Monday in Nature POTW

<p>Good Morning. It's Monday in Nature and the first day for a POTW in this forum. This is a way to bring nature photographers of all camera makes together. It's also a place where we can see the different styles and subjects from underwater to sky and all that is in between in the natural world. I'll start the thread Monday mornings at 6 AM, EST. Let's see how this idea develops. We'll set up parameters as we go. The usual 700 pixels on the long axis applies.</p>

<p>The opening shot was taken at Hawk Mountain Sanctuary. Eastern Red Spotted Newts are in their juvenile "eft" stage. It was chilly that morning and we were all moving a bit slow. There are many of these in easy view along trails at the sanctuary.</p>

<p>What has nature presented to you lately? </p><div></div>

<p>Laura, nice idea.<br /> Here is a jackdaw which came and landed on a wall where I was sitiing recently. Not a brilliant shot but it is nice when nature comes along and sits down next to you. <br>

Canon 5DII + 70-300 L lens</p><div></div>

<p>I'll start with a macro shot of the seed pods of Bedstraw (Galium).</p><div></div>

<p>Great idea Laura.<br>

Are you intentions to put in a one photo limit/week?<br>

I may not be strictly adhering to your pixel limit (I'll be more careful next time). I have the same image over with my Pentax folks, but it's always nice to be around a nature-focused bunch of folks.<br>

Yellow Billed Cuckoo, Eagle Creek Park, Indianapolis, IN USA<br>

Pentax K5 iis, 600mm A f5.6 at f8 (this is a manual focus lens), JPEG ISO 800. Image is cropped.<br>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17371312-md.jpg" alt="" width="680" height="507" /></p>

 

<p>Hi Doug,<br>

As far as a limit on numbers per week, I'm posting one. Other forums like Nikon and Canon have gone to 3. Let's see how much participation we get. The idea is fluid at this point. The 700 pixels is in place for other forums, so it's there for the sake of consistency. It may take a bit for folks to notice this POTW, but the ball is rolling. So far, so good. I'm appreciative of all who like the idea and want to help move it forward.</p>

 

<p>African standoff - Gaboon Viper left, Green Mamba right. (Captives)</p><div></div>

<p>Good idea Laura, like the snakes Mark, hope to be able to join in next week (still in a sling from my 2nd arm surgery) what the heck will throw in an old shot</p><div></div>

<p>Nice idea Laura. These have got to be pink lady slippers although they look different than most I've seen pictures of. If not, these should take the pink lady slippers name and the others should be named something else.</p>

<p>I shot these last week on the trail to Wiseman's View which overlooks the Linville gorge in western North Carolina.</p><div></div>

<p>Nice idea, Laura! And lovely shots, all. It's great to see what other people are seeing (and "capturing"). </p>

<p>I've started a project, which I will turn into a book, of photographing a certain spot I pass every morning on the way to work. Here is one of the regular visitors, a male Hooded Oriole, who perched on a saguaro last week.</p><div></div>

<p>Laura,<br>

<br />As much as I see a lot of adult Eastern Newts, I've never seen a the Red Eft land form, so I'm jealous (I'm kind of a salamander fanatic). </p>

<p>(I give enough praise to Robert over in Pentax; it would become gratuitous to do the same over here) <br>

Great subject/lighting Rick.<br>

Don, I don't think what you have there is a Lady's Slipper, although I'm not quite sure what you have. Lady Slipper's are monocots and you can tell from the branching veins on the leaves (if those are the leaves with that flower) that the leaves are to a dicot (sorry, I'm an annoying Biology-prof). I bet a visit to Robert's site (ak Orchid expert) will confirm that.</p>

