Bird Photography and "Bird on a Stick"
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 сен 2024
- Ever heard the expression "bird on a stick?"
I have always heard this with a negative meaning, so I thought I would find out your experiences with this phrase. I hope to debunk a little of this negativity and show you a few images of birds on sticks. Trust me, you don't have to feel bad posting or printing images like this, but there are a few factors you should consider.
Subscribe for editing tips and behind-the-scenes videos as well as community contests and free giveaways:
www.patreon.com/WildlifeInspired
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Best noise reduction and sharpening software: topazlabs.com/...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
MT FAVORITE GEAR
Nikon Z9: bhpho.to/3rM9O7A
Nikon 400mm 2.8 Z: bhpho.to/3tj806y
Nikon 105mm macro: bhpho.to/3NngzVI
Laowa 25mm ultra macro: bhpho.to/3F405g7
Leofoto monopod: bit.ly/46xfQYE
Robus Tripod: bhpho.to/46eAQn3
Promedia Gear Tomahawk (monopod gimbal): tinyurl.com/4v...
Promedia Katana Jr (tripod gimbal): tinyurl.com/yj...
Leofoto fluid head: bit.ly/3ZFtRB8
AK Diffuser: akdiffuser.com... (COUPON CODE skeys5 for more savings)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shopping for any of these brands? Use these links:
B&H (my online source with great delivery and service): bhpho.to/41vuugj
Promedia Gear: www.promediagear.com?aff=36
Leofoto: leofotousa.com...
The bird on a stick thing is just a narrative that is just being pushed to create some form of hierarchy or self-importance in bird photography. Plain and simple. You could say "bird on a beach", "bird in a puddle", "bird on the ground" and apply the same sort of virtue signaling. A lot of it is coming from two recent schools of thought: "unless it's BIF, it's crap or unless it's bird, small in frame with a lot of environment shown, it's boring". It's all about what people value and their own self worth
Yeah, birds are pretty skittish. Getting bird on stick isn't as easy as it sounds, especially some species!
A lot of what I see on social media (Instagram is particularly bad!) are what I call "museum quality" images. Pretty bird (normally colourful), very close up, on a highly curated stick with a bland background and often heavily edited. I don't like those images, they bore me. I also find it disconcerting when you KNOW that the particular bird in the photo won't naturally sit out in the open and that the image must be either set up or have half the background photoshopped out. I DO really like "bird on stick" images that show a comfortable bird with a sense of "place" in the image. For some birds this means not only ON a stick, but also surrounded by sticks :) and it's hard to get a clear photo with adequate separation of the bird from the background to create a pleasing image. Bonus points for multiple birds or some sort of behaviour. (and I've just realised that my avatar here is a classic "bird on a stick" image so obviously I do take plenty of them.
I have never worried about showing a bird on a stick. I don’t use a studio setup. Usually just a natural perch or a stick attached to something. I have perceived that a lot of people look down on it, though. But for those of us with full time jobs, families, and limited time there is only so much you can do and setting up some places where birds can be photographed in your backyard is where most of your wildlife photography will occur. I try to keep it as natural as I can, though. The people who view my stuff on IG like it although IG is geared towards video now so my views have plummeted. Oh well, good thing I do this for me and my mental health.
I completely agree. It is all about what we have access and the resources to do. Also, mental health! So important. If that is the 'only' thing photography does for someone, that is a huge win!
What is your IG? Would love to check it out.
@@RobinWildlifeMy replies seem to be disappearing for some reason. Sorry, I guess I can’t share an IG tag for some reason.
Good on ya.......for recognizing this simple truth. I've always thought the phrase "bird on a stick" was demeaning and condescending. It's extremely challenging to get the images like you are showing, they're beautiful. I have a few that I'm quite proud of myself. Thanks for your different point of view on this........like you said, nothing wrong with photographing a bird where it naturally wants to be.
Well said!
People always find ways to tear others down. Wildlife photography tends to be more filled with this than most.
"Birds on sticks", "zoo photos are cheating", "safari photos are cheating", "photoshop is cheating", "baiting is cheating", "hides are bad", "bird on blue sky" etc etc etc. Photography is filled with gatekeepers that think they are better than others. Just gotta ignore them and do what you love.
A "bird on a branch" can be beautiful, or it can have poor composition, but there is no absolute rule
I get it. That said I still dont like birds on blue sky, lol
@@WildlifeInspired Me neither. :) But I think there is a big difference between not liking something and using it to gatekeep others.
