|
Post by Romy Ocon on Feb 12, 2009 23:16:11 GMT
I've just tallied my video-lifers, and I think it will be fun to see how many lifebirds each of us has captured in the wild so far. ;D Let's post in a standard format, with the following info: 1. Year when one started in bird imaging. 2. Photo-lifers, Philippine birds (specify the number of endemics/near endemics). 3. Photo-lifers, non-Philippine birds 4. Video-lifers, Philippine birds (specify the number of endemics/near endemics). 5. Video-lifers, non-Philippine birds As one adds more lifers in the field, you can modify your tally sheet to reflect the new additions. This way, we can have an idea how hopeless a birdnut each of us has become.
|
|
|
Post by Romy Ocon on Feb 12, 2009 23:20:12 GMT
Sigmonster Tamer
1. Year when one started in bird imaging - 2004 2. Photo-lifers, Philippine birds (specify the number of endemics/near endemics) - 258 species, including 66 endemics 3. Photo-lifers, non-Philippine birds - 1 species 4. Video-lifers, Philippine birds (specify the number of endemics/near endemics) - 39 species, including 5 endemics 5. Video-lifers, non-Philippine birds - 0
|
|
|
Post by Toto Gamboa on Feb 13, 2009 0:12:00 GMT
Wow what a record master! It would take me a lifetime to achieve that number. Mine is still less than 20 haha. To follow the posting rules, i'll repost later after counting 1. Year when one started in bird imaging - 20082. Photo-lifers, Philippine birds (specifiy the number of endemics/near endemics) - 17 species (3 endemics)3. Photo-lifers, non-Philippine birds - 2 species 4. Video-lifers, Philippine birds (specifiy the number of endemics/near endemics) - 0 species 5. Video-lifers, non-Philippine birds - 0 species Wow .. almost a year ago, my numbers are low! 2009 was a great birding year for me. As of this posting, I now have 125 species in my PH-bird lifelist. I have yet to determine which are endemics and those that are not.
|
|
|
Post by Romy Ocon on Feb 13, 2009 0:57:16 GMT
On the brighter side Toto, there's a 97.2% chance that any bird you see when you go out is a lifer! ;D ;D ;D Once you get past 100 species or so, lifers will be slow to come by. I get one now perhaps every 3-4 months. Wow what a record master! It would take me a lifetime to achieve that number. Mine is still less than 20 haha. To follow the posting rules, i'll repost later after counting 1. Year when one started in bird imaging - 20082. Photo-lifers, Philippine birds (specifiy the number of endemics/near endemics) - 17 species (3 endemics)3. Photo-lifers, non-Philippine birds - 2 species 4. Video-lifers, Philippine birds (specifiy the number of endemics/near endemics) - 0 species 5. Video-lifers, non-Philippine birds - 0 species
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Regpala on Feb 13, 2009 1:02:33 GMT
Once you get past 100 species or so, lifers will be slow to come by. I get one now perhaps every 3-4 months. That explains why the videos ... to get some lifers. ;D ;D;D (Stats to follow)
|
|
|
Post by Romy Ocon on Feb 13, 2009 1:05:20 GMT
Once you get past 100 species or so, lifers will be slow to come by. I get one now perhaps every 3-4 months. That explains why the videos ... to get some lifers. ;D ;D;D (Stats to follow) You're right on the dot, Ted.... HDV wipes the slate clean, and allows me to start a new chase!!!! ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by Neon Rosell II on Feb 13, 2009 1:55:12 GMT
Avianus lunaticus
1. Year started in bird imaging - 2006 2. Photo-lifers, Philippine birds (specifiy the number of endemics/near endemics) - 196 species, including 50 endemics 3. Photo-lifers, non-Philippine birds - 112: 65 - OZ, 18 - US, 20 - Thai, 9 - Spore 4. Video-lifers, Philippine birds (specifiy the number of endemics/near endemics) - 2 species, including 1 endemic in Mini DV 5. Video-lifers, non-Philippine birds - 0
|
|
|
Post by Romy Ocon on Feb 13, 2009 2:42:32 GMT
Wow, partner..... for a guy who's in prison half of the time, that's a prodigious number! Perhaps we need to form clubs, as in Club 100, 200, 300, 400 and the elite Club 500 (I think Nick I., Jon H., and perhaps Des A. are among the rare members of the Club 500, but that's visual not photo-lifers). Avianus lunaticus1. Year started in bird imaging - 20062. Photo-lifers, Philippine birds (specifiy the number of endemics/near endemics) - 190 species, including 42 endemics3. Photo-lifers, non-Philippine birds - Still have to tally all my OZ and US birds4. Video-lifers, Philippine birds (specifiy the number of endemics/near endemics) - 2 species, including 1 endemic in Mini DV 5. Video-lifers, non-Philippine birds - 0
|
|
|
Post by Toto Gamboa on Feb 13, 2009 4:54:49 GMT
Master, we are also interested to know the total number of species you got including non-lifers Perhaps we can include this in the stats
