Who am I?

My photo
An individual, of no great importance, who is unable to the see the natural world as a place for competition. I catch fish, watch birds, derive immense pleasure from simply looking at butterflies, moths, bumble-bees, etc - without the need for rules! I am Dylan and this is my blog - if my opinions offend? Don't bother logging on again - simple!


Tuesday, 16 July 2013

Those little things!

As I fumble along, lifes' pathway, I find myself increasingly in awe of the variety of life that shares my space. My ability to use a camera has, for much of my lifetime, aided my cause by recording the events as they happened. In the early days (1970's-80's) Kodak played a significant role in my life - I worked for them! I had, at my disposal, some of the finest advice available on the "art of photography" - a profession which took a seven year apprenticeship to become fully qualified.
If only they had taken the threat of digital technology seriously; they would still be a "Global" player.
Hey-ho! They didn't and they aren't. Digital technology has spawned a whole new generation of "photographers" who, armed with their computer operated equipment, record images of stunning clarity and composition. Quite how much credit is due to the technology is unknown - but there's no seven year apprenticeship to become a master of photoshop! The clock will never tock - tick backwards and the advances in image capture will continue apace. I see that Nokia will be selling a phone with a 41 mega pixel sensor - my Canon 400d is 10.1 mega pixel.

A Hoverfly sp. in Sye & Yve's back garden. (Sunday morning)
So I now find myself in a position where I am unsure if the individual, or the technology, is the master of the situation? I read photo-bloggers complaining about the quality of their images. What?
Two years ago they were still digi-scoping! It is a crazy world and the speed of technological advance is unlikely to slow down. Anyone who has the funds and desire to chase these advances will be at the forefront of digital image capture - me? I happily plodding along at the back of the queue. A good camera doesn't suddenly become a bad one when new advances are marketed - it just becomes less fashionable (very much like me!)

A Thick-headed Fly - Sicus ferrugineus - in our garden on Monday
This is not a moan, just a simple observation about the times in which we live. Some of the images that are to be found are now so "photo shopped" that the subjects look like they have been rolled in sugar! I would think that mine, by comparison, look like I've a lemonade bottle as a lens! The thing with this blogging lark is it doesn't matter. My blog, my images (good, bad or indifferent) are placed into cyber space purely for my own reasons. If others are able to find entertainment from my postings, then so much the better.

A Hoverfly sp. - a Sphaerophoria sp. (probably scripta) in the garden this morning

I've accompanied this nonsense with some images from the past four days - using the 170 - 500mm with my extension tubes to capture some of the insects which have crossed my path. Certainly not the best efforts available on the network - yet plenty good enough for a simple blog?


  1. Yoy got it in one, if your images are good enough for you then job done. Photo shop is a good tool if used properly, it is very easy to go overboard with the sugaring tool, sorry I meant sharpening tool. I showed some of my fishing mates that 11.6 Barbel photo and they all agreed "a cracking fish"

  2. Steve,
    If the original image is of a decent quality, we shouldn't need to use photoshop to "improve" it? The guys who learnt their trade using conventional cameras and film had to make every effort count, if they were in the business. Mistakes were costly in time and money.
    Today we can happily snap away; no constraints on the number of shots (we don't have to change a roll of film after every 36 exposures)and no expense involved in getting the results developed. In this computerised age, we are fortunate to have instant access to our results on the back of our cameras. For us digital age bloggers to start harping on about image quality is farcical - as if we earn our living from posting pretty pictures in cyberspace?
    Blogging is about sharing experiences, not a shop window for wannabe photographers - there are plenty of other avenues open to the individual who wishes to become a "wildlife photographer" only you might just come up against the likes of Hugh Miles and Simon King and realise just how inferior your images really are in comparison to professional cameramen who have undertaken a lifetimes apprenticeship?