The world we see is what we think it is, not what it actually is...

So much of our reality is self-invented, self-limited.
We see what we want to see.
We see what we have seen before.
We see what we expect.

We see what we allow our selves to see.

We are blind to what we do not expect.
We are blind to what we do not see with our eyes closed.

Reality is a fungible thing.  We don't think it is, but it is.  We bring so much to the table when it comes to enabling a reality to be experienced.  We bring so much that it doesn't seem right.  It should be an objective thing, something that just is.

I recently heard the saying "I'd rather be the person that bought the Bridge, than the person that sold the Bridge".  And I would rather have bought the bridge, than been the person that knowingly tricked and took advantage of another...

So what about photography?

As a photographer I see what I see and then make a choice to capture it.  But how can I capture what I don't see?

One way to overcome this might be to play.  Playing allows me to try things, to experiment, and to not have an expectation or result in mind.  An easy example of this is to play with slow shutter speeds and see what happens.  The pleasing results can be few and far between, but then there's that one that works.  (Kind of like most of my experiences on the golf course - the rare well struck ball that makes the day fun.)

Another way to overcome the expectations of experience and past sight is to put the camera up to my eye and see what I actually see.  This is different than looking without the camera, because the camera restricts vision, frames it in a little box and focusing the mind on just what is there.

And another way is to slow down, and sit, observe and stop looking for a pattern match.  This can be when I start to see past everything I've brought to the day.

--
I was in Florida this year (2016), my 5th year there to drive around and see nature, photograph birds and landscapes, etc.

While there I made it to Fort De Soto and looked for the GHO nest from the year before but I didn't see it and was disappointed.  So I did what I have learned to do when this happens and I found a local (park guy) and asked him some questions.  I learned that the nest I was looking for failed, as did another nest in the park - but there was a nest by the fort just up the road.

I have learned to value locals and their knowledge, and to not be afraid to get some advice.  When I go to a new National Wildlife Refuge for example, I will stop by the visitor's center and talk to them and try to learn from them. By contrast I also do not do a ton of prep/research when going somewhere new and try to have an open/fresh and unplanned approach.  It doesn't always work for the best results (images), but it removes stress and expectations and in that regard I am good with it.

Once I knew where there were owls I headed over there and quickly found the tree with the nest and 2 chicks.  It was in a grassy area just off of the parking lot and the tree itself was in a small area protect by some orange tape to instruct visitors to keep their distance.



I saw the chicks and took a few photographs.  Then I saw another photographer and we started talking a bit.  He said he had been there for a while and didn't see an adult around but he had looked this way and that way and was keeping his eyes opened.

By now I had just been here for maybe 5 minutes and he said he had been there for a couple hours.

What happened next is the reason for this post.

I could have taken his longer observation as fact, and shot the chicks and nest some more and then moved on.  But instead I used my own history with nests and birds and I had a hunch that the female/adult was nearby and within eye sight of the nest, watching over it.

A few years ago I watched another Great Horned Owl nest a few times, and learned that the female would hide in almost plain sight, but high up and blending in to the canopy.  This makes good sense to me - laying eggs and raising chicks is a huge investment in time and effort, and the adult is not likely to be off hunting or sleeping or whatever away from that investment if they have a choice.

With my own perspective, and not the other guy's perspective, I found the female perched in a tree, a tree INSIDE the taped off area, within just a few minutes.  From the perspective below, you can actually see the bird in this wide angle shot pretty clearly outlined.

She was there, clearly resting and watching the nest, from a very close vantage point.  She was hidden, but not that hidden.  One thing I remember the other guy saying after I spotted her was he didn't think she'd perch in a palm tree so he didn't really look there much.



Reality is more than just what you see.  Look harder.

Making different images at the zoo

I enjoy going to the zoo.  I've been going now for over a decade, to the US National Zoo in Washington D.C.

By now I know where most things are, and try to time some photos for the seasons, the colors, and take care to make images that show the animals in a way other than the boring "animal at the zoo" kind of way I think a lot of people expect.  I think it is true that a lot of the time the zoo and the animals can be boring - they might not be outside, they might be hiding, they might be sleeping, they might be pooping.  There's a lot that can go wrong if you want to take interesting photos.

I try to focus on the framing, the colors and getting images that don't scream "captive animal", but I also don't want to mislead anyone and I label the zoo images as taken in a zoo.  In addition to the captive zoo animals I photograph there, I also shoot a lot of the native/migratory wildlife.

Here are 2 captive animals I recently shot.

Flamingo



Lioness




And here are a couple of wild / non-captive birds from the zoo's grounds also.


