Comment by freetime2

Comment by freetime2 a day ago

11 replies

View on Hacker News

That winning photograph with the bird in front of the solar eclipse is really incredible. I wasn't sure if it was real or not (some photography competitions will allow composites stitched together in photoshop).

But the photographer uploaded a video on YouTube of him taking the photo, and just looking at the environment (he's in a small boat off the coast of Mexico) you can see it really did require a remarkable amount of planning. And I think it is indeed a real photograph.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voTNPeHR7Jc

gyomu a day ago

For anyone curious, the competition rules are here:

https://www.birdpoty.com/rules

"With the exception of HDR, stitched panoramas, focus stacking, and in-camera multiple exposures, composited images or AI-generated images are not permitted in any category. Sky swapping or removal of objects through cloning, for example, is not permitted."

Reply View 0 replies
regera a day ago

Thanks for sharing, can't imagine how bird photographers devote weeks to plan for a single shot - may seem extreme. Being in the right location at the right time is the key. Wow!

This skill is often underrated. World is moving faster than ever. Another underrated skill is quick-decision making.

Reply View 0 replies
SwtCyber 20 hours ago

Cool to see that kind of effort rewarded in a space often dominated by post-processing tricks

Reply View 1 reply
  • ghaff 15 hours ago

    It's not even a new thing. I remember an article, in Outside maybe, about the controversy around how many photos in the wildlife/landscape space were heavily post-processed in various way.

    I had a friend who prided himself in his (very good) nature photography and he got quite discouraged with respect to nature photography contests when so many people weren't stopped taking photos "out of the camera."

    Reply View 0 replies
baxtr 20 hours ago

Stunning image.

Although, having experienced a solar eclipse and the associated hysteria around protective glasses, I wonder how risky it was for his eyesight to look through a magnifying lens.

Reply View 1 reply
  • pgalvin 16 hours ago

    It looks like he is using an EOS R5, in the video he uploaded of him taking the photo. This is a mirrorless camera (very common nowadays) so the viewfinder is merely an LED screen with a live video.

    Reply View 0 replies
lofaszvanitt 21 hours ago

[flagged]

Reply View 3 replies
  • eru 20 hours ago

    > As an added plus: nobody cares how the photographer took the shot. On one leg, in a boat before eaten by a shark, whilst taking a dump, on top of an elephant, whatever. The photo must speak for itself. Just like you check a painting and if you like it at first sight, if it talks to you, then that's a good painting by your standards. So check the painting, do not read any added text. If it's good, it's good. If you need description, then it's not a good shot.

    Some people connect with the history and context of a piece.

    There's a reason the real Mona Lisa is worth considerably more than even the most faithful reproduction.

    Just to be clear: I'm not saying that _you_ have to care about context. Nor that caring about context is good (or bad). I'm just saying that many people do care about context.

    Reply View 2 replies
    • lofaszvanitt 19 hours ago

      People nowadays do not have any means to connect with whatever. They see a picture somewhere and they only see the picture, and maybe the name of the artist. So the piece has to talk for itself.

      You can be sure people never actually see the original Mona Lisa, or any other heavily marketed artwork. And in terms of pricing. It's all a game.

      Reply View 1 reply
      • eru 4 hours ago

        > You can be sure people never actually see the original Mona Lisa, [...]

        Long queues in the Louvre disagree.

        Reply View 0 replies