It is definitely used as a negative too often. I am not sure why many photographers have the idea that birds in their natural habitat is wrong for taking pictures. Perched is when you get the cute head tips, body positions and wing shakes or stretches. A nice background, good light and a nice branch is one of my favourite ways to capture bird images. I also love to get in flight with translucent wing tips and do try to get those as well, but my tracking skills are not always up to the task when we are in the trees. Ducks pretty much live in the water but water shots are frowned upon; I love to show them sitting peacefully in their habitat or foraging for food.
I will see people on social media slam an image of a perched warbler on a branch then praise a red-winged blackbird perched on a reed, or praise a woodpecker in its natural spot of being right up against the tree; I am not sure why one is ok and the other is not. I very seldom post to social media groups for those reasons.
I am not a fan of set up pictures like birds at feeders or man-made perches but for some it works and works well.
💯 correct Scott! Anytime l see a bird in a scene that maybe absolutely gorgeous my instincts of the photo might be a setup and not realistic. Sorry, but most small birds we photograph are either going to be in flight, on the ground and on a feeder (both not really desirable) or on their natural location, A STICK! Like you implied, it’s up to the photographer to get the bird isolated on the stick in the best light and background that we can,and that’s what makes a meh photo to a great photo! Just my 2 cents!
I always thought that "bird on a stick" was like "hotdog on a stick", a bird on top of a somewhat vertical stick perch. As you say, birds perch on sticks! Almost all of the images you have shown don't qualify as a "bird on a stick" for me. Working in the pretty backgrounds is very important.
I had always considered 'bird on a stick', said derisively, was a pretty stupid comment. It's like derisively saying 'duck in a pond' or 'squirrel in a tree'. Where else do you expect them to be? But, I hadn't added in the bird studio aspect, which I also dislike and thought of as a separate category.
Actually, I don't think bird studio was meant when I have heard the 'bird on a stick' comment. I think the speakers were always commenting on the lack of action in the picture - it's a stock bird portrait without any additional interest. But I disagree in many cases, for just the attributes that you picked out - light, color and background/environment. A photo that basically shows a perched bird on a bare stick against a blank background (pure sky, gray wall, whatever) isn't a very interesting picture (not that I haven't taken a thousand of those) and probably earns the term 'bird on a stick'.
Social media in general has turned this beautiful hobby into a pissing contest. Unfortunately, those that mock "bird on a stick" is a way to tell others their photos are better than yours. Its foolish talk and these people are brainwashed sheep from social media clout.
I agree with you that its more about the background, if I see a picture of a bird on a stick with a human item such as a building or a feeder in the background or foreground, that is not something I would like also just plain blown out sky is not that appealing, but a nice, blurred background with complementary colors looks very good. If however, the color of the bird and the background seem to make it hard to tell where the bird is that tends to take away more than help the image
How would anyone take a photo of a songbird if it wasn't on a stick? A songbird in flight looks horrible.
I agree with you. Of course it's all personal preference, but for me, a close up with a pretty background makes me stop and look at someone's photo every time (on a stick or otherwise). Keep in mind that it is partly due to the fact that I rarely get to see a wild bird (on a stick or otherwise) that close up with my own eyes, so that alone is a compelling composition from the get go for someone like myself that enjoys birds. We like them but they don't like us..... Add in the background color and right body position of the bird --- which all adds to the composition. But again, beauty is in the eye of the beholder so personal preference at work here. Thanks. Kind regards
I'm an amateur photographer who has, in retirement, gravitated towards birds. And, I do not do any social media, I simply share my shots with friends through email, or posting them on Flickr (which, I know, some of you will say is social media, but I don't really consider it so, as there is no commentary about society, hence, not social). My goals in shooting birds is a) get an ID shot, b) get a bird on a stick (reference shots), and then c) try to go for either a behavior or artistic shot. I will share even an ID shot, as I believe it imparts my sense of excitement (I saw a purple-farting painted-coot, wow!). Of course, I prefer to share birds on a stick. That gives my audience a chance to see the color, detail and environment that they would otherwise never be able to experience and appreciate. That last bit, 'appreciate', is important, and I hope that it helps my audience lean further towards supporting protecting the environment. And of course, when I get better shots, I post those too. If artistic shots were my only goal, I would be bored off my gourd. The opportunities to get those shots happen so rarely, you just can't count on them. I share mostly birds on a stick.