Mallard



Red-Shouldered Hawk



If you like to photograph wildlife one thing that can make a difference in the animals is what they are used to.  A RSH that lives off in the woods and rarely sees a human will be very likely to fly away when it sees a photographer.  However a RSH/animal, that often sees people/photographers, because that's what is in their home turf will likely not be so eager to fly away.  This is true anywhere.  I was surprised when I learned about the Red-Tailed Hawks on the Mall in DC, and other animals like ducklings, that people have photographed there.

-Jon

What's the value of an unshared photo?

 What's the value of an unshared photo?

Are you a photographer?
Do you take photos?
Do you share your photos?
Do you email them to friends?
Do you post them on facebook?
Do you post them on flickr/instagram/blogs/forums?
Are you a citizen reporter, and do you send your images to CNN or the Weather Channel?

Many people do share their images, and post them online at places like Facebook or Flickr, or Instagram.  Those are the places I regularly share images.

Do you only share small versions of your images?
Do you hold back the best images for yourself and don't share them publicly?

I used to share small versions, and only shared those photos that were everything but what I considered super special, or my best images.

Before I go on let me address the opposite of the problem I'm getting at.  Some people post all their images, every day they post photos.  And everyday they post too many photos.  They either don't know what the good ones are, or they think they're all great and want to share them with everyone.  Unless you're some amazing photographer, the chances are that you are not making amazing images every day.  If you're posting dozens of images from the same day of the same thing, you're doing it wrong.  As a photographer you need to curate your own work.  You need to find the best, new, unique images you've made, and share them, slowly, giving each image a chance to stand on its own.

I learned from flickr early on (2006) that posting multiple images at a time will distract from the group of images, and at best 1 image will get viewed and get feedback and appreciation.  Posting multiple images can be useful when you're not sure what a good image is, or what images others might like and respond to.  But once I got an idea of what works, sharing a single image at a time worked best.

In time I learned that I should not hold back some images, and these days I will eventually share just about any image, but I will delay the posting.  Delaying posting in general is another subject, which I will say is useful in that you can explore a subject/approach/technique/style and work on it for days without sharing an image and then when you've advanced you can share images that are much better than what you initially started capturing.

So what's the value of an unshared image?

What I'm getting at with this is the mindset of people that think:

• People are going to steal my images
• My images are special
• My images will be worth less if I can't control them
• I just take photos for myself, no one else needs to see them.
• I don't care what other people think of my images

Or maybe people have a negative view and think:

• My images aren't that good
• People won't like my images
• People will be mean and nasty and tell me how my images suck

Above are reasons I've thought of for not sharing images, reasons I've thought myself and that have made me wonder about sharing images publicly.

In recent years I've not shared a lot, and posted very infrequently.  I guess I got burned out on the social aspects of photography.  And I got burned out on the competitive nature of photography.  While some people might appreciate my/your images, there is a group of people that are only interested in getting their own images, copying my/your images, and wanting to know how you got what you got!

So what good is a photograph if no one gets to see it?  What good is the work if it is locked away, a secret to be kept?

I would argue that the unshared photograph isn't worth that much, but there's also the experience of going out and taking the image that is of value.  That's what kept me going when I was put off from sharing.  I did it for myself, not motivated by likes/favs/etc.  But it had a bitter taste to it, like I was upset with the world for trying to make photography in to something besides what I wanted it to be and what I appreciated.

But sharing images has many positive aspects.  When I joined flickr in 2005 I knew next to nothing about photography, or animals, or the area I lived in (MD/VA/DE),  Sharing photos changed that, and I met people, got better at photography, and learned a lot.

So - are you making images and hiding them away, keeping them just for yourself because of some of the reasons I listed above?  Do you want to get better at photography, discover new places, new people, new ?  Then you should overcome that resistance, make a profile on flickr or instagram, and start sharing images.  If you're new to it, that's where you have to start.  I've removed many of my earliest posts from flickr, but there are some up there still that kind of suck.

Here are a few images I shared when I first started:










Here are a few images I made in the last few years:
















As I'm sure you can tell, my images went from awful to pretty good.  It took a decade of shooting, learning, buying new gear, and finding what I liked shoot and what others like to see.  I still shoot what I like, I haven't just started shooting what other people like - but the aspect to consider is that feedback on your images, the ones you like, from others will make you a better photographer.  And if you don't share your images you will most likely not get much better.  Or if you do get better it will be very slow and then for what?

If no one else sees your images, it's like that saying "if a tree falls in the woods, and no one is there to hear it, did it make a sound?"

Make images.  Share images.  Make more images.  Sharing your images won't make them worth less, it will make you a better photographer.

-Jon

Original content posted at http://natureandwildlifephotography.blogspot.com/

Nikographer.com / Jon