European bee-eater and dragonfly.

oops just noticed you said D70!

I can of course participate in the general expression of admiration on this photo, but I notice that despite all the great competence around, only 3-4 critiques have managed up till now to go beyond the simple celebration of the event and the photographer.

 

It is not my type of photo, I have neither the equipment nor the competences to make them and I mostly try not to rate bird photos, but is there really nothing more to say about this particlar photo that could help us start a discussion on this weeks POW.

wonderful shot, good back ground, congratulations

This is an extraordinary beautiful picture. But it would be a little bit unfair to keep people thinking of it as a snapshot. From other pictures in the series it is clear, that the bee-eaters have been trained to "catch" dead insects from this plant. I guess, almost all wildlife photographers work with "tricks" like this, and it is nevertheless a big effort to create such a picture. But without additional information, it may creat a false picture of wildlife and nature in the minds od not-so-informed people.

Georg, I agree with your remarks. So, could we not have some contributions on the research behind such photos.

 

How much of the work taking a picture of such quality is invested in knowledge about the particular species and the particular bird and its habits etc - and how much is simple luck.

 

The same question is of course relevant for many other themes. We are many that come back to specific nature scenes and landscapes when the sun, season, light, clouds etc are optimal. The same is sometimes the case for street photography where knowledge about the city and sociology and habits of its inhabitants can play a essential role.

 

The general question for me is therefore whether you make "research" in order to take high quality photos or whether you snapshot and hope for the best using optimal equipment (what ever that is...).

Moderator Note:

 

There "were" 26 comments that were not in keeping with the guidelines for posting a comment on the POW. They are now gone.

 

Please read the following for more information about how to post in the POW forum: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo-of-the-week/about

 

Please - no short congratulations posts with no attempt to critique. Those statements - though appreciated by a POW recipiant - should be sent in email - not posted here. Thanks.

The picture is fantastic, perfect in every way.

 

It is a picture of a very, very small moment in time. The bird will have fluttered away from this scene without a moment's thought - as someone already pointed out, this happens about 250 times in the day of the life of the bird. And yet, for all its insignificance, it represents the end of a life for the dragonfly.

 

It reminds us that exceptional moments often pass by in our own lives without us giving them a thought: the itch at the back of the throat when a virus takes hold is noticed, then forgotten, then the cold hits us and we can't remember the onset. Similarly when we bite our tongue or lip: the incident is quickly forgotten and a morning or two later we wake up with a painful swelling.

 

It also reminds us that every moment of our lives is potentially a photographic moment. When we are feeling dull there's a moody melancholy photograph to be had, when we are happy there's a colourful vibrant one, and when we are just plain moving through life there's more interest than we are acknowledging. I find that thinking of day-to-day life at the office as a succession of photographic images makes it feel just a little less tedious.

Vezon,

 

Could you give us some insight into how much time you have invested in order to achieve a photograph of this calibre - I'm not talking about just this one shoot, but the background info on time learning fieldcraft, picking the spot, learning the behaviour of the bird. Or was this beginners luck? (I doubt that). Perhaps some info about your hide?

 

I honestly can't think of anything I'd like to see done differently in this photo, it just smacks of hard work and skill.

Though I am still as amazed as with my first posting....I will refrain from the capitalized exclamations which apparently resulted in my first posting being removed.

 

Therefore I will not proceed with any "WOWS!-AMAZING!-AWSOME!" instead I will conform to the required process as follows.....

 

With almost all great captures, with the issue of "luck" removed....photographic knowledge, the knowledge of use and limitations of ones equipment and a clear understanding of the subjects actions and reactions are paramount in producing the most spectacular images.

 

With that said....you may have the best equipment on the market....the most in-depth understanding of your subject and still not be able to lay claim to an image of this quality. The reason being.... if you do not possess the self-discipline to continue to return to the same spot time after time, to go through image after image seeking the most profound impact, then the percentages of success is far lower. You must be continuously striving to reach the next "level" of precision.

 

Reading some of the posts I feel there is a small amount of jealousy evident. Is it possible the capture has been manipulated? Almost a given....do we not manipulate an image when we return day after day, week after week to capture that precise moment in time? Do we not manipulate when we use flash, telephoto lenses and hides? To obtain an image such as this in a snapshot version would be akin to a "lightning strike". The "split" background cannot be ruled as technically incorrect but more of a personal preference. As far as the blurred wings....whether it is a depth of field issue or motion blur....it works for me. It shows motion in a otherwise tack sharp image.

