Attachment 9582
Attachment 9583
Attachment 9584
Attachment 9585
These are some of the sad last remnants of my epic computer disaster that destroyed tens of thousands of photos :(
Printable View
Attachment 9582
Attachment 9583
Attachment 9584
Attachment 9585
These are some of the sad last remnants of my epic computer disaster that destroyed tens of thousands of photos :(
Sadly computer are like that, a fact of life we have to live with, at least for me not being "computerate".
I just love your close-ups of individual flowers. And also that amazing shot of what must be the sun and the cat silhouette on the horizon. I guess a filter must have been used for that. Great shots, all of them!
Thanks Dreamwoven!
Those were nice photos, Lykren. The colors stood out in the compositions.
As far as losing photos, mine are automatically uploaded to Google and Flickr. Maybe I am over-confident that they are safe there.
Thank you, YesNo. Either my photos were from a time when such dandy cloud services were not available, or I was young and foolish, even more than I am now.
So sorry to hear that, but these surviving pics are really gorgeous. I, too, know bupkis (that's ancient Sanskrit, in case you're wondering) about photography, but I know what I like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lykren
When I was still a child we visited the Lake District, and I took a black and white picture of Lake Derwent like the one in your first picture. My box camera caught a similar moment of sunset behind a lake. Mine was just luck with primitive photography.The ferns catch the intricate detail of the plant with great clarity.
Bah, wet plates are what I call primitive photography ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamwoven
Thanks. That is pretty much what I intended, with the implication that clarity means more than just technical sharpness. (Ansel Adams quote time: Nothing is worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept)
https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/303/18...fdb5b5e4_c.jpg
The "sharp image of a fuzzy concept" idea has got me thinking. It is difficult not to take a sharp image with smart phones so one better make sure the concept behind the photo isn't fuzzy. I liked how the ferns stood out against the forest in the background.Quote:
Originally Posted by North Star
The concept behind most smartphone photos is the selfie. :-0Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
I wonder how narcissists feel about how easy it is today to take a selfie?
Here's a picture of something we found amazing. There is a pond near where we live that has swans in it to keep the geese away. Here is a picture of that swan near some fish. The swan is picking food out of the box and giving it to those fish.
http://i1136.photobucket.com/albums/...and%20Fish.jpg
It looks like I am not the first to notice such things. Here are two videos of the process with larger fish:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkWOse70Oyk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIviEsVyz8M
Here is how I think a pigeon might view the street scene:
http://i1136.photobucket.com/albums/...reet-small.jpg
The image of a swan feeding fish and keeping away geese is very interesting. I had no idea they did that!
Didn't know about feeding fish either, but I do know that swans will attack geese on sight and kill them if possible. Many companies with ornamental ponds buy swans to keep the geese away.
I wonder what benefit or mutual reward the swans receive for feeding the fish?Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
I can't imagine it's out of sheer kindheartedness...
Wait, how come swans kill geese?
You want to fatten those fish up, Iain. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Iain Sparrow
I wasn't aware swans were carnivorous... perhaps there have been rare incidents of a swan devouring a small child holding a bag of two-week-old bread. I'm *ok* with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pompey Bum
A lot of catching up to do, wonderful photos by all spanning the last several pages.
I enjoyed the tour of the gallery.
I think swans are kind of the bird equivalent of buffaloes--big and mean. I've read that swans will attack other animals and humans also. A swan can break a man's leg, and can drag a dog, for example, into the water and drown it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clopin
Aw the only ones buffalo bother are the dummies who walk up, put a hand on their humps, and say, "Okay Margey, take the picture!"
My theory about the swan is that the box used to contain something it liked to eat--pieces of bread or something--but now has only fragments or crumbs. The swan is greedily trying to gobble these up, but can't manage the job well because of its bill. So bits spill out and the fish chow down. Sorry to rain on the parade, but whatever's going on, it's not sharing. Nature's a cruel gal.
P.S. Here's a comment from one of the videos that YN posted:
"They actually aren't feeding them. Swans drop their food in the water before they eat it so that they can consume it mixed with water which keeps it from getting stuck in their throats. The koi have just learned this and in this case are parasitic to the swans. The more you know!"
Oh well, so I was close.
This is a very interesting subject, like Clopin I had no idea swans were so hostile to geese.
Swans are indeed very hostile to all other birds, but they can't break your limb - other than by making you fall over while being chased.
But, back to the topic. . .
https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5455/1...89f4f78b_c.jpg
I like the closeups of the blossoms, North Star, on your last two photos.
Regarding the swans, I suspect the fish are to swans as pigeons are to people picking up what drops to them as Pompey Bum explains.
