Notes on the content of the site:
The images here are mostly of birds, animals, plants etc. and a few are landscapes, although the latter really only work well, I feel, as large very wide images, something not really suited to the vast majority of computer screens, and are utterly ridiculous on phones and the like, I've put a few in, but it is frustrating because I know they won't come across in the way I visualised them. Ho hum.
In terms of the rest the site it is obviously not intended to be an ID guide, or a catalogue of birds. The illustrations in such books and websites are invariably viciously cropped from arse to bill. To me, such pictures of birds always seem forlorn and trapped! Caged by the picture's edge and unable move, or even breathe. And the caging of a bird defiles everything it is: intelligence, movement, freedom and flight. Such pictures don't look in any way a part of nature. Now, this is not really a criticism, because this suits the publishers need, i.e. to get the most bird detail in the smallest space, fair enough I guess. But it always makes me feel uncomfortable, almost want to cry!
Neither are the pictures here a record of rarities 'wot I saw' (indeed most are common), this is why I have selected the humble Chaffinch to be the first species illustrated. In the same way this is not my 'personal list' of everything I've seen (oh, there was so much, you don't know, you weren't even there, man! *). * with due respect to Ron Kovic. 
So, most of the images are here because I think the pose, milieu or lighting somehow makes each a 'picture'. Those with birds, for example, are not intended as ' a picture of bird' or a 'bird picture', rather I want, hope, for them to stand perhaps as 'pictures with birds in', That goes for the others too, whatever the subject. I hold onto this difference, even if I am clearly unable to articulate what I mean! I really want to show:
       the 'beauty in nature'
Although given that I treat the common equally with the rarity perhaps I should have called the website 'prettiness in the prosaic'.
Whatever, as I believe the young say. There are some pictures here, have a look if you want. If you don't, then don't!
Please note for the odd words on bird names preceding each species I have drawn from Rev. Charles Swainson's excellent 'The folk lore and provincial names of Britsh Birds' of 1885, Thomas Bewick's 1826 edition of 'A history of British Birds' and the odd little bit from Mark Cocker's gorgeous 'Birds Britannica' of 2005. All are excellent and recommended, although the latter is of course the more colourful!
Oh, I suppose I may as well add for completeness, all images are taken in nature of wild birds etc and 'developed' by myself. I do not use remote automated cameras, contrived 'artificial' backgrounds or faked situations. I will wrap up in camo sometimes and lay in a ditch or something, but that's it. I strive not to do anything to harm, disturb or alarm any bird, if I can't get a picture by fair means, then so be it. I'll try another day.