July 06, 2015, 03:29:28 AM

Author Topic: Show your Bird Portraits  (Read 1376991 times)

Atonegro

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 79
  • It's not the gear, it's the eye.
Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2115 on: August 03, 2013, 05:53:53 AM »
Found this this morning.
Shot with a Kodak Brownie SIX-20 when I was 8 years old.
Developed by my uncle and printed by myself 45 years ago.
DCS 3c, D2000, 1DS, 1DS2, 1DS3, D800e, D810 and now waiting for the 1DS-X.....or a Nikon D4X...

English is not my native language, I learned  it only a few years ago. If you don't like my spelling, I will be happy to write it in Dutch for you.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2115 on: August 03, 2013, 05:53:53 AM »

IslanderMV

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 283
  • "life is for the birds"
    • Jeff Bernier Photography
Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2116 on: August 03, 2013, 09:47:35 AM »
Maternity

Northstar

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1610
Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2117 on: August 03, 2013, 09:58:21 AM »
Found this this morning.
Shot with a Kodak Brownie SIX-20 when I was 8 years old.
Developed by my uncle and printed by myself 45 years ago.

ok...i stared at this for a bit and I'm not really sure of what I'm looking at, what is it?
Sport Shooter

1dX and 5d3... 24-70 2.8ii, 70-200 2.8ii, 1.4xiii and 2xiii, 85, 40mm, 300 2.8L IS....430ex

rpt

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2500
Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2118 on: August 03, 2013, 10:20:41 AM »
Found this this morning.
Shot with a Kodak Brownie SIX-20 when I was 8 years old.
Developed by my uncle and printed by myself 45 years ago.

ok...i stared at this for a bit and I'm not really sure of what I'm looking at, what is it?
I had the same question. There seem to be some bones...

jrista

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5193
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2119 on: August 03, 2013, 10:41:31 AM »
Found this this morning.
Shot with a Kodak Brownie SIX-20 when I was 8 years old.
Developed by my uncle and printed by myself 45 years ago.

ok...i stared at this for a bit and I'm not really sure of what I'm looking at, what is it?
I had the same question. There seem to be some bones...

It is the skeleton of an old, dead bird. Rather morbid...

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 16714
Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2120 on: August 03, 2013, 11:14:13 AM »
It is the skeleton of an old, dead bird. Rather morbid...

IMO, 'portrait' implies a living subject.  Not that I'm squeamish about a few bones...not after eight years of teaching gross anatomy to medical students.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

jrista

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5193
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2121 on: August 03, 2013, 11:27:13 AM »
It is the skeleton of an old, dead bird. Rather morbid...

IMO, 'portrait' implies a living subject. 

I agree.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2121 on: August 03, 2013, 11:27:13 AM »

surapon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2754
  • 80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2122 on: August 03, 2013, 01:18:37 PM »
I use Canon 5D MK II and Canon EF 600 mm. F/ 4.0 L IS USM  with Flash and Better Beamer, on Monopod :

https://surapon.shutterfly.com/pictures/11030

Orangutan

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1061
Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2123 on: August 03, 2013, 01:31:14 PM »
IMO, 'portrait' implies a living subject.  Not that I'm squeamish about a few bones...not after eight years of teaching gross anatomy to medical students.

I'm willing to grant Atonegro some artistic license on this. 

I guess if we want to nitpick: "ORIGIN mid 16th cent.: from French, past participle (used as a noun) of Old French portraire ‘portray’"

Oh, and a bit of Googling: http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/articles/e/egyptian_mummy_portraits.aspx

Yes, it's a portrait.


Northstar

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1610
Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2124 on: August 03, 2013, 01:35:01 PM »
breakfast...
5d3
300 2.8 with 2xiii at 600mm
f7.1
1/1000
iso500

and then as I'm so proudly examining the images i just took of the herron eating a sunny, this beautiful bald eagle swoops down and snatches a fish right in front of me and starts flying away (second pic) 
« Last Edit: August 03, 2013, 01:41:57 PM by Northstar »
Sport Shooter

1dX and 5d3... 24-70 2.8ii, 70-200 2.8ii, 1.4xiii and 2xiii, 85, 40mm, 300 2.8L IS....430ex

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 16714
Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2125 on: August 03, 2013, 01:43:40 PM »
IMO, 'portrait' implies a living subject.  Not that I'm squeamish about a few bones...not after eight years of teaching gross anatomy to medical students.

I'm willing to grant Atonegro some artistic license on this. 

I guess if we want to nitpick: "ORIGIN mid 16th cent.: from French, past participle (used as a noun) of Old French portraire ‘portray’"

Oh, and a bit of Googling: http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/articles/e/egyptian_mummy_portraits.aspx

Yes, it's a portrait.

What kind of cameras did they use in 16th century France?  Oh, and from your link: "This has proved that the portrait did indeed show the person as they appeared during life."

I like picking nits...   ;)
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

Orangutan

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1061
Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2126 on: August 03, 2013, 02:30:09 PM »
What kind of cameras did they use in 16th century France?
Dude, you're too smart and thoughtful for this kind of argument: if the skeleton had been painted rather than photographed would that have transformed it into a legitimate portrait in your estimation?  Painted portrait or photographed portrait are irrelevant.  What's important is that it "portrays."

Quote
Oh, and from your link: "This has proved that the portrait did indeed show the person as they appeared during life."
I almost addressed this in my original post, but figured you wouldn't go for the obvious fallacy: your original statement was that a portrait should portray a "living subject."  The mummy portraits were painted after the death of the subject, and therefore portray a deceased subject.  If we take your argument regarding the mummy portraits, then a photo of a taxidermied bird could be a portrait because it represents what the bird would have looked like in life.  However, my example only addressed your need for a living subject.  It would have been more legitimate on your part to argue that a bird skeleton is not a bird, but that's a different question.

Quote
I like picking nits...   ;)

Can be a fun, social game since we all have nits.  At least that's what I've learned from gorillas and chimps.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 16714
Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2127 on: August 03, 2013, 03:04:19 PM »
Quote from: Wikipedia
A portrait is a painting, photograph, sculpture, or other artistic representation of a person, in which the face and its expression is predominant. The intent is to display the likeness, personality, and even the mood of the person. For this reason, in photography a portrait is generally not a snapshot, but a composed image of a person in a still position. A portrait often shows a person looking directly at the painter or photographer, in order to most successfully engage the subject with the viewer.

What's the 'mood' of the dead bird?  How well does a dead subject engage with the viewer?

I suppose a portrait is in the eyes of the artist and viewer.  As the viewer, I don't think the bird skeleton was a portrait, any more than the drawings and photos in my bookcase full of anatomical atlases.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2127 on: August 03, 2013, 03:04:19 PM »

Orangutan

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1061
Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2128 on: August 03, 2013, 04:40:54 PM »
I suppose a portrait is in the eyes of the artist and viewer.

Agreed.  The reason I poked you about your comment is that the poster had brought out a memory of his childhood, an image that seemed to have inspired his future photography, and then presented it on the most appropriate forum he found here.  I concede that it's in the gray area for a portrait; but it was heartfelt, and not a troll.  And it was kinda funny too.  Your comment struck me as petty, which your posts usually aren't.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled programming...

serendipidy

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1497
Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2129 on: August 03, 2013, 04:46:46 PM »
It is the skeleton of an old, dead bird. Rather morbid...

IMO, 'portrait' implies a living subject. 

I agree.

I think his bird just took a tern for the worse. :o
EOS 5D miii, EOS 7D, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS ii, 100-400mmL IS

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« Reply #2129 on: August 03, 2013, 04:46:46 PM »