Thanks for the view!
"I hope that it helps my audience lean further towards supporting protecting the environment" 100% that! If pictures enhance people's appreciation of wildlife, we are winning!
great video Scott,,I agree bird on a stick is negative .I am a bird photographer I can take great photos some on clean branches and some on branches with more punch to them .i have had great feedback from both
Right on
I love these quick thought videos. Another great topic.
My thoughts....I think since the birth of IG and other platforms that have allowed us to get a bit over saturated with bird photos, our expectations of what makes a "great" photo have changed and many photos that are beautiful get easily overlooked. To me it doesnt matter if its on a stick or the ground, all the same rules apply to making it a beautiful photo. The ground, rock, water, sky, or branch, can all be boring or interesting. Birds live in trees. An interesting branch can compliment a bird just as much as an interesting rock or sky. A setup branch can have interest or it can look fake or unnatural. There are many different factors that make a good bird photo, so getting bothered or bored by a "bird on a stick" photo is just missing the point of bird photography to me. An interesting bird photo is interesting or beautiful or artistic because many factors lining up and not from it being on or off a stick 😊😊
Great topic. The oversaturation of photography
I completely agree. To a large extent the setting in it self is not the point, there are lots of other factors to take into account. I have to say, I do prefer it when a photographer provides some context to the picture. Where it was, what makes that particular setting interesting. That kinda thing.
I mean if that's the kind of party it's going to be, Henri Cartier-Bresson took pictures of humans on sidewalks.
I do honestly try to capture bird on stick plus something else though. Bird on a stick giving me attitude or posing heroically. They often don't appreciate the photographer's creative vision.
first of: I've never heard the term 'just a bird on a stick' (or another bird on a stick). It is actually my favorite kind of bird bird photos, clear background, simple stick or stump.
Using the phrase "just a bird on a stick" has the same energy as someone saying "get a REAL camera." Condescending and dismissive. You can get great photos with any camera, and you can get great photos of a bird on a stick.
Honestly, I used to do more BIF, but have evolved into shooting more "birds on a stick" shots. I just call them 'perched'.
IMPO, while BIF might be "cooler", perched birds are typically prettier, and with good eye contact, evoke more emotion.
Of course their are always exceptions.
I do lots of back yard "set up photography" too, and often use the excuse > I'm just testing my gear / settings. But in reality, I love it, and get lots of nice shots, and beautiful birds when doing it.
But then I do a lot of in the field shooting as well.
Oh and about birds getting lost in the BG, with my style of pulling birds up in a persons face, it's going to be a lot harder to lose them 🙂
In the examples you showed, your closest would probably be just about my farthest.
I just really like to be able to look into that eye, to try to see what they are thinking 😉👍
I typically shoot at 1280mm equivalent, but yesterday I was shooting at 1792 mm !
As long the "stick" and the background is a part of the natural environment of the bird, I don't subscribe to the view of it is not artistic or whatever comment!... Yes definitely your images shown that!...
I think it’s pompous to even think “it’s just a bird on a stick”
Some people do photography for documentation. (More like Birders)
It’s not really meant to be judged as artistic or beautiful.
Such a gray area with all this. If you set up a natural perch in your back yard, with a stick that the bird normally would land on… whatever.
But if you set up a studio, similar to the hummingbird reel, then I think it’s a little cheap.
I probably align more closely with you Scott in this: if the bird is a naturally perching bird, and it is perching on a stick it would normally perch on, fine.
Also, we are all at different experience levels. Your perched photos are 10000x better than mine, but I am trying to get better at it.
There is something fundamentally wrong in calling a branch as a "stick'...and it is plain foolhardiness to expect that a bird should not perch on a branch of its choice that nature has provided it.
Everything in a photo matters. As you mentioned most bird's are built to perch. It doesn't mean they aren't pretty, just common. Something different will capture the viewers attention.
I’m not sure where else we would catch some of these birds. On the ground is terrible. It’s almost impossble to catch small birds in flight, other than leaving the perch.
To me, ‘on a stick’ is the most common and natural!
At least I don’t post ‘bird at the feeder’ photos!
