For many years I have never taken any photos, I was just happy to observe birds. It is a different philosophy , but I think, by watching birds, I see, and later remember more. I have a good visual memory, and can recall events vividly for many years. My brain prosesses a lot more on the periphery, than a camera can. I think,one misses out on many things, looking through a camera lens. A bit like going through life without seeing the whole picture. These days I do take photos, and I enjoy the photos on the forum very much!! But to me it is still more important to quietly watch and listen! I'm most interested in your thoughts on this???
you have a good point Marie-Louise. I like to just watch the birds as well. Usually if i have got some shots then I will stay and watch the birds witout taking any more shots. You can see their behaviours much better when you use your own eyes not the camera's. It is still enjoyable to take photos though.
Cheers, Owen.
I agree with you Owen, Thats what I do to.
I love to do both Araminta.... I just can't sit there and not shoot what I see... I feel as if the camera is an extension of myself for sure! But there is a time to put it down and just be in the moment... and quietly observe what you can. I listen a lot too and it is the sounds of the bush that I love passionately ... just the special call of the grey fantail or the Golden Whistler can transfix me and put a huge smile on my face, then there are the YTB cockies... they make me shiver when I hear them call ... there is something primal in it.
Bottom line..... we are all out there...enjoying nature
Sunshine Coast Queensland
Marie-Louise I agree that part of the moment is lost if I'm fiddling with a camera. However, if the bird is there for long enough I would still like to get a photo in order to keep a physical memory of the sighting, or in case I want to check id. But the actual watching is the best part, I reckon. Photos are a lucky bonus (for me; I know that other people are really into photography first, and birds second - fairy nuff).
I'm with the others - I love both. If I don't have the camera I'm still scanning power lines adn looking at birds all over the place. I can see a lot of things better through the camera and often don't know what I am looking at until I have that magnification
That's a good point Kim...me eyes need that magnification too!
Sunshine Coast Queensland
I'm pretty-much like everyone here. I am a birdo first and a photographer a very distant second. I like to observe them and take a few shots to remeber the moment.
I agree with birdie - there's nuthin' better than being outdoors and experiencing nature.
Cheers,
George
Melbourne, VIC
George it is funny how I was a photographer first but now all I want to do is photograph birds!! They are a very addictive hobby aren't they?
Sunshine Coast Queensland
Well I am a photographer first and a birder second. I just started getting into birds pretty much the past year and a half. And I definitely agree. You will miss a lot while trying to photograph a bird, but if you do get the shot you will have a lasting memory of it in exact detail. I often see stuff that I cannot capture with my camera. And I must also say since I have joined this forum I have learned a lot about birds and am almost always looking out for them. Sometimes I wish I don't because I see them and I know I don't have the camera with me. Although I do enjoy watchin them just as some of you guys do.
I was born to live and I live to die.
Ok, I'm a little different to all of you. I was an artist first. Then a photographer and now a bird-watcher. As time goes by, I tend to watch the behaviours a lot more, but when they are either at a distance or are high in a tree with a glarey background, the camera is my friend for the magnification, although having a few younger eyes helps me too. I do love the family experiences bird-watching has brought as opposed to the solitary activity of painting though.
I've succumbed to the birding bug!
Alice Springs, NT