Top quality British butterfly images on Flickr.

[Testudo Man]

I tried to read that link, but didnt find it that interesting, so i gave up.

Im not into landscape photography, or pets or people. I wondering if the author has ever tried close up/macro photography of small skittish creatures(that are alive)? or insects with wings? that are also very much alive, an can take flight at any moment!

I did read the conclusion/last paragraph though, but i prefer what he wrote here - quote - Break out of the habit of thinking that you should do something, and instead realise that you can do whatever you want!



I hate rules...im a rule breaker...I choose to make my own rules...i can break/tweak/change my own rules as i see fit...I dont shoot images for other peoples enjoyment...i shoot images for my own enjoyment.

But, we have to follow certain rules in life...this forum has certain rules(which we generally have to follow).

Gruditch/Gary has his own set of rules, that apply to his own Flickr group called TQBBI. I dont have a problem with Garys TQBBI rules, as i said at the start of this thread - Whilst other Flickr groups allow any images to be posted, TQBBI have a standard, so there is no guarantee your butterfly images will "make it" into the group! Maybe thats why this group has a low amount of members, compared to all the other flickr groups.
Ive submitted many images to TQBBI in the last 5 years, an ive had many images fail to make the cut...I didnt bleat about this, you cant win em all......as long as i win some, im a happy bunny.

Note - I show no malice towards Landscape/Pets/People etc photographers at all, those subjects do not interest me at this point in time......who knows, in the future i might try my hand at those types/subjects/styles of photography...but right now, im happy with my style of close up/macro photography, which just so happens to include wild butterflies found in the UK.
Cheers Paul.

One last point, there are many "armchair experts" out there, who "talk a good game", yet they never seem to show/post their own work.
I would say this - get out into the field as often as you can, an practice practice practice, an then practice some more. You can read all you like about photography, or any other subjects at all, but nothing beats the real thing.

PS. a couple of my images that are not butterflies.

Jumping (Zebra) Spider (female). by Tort Man, on Flickr

Adder (Vipera berus) male, basking on a log pile. No cropping. by Tort Man, on Flickr

[Gruditch]

millerd wrote: ↑Tue Oct 13, 2020 8:42 pm
"Photography is a creative pursuit, and trying to define creativity by rules is never wise."
Nice! Sums things up perfectly!

Be as creative as you like, but if an image is blurred, un-sharp, or has blown out whites, etc, it will be a technical failure. If an image has blade of grass obscuring the main subject, or the subject half cut out the picture, etc, it will be a quality failure. While quality is not always a requirement for other forms of art. Look up any world renowned photographer, they will be technically proficient.

Regards Gary

[Benjamin]

Ah I didn’t realise it was Gary’s group. Had I known the creator of the group was involved in the conversation (I prob should have guessed) then I’d have been more careful - obviously I stand by my view, but I’d have softened it a bit - ‘Granny’ and ‘Homebase’ weren’t really necessary!

I think it has become clear, that the technical aspect of photography is key in that particular group. They are all technically brilliant from what I can see - far better than my own confused efforts to achieve the same thing. Confused because even when I get a good one, and consider it a technical achievement at least, I don’t enjoy the end product!!

Gary’s group is weighted heavily toward one or two aspects of butterfly photography (fair enough, it’s his group!) and the ‘Top Quality’ bit refers to those aspects. Any one of us could perfectly legitimately create a TQBBI group with the weighting in a different area (behaviour/ecological interest etc) where very few of the images in Gary’s group would ‘make the cut’, and that’s fine, we all like different things (as I think we’ve established!). If this point is at all controversial then from my point of view there’s still a discussion to be had, but if not then I’ve nothing else to add.

Guy’s comments regarding field practices are spot on, and I take them on board. I completely agree but in all honesty find myself breaking them regularly with camera in hand. Not as bad as many I see out in the field, but plenty of room for improvement for sure.

[Gruditch]

Gary’s group is weighted heavily toward one or two aspects of butterfly photography (fair enough, it’s his group!) and the ‘Top Quality’ bit refers to those aspects. Any one of us could perfectly legitimately create a TQBBI group with the weighting in a different area (behaviour/ecological interest etc)

Incorrect, if you go back through through the near 5000 images, there are images of mating pairs, egg laying, blues with ants in attendance etc. When you have mastered the technical aspects of macro photography, its relatively easy to obtain a high quality image of a Common blue on stick. However a high quality image of ants attending a Silver-studded blue, are obviously going to be a little rarer.

Regards Gary

[Benjamin]

Fair cop - I stopped somewhere between pages 5 & 10.

Apologies if I drew the wrong conclusions as a result of that, and I don’t wish to pick on your group specifically - obviously it sparked the discussion so has naturally remained central to it, but a more general discussion is surely now preferable.

[bugboy]

Well this wasn't so much as a can of worms I opened as lorry load. An interesting discussion nonetheless and goes to show just how personal and subjective photography can be. I'm glad we all like different styles though, this site wouldn't be half as interesting if we all posted the same style of images.

[Testudo Man]

Well this wasn't so much as a can of worms I opened as lorry load. An interesting discussion nonetheless and goes to show just how personal and subjective photography can be. I'm glad we all like different styles though, this site wouldn't be half as interesting if we all posted the same style of images.

I dont see a lorry load of worms in this thread ive quite enjoyed the threads content so far...its all good

Im not sure what "Granny an Homebase" have to do with it though???????? but it did make me laugh some

A couple of images from me.............with plenty of grass stems/vegetation/messy backgrounds etc.

Cheers Paul.

Female Common Blue Butterfly (blue type). No cropping. by Tort Man, on Flickr

Female Common Blue Butterfly. No cropping. by Tort Man, on Flickr