Thanks for the video and point of view. I’ve been hearing the phrase “bird on a stick” a lot lately and just like you immediately to offense to it. I mean birds sit in trees therefore they are going to be on sticks. Actually wish I had never heard the phrase as I look back in pictures now (being primarily a bird photographer) I feel like my pictures aren’t worthy of sharing even though some of them are best work. I guess those that don’t like can just keep scrolling. 😉
It is the choice of the person who takes the photograph for whatever reasons and circumstances... So we cannot be judgemental about how the photograph was taken...therr is no scientific principle which decides one photo is better than other...if someone takes a photo of bird among clutter of trees...it coukd be have been for the very joy of being able to see that bird... For those who commercialize photigraphy, some safety nets might be needed ti create sellable work and some of these guidelines can apply. I am close to retirement from a full time job, so for last few years i get some time to go out and take...but do i have the energy to visit an exotic loation or deep inside a forest.. answer is no..while i was younger .. i had no time.. so with what is feasible now i enjoy .. but i must say tgat some of these tips has helped me enjoy better the photos i take.
I 100% agree !
I think it is both an important artistic, as well as philosophical question, about whether wildlife should be depicted in idealized settings, or rather in their natural habitat displaying their normal behavior. Perching birds are usually found perched on a branch. I agree that color and lighting provide very important artistic content whether the birds are perched or in flight.
I photograph birds wherever they present themselves. If the surroundings are attractive in some way, then it can be an overall attractive image. If the surroundings are unattractive, the image depends entirely on the bird. If it works, it works for me. Next, people will complain about ducks on a pond or bird in the air.
Great point Scott,,, let’s talk about birds on a wire!!! lol.
I don't do the whole "hide and wait" thing, neither in nature nor on a perch, I basically tend to just walk around and see what I can find. Never have I cared about having a "bird on a stick", even if it's not the most beautiful stick or if there are a bunch of sticks next to it. That's just the reality, that's exactly where a lot of these birds live, I think it's stupid to only show these single sticks with a perfectly clean background.
The phrase definitely is most commonly used with a negative connotation, but it shouldn't be. The goal should be to get away from the bird on a stick with a ton of other sticks, which is what way too many of mine are, and get to the bird on a stick without any other sticks. There isn't really any difference between a bird on a stick and a duck on the water, however you don't hear anyone calling those out. Showing the natural environment is important. Perhaps people are just wanting to get birds in flight, which is all well and good, but it's not always realistic.
"just a duck on the water....." interesting You usually don't hear that but its appropriate to this context.
I am glad you've raised this. A lot of my best perching bird photos are 'birds on a stick' because that is where the birds were in their natural environment. Just like you, there is also some interest around the stick, the type of tree, the background etc. I've never taken a set up photo, I am an opportunistic photographer and it just depends where the birds are on my walks. Perching birds will perch on a branch - which is termed a 'stick'! I would prefer to say 'branch' and there are many different branches with photos taken at different angles and backgrounds to make the photo interesting, artistic and creative. So I take 'birds on a branch' just where they should be!
They are birds right???
Thanks for sharing Scott. Very thought provoking as ever. Capturing the behaviour gesture & personality of a "bird on a stick" l think comes into play & therefore an image should be in their environment. While ever the bird is star of the show, anything goes IMHO.
I watch all your videos & others & this is the most interesting video l seen for a while. It again points out just how important background is more so than what the bird is doing. It made me stop & think how many bird on stick shots do l have & it turns out only one yet it is in my top 6 all time favourite images l have got. The others are all birds of prey leaving or landing on a perch.
Scott, as always you come up with thought provoking subjects about bird photography. I am not concerned with capturing a bird on a stick as long as there is an interesting background to complement it. My concern of late, since I've joined a camera club with competitions, is whether the BG should be lighter or darker. I've found that judges seem to prefer darker BGs regardless of the bird's brightness though I find Jan Wegener's images beautiful and he seems to prefer lighter pastel like backgrounds. Eye of the beholder!
completely subjective and maybe one day you will break free from the chains of judges!
I agree with you that a “bird on a stick” is a pretty composition and using the bokeh or color in the background adds to the photo. Birds live on sticks, so to say it’s an ok photo isn’t correct.
Although, I am ok with using a “single stick” in a setup to bring the bird near with a natural landing site. If one makes a full out “stage” then I don’t agree with this style of bird photo.