<p>Great shot Mark. Even I know one place where I wouldn't stick my finger!</p>

<p>Good Morning Laura,<br /> It's wonderful that you have brought your POTW idea to fruition, and even more so that it's already attracted so many lovely and interesting photos. It's going to be so interesting, I think, to see aspects of nature in others' work that one would not ordinarily see in one's own neck of the woods. My shot for the week is an extremely lucky one in that I had to get into a awkward position to capture it, wasn't carrying my tripod, and it was waving crazily in a breeze that slackened only for an instant.<br /> D7000, 16-85mm @ 85; 1/200 @ f/8, ISO 1000 -- 100% crop</p><div></div>

<p>Here is a shot of the 'elusive' Indian Pipe, a plant lacking chlorophyll. It is often involved in a form of ménage a trois , gaining its nutrition from a fungus that is in turn in a relationship with a host plant.</p>

<div></div>

<p>Thank you for starting this forum, Laura. I'm looking forward to this one a lot. </p>

<p>Shot yesterday at Reifel Wildfowl Sanctuary in Delta, BC. This house sparrow clearly was proud of its catch (I think it was some kind of fishfly, but not sure), and it posed for a while.</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks again to Laura for getting these threads started.</p>

<p>The 700-pixel limit is photo.net site wide, not specific to this forum. Strictly speaking, nature photography means there should not be any signs of human activities in the image. Therefore, subjects such as lighthouses, bridges, etc. are off limits. However, at least initially we are not going to strictly enforce any rules, but please post nature-related images and avoid anything that can be considred as "bad taste." After a little while, we'll set rules such as how many images are allowed, etc. In other words, if you post a second image to the same thread, chance is that we are not going to delete it at this point. In fact, we would like to encourage more participation, but please don't post like 5 similar images to dominate the thread.</p>

 

<center>

<p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17339852-md.jpg" alt="" /><br>

Avocet in Flight, Nikon D7100 with 600mm/f4 lens</p>

</center>

<p>Hello Shun and Laura,<br /> I'd like to better understand the idea that photos submitted to this forum should not show any signs of human activities, therefore no lighthouses, etc. And this is not an unreasonable position. But what about the photo Colin submitted this morning? It seems perfectly acceptable to me although the bird is perched on a man-made wall. And yesterday (I live far out in the country, entirely off the grid, and there are many wild creatures here) two adorable baby skunks turned up feeding next to our emergency generator. I was very excited and took several shots before they hid under the wood shed. All of the pictures I took of them, however, show the generator, certainly a man-made item, in such a way that it can't be cropped out. Yet, as Colin observed, sometimes nature presents herself in unexpected ways. So a little flexibility may be in order; probably something that can be worked out over time. Thank you.<br>

Jim Butler, aka Young James</p>

<p>Canon S95 from the Shedd Aquarium- Chicago </p>

<p>Nice thread.</p><div></div>

<p>Nice idea.</p>

<p>Other people get birds on the wing, I get squirrels taking off.. </p><div></div>

<p>As I said, let this thread run for a few weeks and then gauge how everybody feels. As long as the theme is mostly nature photography, I don't think we'll pick on one overhead powerline in the frame, etc.</p>

<p>The Nikon Wednesday thread started in 2008. In about 5 years, I have deleted a grand total of 2 images plus sent one warning. In all of those cases, the images in question involved nudity or other "family unfriendly" content. I really doubt that we'll run into similar situations on this forum. As long as we all use some common sense, hopefully we'll never need to delete any posts.</p>

<p>Monday and nature, nice idea. My daughter alerted me to some local nature just yesterday, so I get to share it fresh with everyone here...</p><div></div>

<p>Blueberry barrens in Fall, Cherryfield, ME. Gup, the intensely colorful blueberries are, remarkably, a distant relative of your ghostly Indian Pipe.</p>

<p>Fuji Velvia, don't remember the camera.</p><div></div>

<p>Well, we've been out in a bog for much of the day. What fascinating little places they are. We came back to all of these wonderful contributions to the opening week. It is heartening to see so many familiar names and encouraging to hear your support for the thread. Special thanks to the Nature moderators for their support of the idea.<br>

