Re: Camera For Photographing Animals?

On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 19:27:02 -0000, "Roy G" <roy.gibson1@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


"Dave C" <contact@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:rbbjg49fnelcho3131937jqejuemct3cd8@xxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 06:50:17 -0500, Dave C <contact@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:


To top it off, it's not even a photo that I would consider submitting for
viewing by ANYONE. I wouldn't even waste a friend's time with it

Thanks for posting that link! LOL!!


Windbag!

Put up or shut up.

Roy G


I don't bother to placate useless usenet trolls that try to manipulate others
into posting their marketable photography just to make their own basement-living
life seem like it's been worth it.

Interesting anecdote(s), my last photo-trekking partner and I invested in an
extensive 8 volume set of all the known endangered species in North America. We
thought it might be a fun challenge to see how many photographs we could get, of
species that have as yet gone unphotographed. No photos of them in existence. We
managed to photograph about 5 per month, for a year. It almost got boring, but
provided for an interesting challenge and a fun excuse to visit areas of
continental N. America that we might not have considered before. Not to mention
the diverse species and habitats that challenged our photography skills. It was
a fun way to fine-hone our skills.

Quick example: Orchid lovers are all ga-ga over finally having professional
photographs of the rarest species on earth. Only one small patch approx. 1x3 ft.
of them was rumored to exist on the whole world. Luckily, for the orchid
officianados, I also personally managed to find 2 more patches of them, much
larger than the original patch, while hunting for the originals. The
national-park officials thanking me greatly. One of my discovered patches being
over 2ft x 20ft. I guess they aren't so rare anymore. It took 3 days of hiking
through alligator infested chest-deep swamps but it was worth it. (And for the
record: 'gators are not as nasty as all the idiotic sensationalists on the media
make them out to be. If they have a way to get away from you, that'll always be
their first option. You only need a good walking-stick to prod the murky waters
ahead of you.)

Another simple example: an insect species that hasn't been recorded since the
1920's, recorded in drawings and text but never photographed. The last known
specimen disappeared from a NY Museum over 40 years ago. There are now excellent
macro-photos of its existence, thanks to me. Albeit, 10 states away from its
original range, but proof that they actually do still exist. When my photographs
were shown to specialists in that field they about had coronary attacks.
Unfortunately, they didn't want to pay for the photographs. They thought the
discovery so fantastic that this deserves to be in the public domain.. So they
are now safe in my possession, withheld from the specialists (and public) from
having any access to more than the 200x200 pixel versions.

Endangered species aren't difficult to find, IF you know enough about animal
behavior and habitat requirements of particular species, plant or animal.

I think I might try for the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker next, since my past success
rates have been so high.

This "award winner's" Snow-Leopard half-assed random-chance attempt is pathetic
at best. An animal that large and easy to track? Over 6 months? A team of
professionals? FOURTEEN remote controlled cameras? I'd be embarrassed to even
have to admit that. I guess you'll never see why I am laughing about it (what
with your isolated urban-life experience and all), but the reasons for laughter
are more than obvious to me. To top it off his photo wasn't even close to being
"artistic" or composed properly. Just a mundane record that they exist. I don't
stop at just "acceptable", I make sure that when I record a rare species that it
is not only useful to the scientific community but is good enough to adorn the
wall of any establishment, being pleasing to view for decades to come.

Show my photos to you? How much money do you have?

Don't be such an obvious and pathetic net-troll moron. Any professional
photographers would completely understand why I don't post my photos publicly
for free. Your insistence that I do only reveals you for the useless, ignorant,
and inexperienced troll that you are.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: DSLR Cameras
    ... here's two species to which the photos of them were stolen without ... you managed to find only a partial technical drawing made ... Since you could not find any photographs of this ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: Moths & Butterflys of Josephine County, Oregon.
    ... there being as many as six of one species. ... lepidoptera month netted me (in photographs of live subjects only, ... the feathers on a feather-boa. ... How about providing me a link to your photos. ...
    (rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
  • Re: Photography in a section meeting
    ... We thought it'd be a good idea if we could include photos of the ... school nativity play. ... Photographs taken purely for personal use are ... exempt from the Data Protection Act. ...
    (uk.rec.scouting)
  • Re: Photo of Xanthops
    ... I did this last photo of the species. ... photos they'll stop buying birds that are caged and treated like this. ... A local organization to protect their ... wiping out thousands of native Florida fish species from over-grazing the ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: C++ vs. C#
    ... Photographs have finite lifetimes. ... Old photos are now a hundred years old, ... your images will not outlast your current computer. ... Negatives often have better lifetime than the photos, ...
    (microsoft.public.vc.mfc)
Loading