I’ve never heard of “bird on a stick” said positively but I’m with you. They’re birds and they’re gonna perch on sticks! When I was new to bird photography, I thought all those set ups were amazing and I couldn’t believe anyone can get photos like that of wild birds. It’s easier now to tell the set ups from the natural settings, but I think they often set unrealistic expectations. I’d much rather a “boring” stick with a beautiful, natural background than a set up. I like to see the natural environment not just a clean background and cute perch.
I recognize Vintermane! now subscribe to see more videos!
I like to photograph birds, particularly raptors, perched atop old, weathered, lichen-encrusted fenceposts in rural areas. Often, the texture and color of the fencepost is as interesting as the bird.
And many people will say..... well its on a fence..... (as a negative)
A friend of mine has a terrific series of birds perched on rusty old barbed wire fences. The birds themselves, in various poses and colors, contrast beautifully with the man-made elements.
I have heard the phrase many times from photographers on social media. Usually as a way to say "that's a bad photo" with having to say the word bad. Typically applied to images from new photographers or birders that have a camera and want to document what they have seen. I know I was really proud of me early bird on a stick photos. I have learned over time and with effort (and from you and others Scott) that a bird on a stick in my backyard with the neighbors house in the background, in spite of the fact its in focus and correctly exposed, is not an pretty picture.
The majority of birds live in trees and bushes. So that's where we are going to take their picture. Nothing wrong with that or using setups for that matter. Artistically pleasing images can be made like that, as you have demonstrated many many times. But if one is happy with a bird on a stick photo that is ok. I submit that it is more important for a person to enjoy interacting with nature than being artistic about it.
Great point of view. Half the birds in the world live in trees. Except for birds in flight, most of my images are birds on a stick. Except of course those that perch in the water. Great viseo. Thanks
I've personally gotten a bit tired of seeing "bird on a stick" photos. And I say this as someone who's new to the hobby of bird photography myself, and admittedly my own skills are terrible and need a lot of work, but I'm expressing this as a consumer of bird photos rather than as someone who takes them myself.
Even if the "natural" bird-on-a-stick photos are accurate to the habitat and behavior of birds, they don't really seem that interesting to me artistically. It's a bird on a stick, doing what you would expect a bird to do. And because they are doing something that is expected, it isn't really that interesting. Out of your examples, the ones shown at 8:07 and especially at 8:21 are the ones I like because they add something more: an interesting pose, a pop of color from a branch, or the uniquely thin depth of field. I would
I would like to say is that I much prefer your waterfowl photos and that I aspire to be able to take photos as good as yours. Many of your shots have that otherworldly feel and have amazing compositions and light. I think what makes waterfowl photos inherently interesting is that they aren't usually seen by humans at eye level, whereas passerines can be often be observed in real life just the way they are photographed. Also, of your passerine photos, the ones that you presented on your "foreground wildlife photography" are most especially beautiful, though I suppose those aren't your usual "bird on a stick" photos like the ones you presented here.
Good feedback thanks!
Hi Scott!
A lot, I mean a LOT, of birds live in trees and trees are an amazing source of sticks.
What’s next??
Let’s ridicule lions on the savanna, ducks on water and honey bees on flowers.
I get it!
Variety sells, a moment demonstrating a specific behavior has deeper meaning and a rotisserie chicken is technically a bird on a stick.
But…
That’s where a lot of birds live. 😂
Happy New Year!!
Yeah. Then take it into other genres of photography. Just another grand landscape. Just another waterfall. Just another person sitting outside next to their business. Just another person in a third world country. Just another picture of stars with a natural land formation in the foreground.
I like that "its just a lion on the savannah..... yawn"
Very informative, I really like your style!
I appreciate that!
Ive just recently gotten into bird photography. As a newbie, "bird on a stick" photography allows me to learn at an accelerated paces compared to walking around all day hoping to find birds. I can be in the blind and set up in 5 minutes and if I can only spend a half hour shooting, Im guaranteed birds.You are so right about the backgrounds and the sticks needing to have some visual interest. I never really care what other people think about my birds on sticks. If they dont like it, they sure dont have to look. At any rate, a bird on a stick is more natural than a hot model on a fast car, just sayin🤣 I enjoyed this video.
I have never heard this phrase. Like the natural and simplistic photos of a bird perching on a branch with a beautiful background as you showed in your examples.
Morning Scott.
Enjoying your challenges.
For my photography I try to have an additional element to the image. Agree about backgrounds but I would go further.
