Jump to content
Whatbird Community

Review Bombing


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Charlie Spencer said:

I don't consider four to be down rated.  

Yep.  It's an outstanding shot of coots on the water.  To me, there's nothing that takes it to the next level.

I agree. Nothing takes it to the next level. That’s why I said it’s not one of my best images. I agree that an image needs something amazing, something different, and something else to make it truly amazing. 
However, according to eBird, that doesn’t have to be the case to be a five star image. Would I prefer it to have something else that’s special in the shot? Absolutely! 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, IKLland said:

I know this is an incredible photo, if you’re a photographer looking for a next level image. But, I’m curious how you guys would rate it based on the guidelines. I’d give it a four based on the ebird guidelines, but if there were not guidelines, I’d give it a five. 
https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/53600391

Five for me. It clearly shows the whole bird, the photo captures the habitat very well, and most importantly, it's just really darn pleasing to my eye. I'm down with this photo for sure and the only drawback I can see according to the rating scale is that the bird is not fairly large in the frame.

IMO, this type of photo is much more difficult to obtain, and therefore warrants a better rating, than the thousands upon thousands of highly rated photos on eBird that are of "X" species showing a very crisp highly cropped image of the whole bird, but are very clearly at some swag duck park in any given major metropolitan area or at someones backyard feeder. While I am definitely not hating on those images, my point is that this image is, to use your own words, "next level."

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DLecy said:

IMO, this type of photo is much more difficult to obtain, and therefore warrants a better rating, than the thousands upon thousands of highly rated photos on eBird that are of "X" species showing a very crisp highly cropped image of the whole bird, but are very clearly at some swag duck park in any given major metropolitan area or at someones backyard feeder. While I am definitely not hating on those images, my point is that this image is, to use your own words, "next level."

Totally agree! While the close up portraits are certainly all great images that capture the birds beautifully, they only show the bird. It’s gets boring after a while. While I have many images like that and enjoy them all, an image needs something unique or different to stand out from the crowd. This image shows those things. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, IKLland said:

I know this is an incredible photo, if you’re a photographer looking for a next level image. But, I’m curious how you guys would rate it based on the guidelines. I’d give it a four based on the ebird guidelines, but if there were not guidelines, I’d give it a five. 
https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/53600391

I swear somewhere on ebird there’s a sentence that says to rate photos tagged as ‘habitat’ based on the quality of the overall image, and if the bird is in focus etc. Not so much how large it is in the frame, as habitat photos need the bird to be small in the frame to showcase the habitat. Yet, I can’t seem to find where I read that…. But either way I don’t think they deserve the same guidelines as they’re showcasing completely different things. 

2 hours ago, DLecy said:

IMO, this type of photo is much more difficult to obtain, and therefore warrants a better rating, than the thousands upon thousands of highly rated photos on eBird that are of "X" species showing a very crisp highly cropped image of the whole bird, but are very clearly at some swag duck park in any given major metropolitan area or at someones backyard feeder. While I am definitely not hating on those images, my point is that this image is, to use your own words, "next level."

Since ebird states that photos should only be rated on the technical quality and not the type of bird/difficulty of the image, I think it’s better to say that photos like these (and other ‘difficult’ to acquire images) maybe deserve MORE ratings than generic, easy to get, but otherwise 5-star photos. In that, a close up of a Mallard sitting at the park still deserves 5-stars, but probably doesn’t warrant 78 5-star ratings…

But then again ebird is not looking for artistic images and they seem to only actually utilize the generic, close up bird photos for Merlin and the species pages. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Aaron said:

But then again ebird is not looking for artistic images and they seem to only actually utilize the generic, close up bird photos for Merlin and the species pages. 

This. That’s why I said that if there were no guidelines,mi would have given that image a five. But since that’s not what ebird wants to be rated as a five star image(even though it is incredible), I gave it a four. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Birding Boy said:

This guy takes amazing photos! Scroll down a bit for some adorable and underrated Cinnamon Flycatcher photos

https://ebird.org/media/catalog?mediaType=Photo&searchField=user&includeUnconfirmed=true&userId=USER513687&regionCode=&sort=upload_date_desc&taxaLocale=en_US

How are those possible with only a 300mm lens on a full frame camera without a teleconverter??!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IKLland said:

How are those possible with only a 300mm lens on a full frame camera without a teleconverter??!!

When you start out with a 45 MP image that's 8256 x 5504 pixels, you have a lot of room for cropping. The better your lens, camera, and skill, the more you can crop.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is interesting.  Same photo, same checklist, same ML number, different ratings depending on how I access it.  I don't care what the rating is, I just find it odd that it could vary.

Incidentally, by my standards, I edited the snot out of this guy.  I'm astonished any one person would think my crude attempts were a 4.

image.thumb.png.55879ee53579ef6d6b1da66df6b61de8.png

Edited by Charlie Spencer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Connor Cochrane said:

The ID is correct, Powerful Owls are somewhat hawk-like.

Wow, I never would have matched the beak on the bird in the photo with the beak on the other Powerful Owl images I reviewed. Once again, goes to show just how little I know. 🙃

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/26/2022 at 7:27 PM, IKLland said:

How are those possible with only a 300mm lens on a full frame camera without a teleconverter??!!

https://ebird.org/media/catalog?sort=rating_rank_desc&regionCode=US&userId=USER2111092 I use a 300mm lens. Now mine aren't super great like those, but it is possible to get full-frame photos. It takes a lot of effort though. If you scroll there are some good ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tanager 101 said:

https://ebird.org/media/catalog?sort=rating_rank_desc&regionCode=US&userId=USER2111092 I use a 300mm lens. Now mine aren't super great like those, but it is possible to get full-frame photos. It takes a lot of effort though. If you scroll there are some good ones.

I know. It’s just that I’ve never seen such consistent full frame photos from a 300mm lens! You’ve got some nice ones too!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This person takes awesome photos! Many of them don’t have many ratings. Go to best quality, too, as some of them have a ton of ratings and are worth seeing. 

Edited by IKLland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...