 

Remember the greatest tool we MUST possess is our brains and our eyes. The mechanics are subject to financial position and personal preference. Never stop learning and never stop striving for the next level of excellence!

 

H.W.Rife

Thanks again for your comments.I just want to say that these birds are migrators from Africa,the first month of the first year i found this little colony i just look at them,taking no photos,then my first pictures were nice but static pictures.Next year I put my little hide before they come(i don't want they are afraid and they go away) and with a lot of patience the results were good...

Sorry for my bad english!

Vezon, it is obvious that you did put an enormous amount of effort and thought into getting these photos. Again, this is splendid work. Most good animal shots in the wild require a lot of patience. Luck helps, of course, but one has to be ready for the moment when it comes.

 

(Most of us wish that our French were half as good as your English.)

 

--Lannie

This is wonderful photograph - I am surprised that discussion around the capture of this moment is focused on the capture of the dragonfly. If you look through his portfolio of bee-eater photos you see he has found a colony of the birds. The photos show many birds with different insects. I suggest the insects have been caught while out foraging and the photos are of birds returning to the nest and "hovering" just before entering the hole.

 

Great photo - obviously one out of many attempts.

what am I to say...just perfect! well done!

Terrific capture and great colors to go with a beautiful composition! Congrats , Robert :)

Stunning

One of the better choices for POTW. It stands out amongst the dark and dreary recent choices.

This might be one of the best photos of its kind I have seen.

Thank you for it

Ah, but was the dragonfly dead at the time of capture by the bird? Was it being held by a fishing line to bate the bird? Was the line cloned out in post production? Did Vezon Thierry use two cameras? Will we ever know any of these answers? None of which detracts, in my mind from the excellent photograph!

I care how the photograph was shot. I accept a certain amount of dodging and burning etc. But if the photgraph was staged then it's not a true imnage is it? Even if it is a still taken from a movie, then that's okay. Some years ago, I sat by a pond for a whole afternoon, watching sparrows taking mayflies in flight. I wasn't able to capture one, actually making the catch. Why? I had no motor wind, no zoom lens, etc, etc. But I got through a few rolls of film! So who says your tools don't count? Of course they do.

In my opinion:

using a dead (or live!) bee fastened to a blade of grass would be no "sin", just a creative technique to make it possible to even get a shot like this.

The other photos posted in this thread also show me clearly that the dark tips of the wing feathers are exactly that, not an artifact of awkward digital editing. That merely increases my awe of these photos.

The fact that a photographer cannot compose an image of a rapidly flying bird, and must rely on the law of averages to get the shot does NOT detract from the artistry of the shot, nor does it demote the photographer from artist to mere craftsman. Where difficult and painstaking technical techniques are required, and where a worthy subject is chosen, and careful "editing" of the output is performed to select the most aesthetic compostion, color, and lighting, the photographer is exercising artistic skills.

As a sometimes specialist in high speed flash photography of hummingbirds in flight, which are much easier to photograph because of their habits, I can look on this photograph with respect for it's awesome beauty and technical mastery.

For those who are familiar with it, it seems that this discussion in large part is a form of the C. P. Snow controversy. He asserts that the technical/scientifice culture is necessarily divergent and becoming distinct from the rest of culture. As you might guess from my comments, I disagree. I think that those who cannot absorb the culture of either "side" are deficient, and that those at culture's apex will always be renaissance personalities who are able to bind together multiple disciplines. I think that this photo illustrates just such an artistic process.

On reading the various responses to this remarkable shot it strikes me that the commentators fall into two camps; the (with the greatest respect) Techno freaks who are primarily concerned about the technical specifications, what camera, what lens, if it was staged how did you do it? and so on. The other group are the aesthetes if you like. The photographers for whom the image is important and does it communicate what you wish it to? I always felt that the most important attribute any artist can have is an eye and the ability to communicate that wonder to others.

In short you can take a good photograph with a bad camera and visa versa. This is a superb piece of art work from someone with an extremly discriminating eye. Someone who understands about light, line, tone, composition and colour. Not someone who has got a great camera that took the shot for them.

There are good pictures of bee eaters.

 

There are better images of bee eaters.

 

And there is a Best image of bee eater.

 

 

This one completely breaks that rule as image is far far better than BEST.

 

Never seen such an image in my life.

Keep the wonderful work at same level of perfection.

 

Sassan

Can I order a print of this?

Great shot.

Nice colors.