Actually I think I've gone over to the "softening up the food by dropping it in the water" explanation. Imagine doing the Heimlich maneuver on a swan! :)
However it gets in the water is likely irrelevant to the fish, but those swans must know once they drop the food in the water it doesn't stay there long. I'm surprised they don't try to scare the fish away like they do the geese.
There may even be some swans who can't read the signs about not feeding the fish.
Where I come from feeding wildlife is heavily illegal. Are swans expected to obey to laws of men? Should we be holding swans to the same standards of behaviour as we do people? These are important questions.
Edit: And I'm not sure bylaw smiles upon instances of wanton geese slaughter either.
Fair enough, but don't we need to change the analogy from pigeons in a park to mice in a kitchen? The swan is not feeding the fish as people sometimes feed pigeons. The fish are merely taking what they can get.Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
Here in California geese-slaughter is encouraged. In addition, most California swans have lawyers, so even if the murder of geese and feeding of fish were illegal acts, prosecuting them would be a Herculean task. #SwanPrivilege #EndTheSwanarchy #ReclaimThePondsQuote:
Originally Posted by Clopin
Haha racist cops don't arrest white swans, it's a damn shame.
I don't understand why the swans don't peck at the fish and move them out of the way if all that is going on is getting the food wet. They don't seem to be annoyed by the fish as they are with geese or with me as I walk near them especially with their young around. They seem to be playing with the fish in some way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pompey Bum
I remember having some chickens and a dog. The dog had to be on a chain. The chickens were free to run around as they choose. The chickens knew just how far the chain went and when they got bored would edge across the circumference of the dog's house to get his attention. He would get up and jump at them and they would head back as if they were teenagers on a ride at an amusement park. They knew just how long the dog's chain was. I'm sure he did, too, but he probably figured he might just this one time get lucky and those birds were ticking him off.
So, I don't know. I'm willing to accept that it is just a matter of getting food wet, but then I remember those chickens.
Here's a picture of potted flowers on our patio. It was raining and I thought the blue of the umbrella protecting the camera from the rain was a nice replacement for the sky. I'm calling it "Red and Blue with Green and Rain".
http://i1136.photobucket.com/albums/...98ae004454.jpg
http://i1136.photobucket.com/albums/...98ae004454.jpg[/QUOTE]
Beautiful colors, YN. Very compelling illusions! :)
I doubt your hypothesis about the swan would stand up to scrutiny, although I suppose it might. We (meaning "you and I," not "science") don't really know how much of the fish the swan sees, but assuming it sees them well and understands what is going on, there is the evolutionary bottom line of whether chasing them away is worth it in terms of food saved vs energy expended. Geese would quickly eat all the bread crumbs on the water and in the box, and given sufficient numbers, violently drive the swan away. That is an existential threat to the swan. But the fish, I imagine, are more like pesky insects are to us: they don't take much, and they come right back if you chase them away. From the point of view of the swan, whose survival is a lot more precarious than ours, they are most probably not worth the energy.
Perhaps the swan is whimsically playing with the fish, although I doubt it. Lunchtime is a serious business in the evolutionary world, and whimsy, in my view, ought to be sought elsewhere. I find it interesting, by the way, that in Iain, you, and me, we have a materialist, an idealist, and a dualist, respectively. At least we've got all our bases covered. :)
I am beginning to see the swan-fish as more like a human-cat or human-dog relationship, but I have no evidence for this at the moment except that the swans are not harming the fish. It could be more like the human-spider relationship.
It may be, as you mention, that the fish are hard to chase away and not worth the energy. However, I suspect the fish provide some benefit to the swans. Perhaps their presence makes the waters safer in some way for the swans. I don't know. Also having food provided is an artificial situation. In the wild, swans would not have that. I wonder how swans in the wild treat fish?
Thanks for the comment on the photo!
You are welcome. It has all kinds of allegorical possibilities between the cage and wall, the beauty of the blossoms (in their own fertile sea), and the blue "Heaven" above. It is a very effective picture.
See if you notice the fish pecking at the underside of the swan at all. I'd be more open to your point of view if they were cleaning the swan's parasites: there's no reason a swan can't take care of that and soften up lunch. But the more I think about it, the more I wonder if the swan even knows the fish are there. Remember that birds don't have binocular vision. Even if the swan drops its beak, it is still looking to each side and not down into the water. If you've seen it twist its head to one side (as robins do when they are looking for worms), that might suggest concern about the fish. As it is, though, it's highly unlikely that the swan is playing with them, whether it knows they are there or not.
I agree. It is probably the fish being opportunistic and the swan not caring. Here is an article about them: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...e-reserve.html
Regarding the binocular vision, I don't think fish are any better off than the swans. There is a nice picture of swan and fish right up against each other in the link above.
Here is another pigeon perspective picture. I like the white lines on the street.
http://i1136.photobucket.com/albums/...et%20Lines.jpg
Two yellow lines???