of your collection. I admire the dedication it must have taken to achieve to that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Brown
If birds come on platter then I am a bird photg otherwise Wild-life ,
I consider myself a Bird Photographer, but in my heart i know, I am both. I have learned a lot about birds in the last couple of years....it is generally the same with all bird photographers.....And all Bird Photographers as a general rule love birds.......So that makes Bird Photographers.....BIRDERS/BIRD PHOTOGRAPHERS.
I am and have been a birder/lister for 50 years. With your good folks help I aspire to be a bird photographer as well.