This would include
A “dynamic” rather than passive bird. Ie about to take off etc
Body position ie head turned across the body
Behavioural activity such as feeding
A passive bird shot for me will generally struggle to interest. Adding some of these additional elements will hopefully attract the viewer and help capture the character of the bird
Keep up the good work
Bob (Scotland)
You're always compelling Scott! I love a good background, and a clean foreground with sharpon eye bird makes for a nice artistic image. Hard to get that in Australia as we do not have deciduous forests, especially in the tropics. But, always search for a nice background!
I have tried many times while out photographing birds talking to them and getting them to do a fly-by so I can photograph them in flight with little or no success. I have come to the conclusion that I'm probably not speaking their language. Oh well! I photograph them as I get them, whether in flight or on a stick. The natural environment is what I'm really focused on.
First I have heard of the “bird on a stick”. I agree with others, that is where they go. I have a water garden off of my patio. There is a little waterfall at the other end of the water garden. I took a couple smaller trees out of the woods and set them up so I had a good angle to get shots. My husband drilled holes in the trees so I could stuff bird seed into the holes. I sit on my patio in a blind and take photographs. They can hear my camera clicking which makes a good pose. They turn their heads at different angles but always looking in the direction of the camera. They do not seem to care about the clicks after awhile.
Great video Scott. I never cared about what people say about this. Where i live, here in South Brazil, if i want to photograph a bird on something else, i have to make a set up for that hheheheeh. I mostly photographing in the Atlantic rainforest, and there, the birds lives in trees. But as you say, the background is important. The same is it if i am photographing in some of the wetlands here. There they will mostly sit on a reed, that is kind of a stick too. When that is said, i have a feeding station in the garden where i live, with "sticks" on. But nothing that i change all the time. I go out and find a stick i really like, and use that until it's not possible to use it any more. About setups, i don't have anything against that either, even if i don't use that myself. Have seen a lot of amazing photos using this technique.
Wishing you a great weekend.
Cheers, Bjoern
To me a bird on a stick image is a simple photograph that would work well in an identification guide.
Excellent video and example photography. Nice one
Many thanks!
Thanks for the beautiful images and thoughtful commentary.
I prefer natural perches not man made objects, but if it’s got all the other elements on point they will work too. So subjective…
Interesting video. Do you think the photographer should indicate that the photo was a setup?
That raises an interesting question!! I am primarily a landscape shooter and the question that’s always prevalent with finished images is “Is that the real sky…did you replace that sky?”. I’m in the camp that if you are going to post a composite image, then you should state that (i.e., sky replacement, perspective blending, etc.).
So, pertaining to bird photography, specifically this “bird on a stick” subject, should the photographer divulge that kind of detail about the image, as you’ve stated?
Generally, yes. I think if someone is using a zoo or other artificial environment it should be noted. I think if there’s significant change to the image it should be noted. And if it’s essentially a glamour shot and not a natural shot it would be good to be noted. I don’t think it generally will be, though, because people have a hard time respecting the creative choices of others plus someone may feel like there’s a stigma associated with whatever. The only stigma, IMO, is where someone is harassing wildlife in some way for the shot. Sadly that happens all too often, too.
hmmmm.... mus they, no. Should they, probably? I think the idea of disclosure is tough. I don't think I have to caption every time I edit out a stick. BUT if asked, I think it's fair to say it was edited or in this case set up.
I completely agree that ‘bird on a stick’ can be as amazing as any other type of setting - the use of background is indeed hugely important and can add so much to a picture. Large numbers of Bohemian waxwings are currently flooding into the UK, and there are many many pictures of them floating around. One photographer posted a video where he showed the difference between a waxwing photographed up against a plain sky and one against an out-of-focus red brick wall. The red background was far more pleasing than the plain and rather harsh white sky. The video is here (the bit about backgrounds is about 5mins10secs in): ruclips.net/video/vxHbTIB5WNA/видео.html
However, personally, I find any picture, however beautiful or basic, far more interesting if the photographer tells the story of the picture. The most stunning picture with “Greater south spotted little warbler #bird” as the caption leaves me a little *great-shot-scrolling-on*. I like pictures that tell a story, where was the photographer, what was the context, where is the ‘so what?’ of the picture. That is obviously a very personal preference, but is what I try to do. Here is one of my classic ‘bird on a stick’ with hopefully some interesting context: instagram.com/p/CrWl11DLxWT/?igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==