Jim, the "strictly speaking" definition of nature photography was new to me, but as Shun has said, lets see how things go. Within the posts here there are captive animals and man made structures used as perches. In every forum I am familiar with, photos of captive animals should be declared as such, which these are. A zoo is certainly man made, but the snakes and the eel are menacing and beautiful. Sometimes definitions can help us filter ideas. Sometimes they can be an extreme end of a spectrum. We want to encourage participation, not stifle it. If nature moved into my shed, I'd certainly want to get a camera. Then I'd want to be thoughtful about how I portray the meeting, especially skunks;-) Common sense is a wonderful guide. And, here, <em>we can provide an explanation,</em> as in the case with your skunks.</p>

<p>Colin, I'm not familiar with the bird, but it's a beauty.<br>

Doug, another bird I'm not familiar with. It's pretty against all that green. I admit I had a good session with 2 efts that day, hard to imagine that you've not seen them.<br>

Rick not only provided a nice shot, but encouragement in person.<br>

Mark K., amazing.<br>

Robert, nice Showy Orchis, a favorite up here in the spring. Good luck with round 2 and please, keep posting till you have new material.<br>

Don, pretty pink, but I agree with Doug, not a Lady Slipper. It looks to be in the pea family, or at least "pea lookalikes". A Lady Slipper comes up singly on an erect stem. These are much smaller and pendant. It's pretty though with nice details. Maybe together we can get it figured out.<br>

Noreen, your project sounds great, and a nice shot of the Oriole. Look forward to seeing more.<br>

Jim, now I see, that's really is nice. Oh, that breeze. Thanks for your part in all of this.<br>

Gup, nice Monotropa. They are always fun to see in the woods.<br>

David, well, not my "forum", but the idea for the thread was many steps in the making. Like your sparrow, it was an idea worth hanging onto.<br>

Shun, beautiful Avocet. I've never had to chance to photograph them, but someday. I think we're off to a good start.<br>

Louis, those eyes!<br>

JDM, what's a nature thread without a squirrel? You and "the hammer" nailed him.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Patrick, she has a good eye.<br>

Edwin, amazing color, I'll bet the blueberries are good too.</p>

<p>Laura and Shun,<br>

Well spake both of you! Of course a little discretion is never a bad thing, and I think we all know how to use it. I suppose I spent too much time musing on what was natural and what was not. I'm inclined to think that everything is natural, but I think the idea here is to minimize the human presence. But, then, are we not natural creatures? Good wishes to you both.<br>

Jim</p>

<p>This has been a lot of fun.<br /> I'll have to start enforcing the 700 rule over in Pentax (we haven't been doing it). We (Pentax) originated the POTW but the moderator over there is clueless about standards across the other forums ;) (yes, it's me)<br /> Laura some populations tend to have the Eft stage, others do not. In better than 20 years of being in the proper habitat I have yet to see one. Unfortunately where I have lived they are pretty rare.<br /> Noreen, I've gotta move to your neighborhood! Lovely image.<br /> Regarding the issue with human structure, etc in photographs North American photography nature saloon rules are generally very strict about this point, absolutely no obvious 'hand of man'. European rules tend to be much more forgiving regarding 'hand of man rule' so for instance the famous annual 'Wildlife Photographer of the Year' sponsored by the Natural History Museum in London generally has many images with 'hand of man' in them. I have no idea what the rules are like in other parts of the world. Personally I try to follow North American standards myself, but I sympathize with other areas using other standards. I suspect lines with seasoned photographers will match their region. After many years here on photo.net where I tried to suggest the North American standards I have found several photographers become defensive if you you point out the 'hand of man' rule. Ergo I have been pretty cautious suggesting those rules to members in the Nature Gallery.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Again, as far as I am concerned, the purpose for this thread is to promote nature photography and have some fun. It is not my objective, and I am sure it is not Bob Atkins' either, to tightly police every entry. As long as we use <strong>common sense</strong>, anything reasonable is fine. If we can see some out-of-focus house in the background, it is not going to be an issue. However, I hope people won't post an image of their dog on a leash waking in the park ...</p>