|
|
|
Post by Romy Ocon on Feb 13, 2009 8:33:06 GMT
Master, we are also interested to know the total number of species you got including non-lifers Perhaps we can include this in the stats Hi Toto, "Lifebird" or lifer for short is a term birders use to describe a bird species which they've seen for the first time, and this collection of lifers is also referred to as a lifelist. We have evolved the term to photo-lifer or video-lifer for our own application. In this context, my photo-lifers actually mean the total number of species that I've photographed so far. Consequently, non-lifers are the birds I've yet to photograph.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Itol on Feb 13, 2009 9:13:43 GMT
A little question. As this field of photography is rather more difficult (or challenging) than it seems and we don't always go home with exhibit-quality results, would documentary shots/videos or those that do not have "aesthetic merit" qualify as photo/video lifers (given it was your first capture of the species)? It's most probably from personal discretion, I think. But I'd like to know if there is some kind of general convention. Master, we are also interested to know the total number of species you got including non-lifers Perhaps we can include this in the stats Hi Toto, "Lifebird" or lifer for short is a term birders use to describe a bird species which they've seen for the first time, and this collection of lifers is also referred to as a lifelist. We have evolved the term to photo-lifer or video-lifer for our own application. In this context, my photo-lifers actually mean the total number of species that I've photographed so far. Consequently, non-lifers are the birds I've yet to photograph.
|
|
|
Post by Neon Rosell II on Feb 13, 2009 9:23:59 GMT
A little question. As this field of photography is rather more difficult (or challenging) than it seems and we don't always go home with exhibit-quality results, would documentary shots/videos or those that do not have "aesthetic merit" qualify as photo/video lifers (given it was your first capture of the species)? It's most probably from personal discretion, I think. But I'd like to know if there is some kind of general convention. Hi Toto, "Lifebird" or lifer for short is a term birders use to describe a bird species which they've seen for the first time, and this collection of lifers is also referred to as a lifelist. We have evolved the term to photo-lifer or video-lifer for our own application. In this context, my photo-lifers actually mean the total number of species that I've photographed so far. Consequently, non-lifers are the birds I've yet to photograph. Yes, a photo lifer is any photograph documentary or a "keeper" as long as you have the photograph that can be positively IDed of the species, it counts!! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Mark Itol on Feb 13, 2009 9:34:06 GMT
Thank you, Neon.
|
|
|
Post by Romy Ocon on Feb 13, 2009 9:40:44 GMT
Adding to Neon's comments, the basic requirement for a photo-lifer or video-lifer is obviously the image should be good enough for the bird to be ID'ed without doubt. Beyond this basic requirement is the imager's personal discretion.... some may require full frame capture with good aesthetics, others target a cetain print size (say 8" x 12"), etc. My current personal standards (the bar is continuously raised higher) for an image to be added to my lifelist are: 1. Photo - the image can be cropped to good composition and postable in the web at a minimum 800x600 pixel size. 2. Video - must be an HD capture (I've not included my previous DVD-format captures), and must be aesthetically presentable. I've some species on file that I'm not posting because I think they fall short on aesthetics, hence they're still non-lifers to me. A little question. As this field of photography is rather more difficult (or challenging) than it seems and we don't always go home with exhibit-quality results, would documentary shots/videos or those that do not have "aesthetic merit" qualify as photo/video lifers (given it was your first capture of the species)? It's most probably from personal discretion, I think. But I'd like to know if there is some kind of general convention. Yes, a photo lifer is any photograph documentary or a "keeper" as long as you have the photograph that can be positively IDed of the species, it counts!! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Neon Rosell II on Feb 14, 2009 5:38:33 GMT
To make it easier for everybody I've created an excel sheet of the Clements and Howard & Moore Philippine Bird List, that would tally one's photo-life list. I've made two list because PBPF is still using the Clements while the WBCP uses the Howard & Moore naming convention. Here's the linkJust modify it, it has my own list saved on it.
