Notes on the content of the site:
In keeping with the 'Pulchritudo in natura' idea all images are taken 'in the wild' and by hand, by me. No zoos, no wildlife 'parks', bird sanctuaries or 'feeding' centres, where tame animals and birds 'give themselves up'. Equally I do not use 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. Neither do I use remote, timed or automatically triggered cameras while I sleep. My eye is behind the eyepiece and finger on the button so to speak. Of course, all that might be what's going wrong!
This site it is obviously not intended as an ID guide. The illustrations in such books and websites are usually viciously cropped from arse to bill. To me, the birds seem forlorn and trapped, 'caged' by the picture's edge so to speak and unable move, or even breathe. Neither do such pictures look, in any way, a part of nature. Now, this is not really a criticism, because it suits the authors need, i.e. to get the most detail in the smallest space, fair enough I guess. But it always makes me feel uncomfortable, almost like I want to cry!
Neither are the pictures here a record of rarities or oddities 'wot I saw' (indeed most are common), this is why I have selected the humble Chaffinch to kick things off. 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 in some way I think the pose, milieu, lighting etc. 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 just want to show:
the 'beauty in nature'
Although given that I treat the common equally with the rarity perhaps I should have called it '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!
A note on the images:
Secondly, all the final 'full-size' images have been reduced in size (to 2500px wide) as well as jpeg compressed. This does degrade most of them but is necessary to limit server-side space to reduce my costs, 'tis as simple as that. I wish there was another way.
A note on the notes !
Rev. Charles Swainson's 'The folk lore and provincial names of British Birds' of 1885. This is excellent scholarship, and a view into different times and attitudes too, well worth perusing.
Rennie's 1833 'The domestic Economy of Birds' is also worth a look, especially if you have indegestion.
William Thompson's 'The Natural History of Ireland' 1849. A wealth of lovely old tales and anecdote from the 'emerald isle'.
The last (at the moment) is, of course, the much more well-known Thomas Bewick's 1826 'A history of British Birds'.
I confess I do find such insights into earlier accepted ideas, beliefs, and folklore truly interesting, but hey, perhaps I'm weird. All can be found on Internet Archive. For those that prefer 'hardcopy' I imagine, they are available from most 'reprint on demand' services such as those offered via Amazon.
A note on the website itself:
SO, this website has been bent and hammered, drilled and filled, kicked and beaten into existence (amongst considerable profanity) by myself to my own design using code ideas, advice, clues and bits from the interwebs (legally). And hey yes, I'm not a coder (you can tell, can't you? ) and so it's crude and clunky, just like me. It is hosted privately so no advertising or that sort of carp. But I think it all works. I've learned so much my head aches, or mebbe that's just the bourbon. This website therefore either stands in support of the adage "you're never too old to learn new tricks" or, far more likely, the quip "don't give up the day job".
Yeah, but why is this site actually here?:
Of course, I am sure it's deeper than that, I have always felt a part of nature, more so than human 'society' to be sure. From a life in conservation, ecological science and lecturing to a chance now retired to combine this with an interest and training in photography from a (much) earlier life, although things sure have changed somewhat since the days of film and knocking over trays of chemicals in a dark room.
So, I take pictures of things I am lucky enough to see (while carrying a ton and a half of camera and lens) and wonder if they're worth sharing. Only you can tell that.
Of course, it is also true that I do spend ages taking pictures and editing them (we will come on to this in a methods section much later). I look at some of my images and go 'aaaaarh' (99.999% of course evoke urrgh). And that's it, I see them, now you can too, and may your cup runneth over with joy!
And so, have we found out why? No. I still clearly have no idea, but I suppose it does provide some sort of an excuse to carry on doing what I do. Look it's this or knitting, and I aint got the patience for that. Besides I'd put an eye out.
A note on the author:
That's all, more than, anybody really needs to be exposed to. The background. of course. is part of the beautiful archipelago of Shetland. Do go there sometime.
If you still want to know more you probably should seek some sort of professional help. If the drugs they give you don't work, then I guess you could use the contact page link at the bottom of the page. Happy to answer any real questions.
As a side-note that camera (Canon 350D) and tripod head (Manfrotto Grip ball-head) were pretty terrible. Or I was naively expecting too much from them. The lens (Canon EF 100-400 f4-5.6 usm) and tripod (Manfrotto MT055 carbon-fibre) were very good tho'.