|
|
|
Post by Romy Ocon on Feb 16, 2009 3:30:31 GMT
Got another HD video-lifer yesterday - Scaly-breasted Munia, upping my stats to 40. ;D
Sigmonster Tamer
1. Year when one started in bird imaging - 2004 2. Photo-lifers, Philippine birds (specify the number of endemics/near endemics) - 258 species, including 66 endemics 3. Photo-lifers, non-Philippine birds - 1 species 4. Video-lifers, Philippine birds (specify the number of endemics/near endemics) - 40 species, including 5 endemics 5. Video-lifers, non-Philippine birds - 0
|
|
|
Post by Toto Gamboa on Feb 16, 2009 6:01:30 GMT
Master, we are also interested to know the total number of species you got including non-lifers Perhaps we can include this in the stats Hi Toto, "Lifebird" or lifer for short is a term birders use to describe a bird species which they've seen for the first time, and this collection of lifers is also referred to as a lifelist. We have evolved the term to photo-lifer or video-lifer for our own application. In this context, my photo-lifers actually mean the total number of species that I've photographed so far. Consequently, non-lifers are the birds I've yet to photograph. Ohh.. my bad I thought "lifer" means .. a top quality shot worthy of keeping sort of being immortalized. I guess now that is clear to me. Sorry for the confusion
|
|
|
Post by Toto Gamboa on Feb 16, 2009 6:06:45 GMT
To make it easier for everybody I've created an excel sheet of the Clements and Howard & Moore Philippine Bird List, that would tally one's photo-life list. I've made two list because PBPF is still using the Clements while the WBCP uses the Howard & Moore naming convention. Here's the linkJust modify it, it has my own list saved on it. Great Neon this will help a lot.
|
|
|
Post by Toto Gamboa on Feb 16, 2009 6:18:37 GMT
Adding to Neon's comments, the basic requirement for a photo-lifer or video-lifer is obviously the image should be good enough for the bird to be ID'ed without doubt. Beyond this basic requirement is the imager's personal discretion.... some may require full frame capture with good aesthetics, others target a cetain print size (say 8" x 12"), etc. My current personal standards (the bar is continuously raised higher) for an image to be added to my lifelist are: 1. Photo - the image can be cropped to good composition and postable in the web at a minimum 800x600 pixel size. 2. Video - must be an HD capture (I've not included my previous DVD-format captures), and must be aesthetically presentable. I've some species on file that I'm not posting because I think they fall short on aesthetics, hence they're still non-lifers to me. Yes, a photo lifer is any photograph documentary or a "keeper" as long as you have the photograph that can be positively IDed of the species, it counts!! ;D I had always refered to this as "Ocon Quality" when trying to convince friends and myself to improve our bird photography. I would always joke around and tell them, if the shot is not of "Ocon Quality", forget about it, it should not see any light of day. ;D The number I have registered meets my personal goal that the photo is at least printable full frame on an 8R at 300dpi resolution. This is what the photoprinter Photoline told me to do so the prints come out in decent quality. I have not tried others though.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Kaufman on Feb 17, 2009 18:51:02 GMT
For me:
1. Year when one started bird imaging: 2004 2. Photo-lifers, Philippine birds: 5 3. Photo-lifers, non-Philippine birds: 419 all in USA 4. Video-lifers, Philippine birds: 0 5. Video-lifers, non-Philippine birds: 0 - (I have 41 videos but they are not HD quality)
|
|