Herps in habitat - photo thread

Jazz · Post by **Jazz** » March 18th, 2016, 10:41 pm

I'm not sure if this has been done before (tried searching) but I thought it would be fun to get a thread going with everyone's favourite 'herp in habitat' shots.

These are some of my favourite photos, such a great way to get creative with herp photography.

I'll get it started with some desert spadefoot toads (Notaden nichollsi) from Windorah, QLD, Australia. This is two photos layered together in my camera that I took at the same time with my camera on a tripod. If anyone else has any other astro herp shots I would love to see them as well!

Desert spadefoot toads (Notaden nichollsi) by Jasmine Vink, on Flickr

dwakefield · Post by **dwakefield** » March 19th, 2016, 6:28 am

That's a hard post to follow, Jasmine!

This is my favorite herp in habitat. Eastern Diamondback Rattlesnake in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Shot as found, in situ.

Watch where you step by Daniel Wakefield, on Flickr

Tyler Hake · Post by **Tyler Hake** » March 19th, 2016, 12:26 pm

Here are two from a quick trip to North Carolina earlier this week.

Jannico_k · Post by **Jannico_k** » March 19th, 2016, 5:07 pm

Male Bornean Keeled Viper (Tropidolaemus subannulatus) by Jannico Kelk, on Flickr

Bornean Keeled Viper long exposure. Not the best but getting there.

ChadHarrison · Post by **ChadHarrison** » March 21st, 2016, 7:26 am

Timber Rattlesnake as found in South Western Illinois

Timber Rattlesnake by Chad Harrison, on Flickr

Nick Scobel · Post by **Nick Scobel** » March 21st, 2016, 11:24 am

EDB from south GA

Eastern Diamondback Rattlesnake by Nick Scobel, on Flickr

Antonsrkn · Post by **Antonsrkn** » March 21st, 2016, 11:33 am

Jasmine, I have commented on that photo before but every time I see it my jaw drops. You've taken the herp photography thing to a whole new level.

I don't have anything in my portfolio that can compare to that spadefoot shot. But I do have a few photos I specifically shot to show off the habitat as well as the herp. How about this?

The Desert Behind by Anton, on Flickr

Porter · Post by **Porter** » March 22nd, 2016, 7:40 am

Great Basin Gopher Snake by California Reptile & Amphibian Appreciation, on Flickr

Porter · Post by **Porter** » March 22nd, 2016, 7:53 am

Highway child...

gpherheat2_0463 by California Reptile & Amphibian Appreciation, on Flickr

Rancorrye · Post by **Rancorrye** » March 22nd, 2016, 8:56 am

Mojave Desert Sidewinder-Crotalus cerastes cerastes by Rye Jones, on Flickr

Great Basin Collared Lizard-Crotaphytus bicinctores by Rye Jones, on Flickr

Utah Milk Snake-Lampropeltis triangulum taylori by Rye Jones, on Flickr

Jimi · Post by **Jimi** » March 22nd, 2016, 11:28 am

Rye did you flip that milk or cruise it? I forget if I've seen that pic or not.

Been down south yet 2016?

Jazz · Post by **Jazz** » March 22nd, 2016, 5:50 pm

Some great photos being posted! Fantastic to see

Antonsrkn wrote:Jasmine, I have commented on that photo before but every time I see it my jaw drops. You've taken the herp photography thing to a whole new level.

I don't have anything in my portfolio that can compare to that spadefoot shot. But I do have a few photos I specifically shot to show off the habitat as well as the herp. How about this?

Haha Anton I really dont think you understand how jealous I am over your Galapagos photos! Your photography has just kept getting better and better since I started following your work.

Thought id post another one up. This is a pretty typical sight in Australia, a central bearded dragon (Pogona vitticeps). I really love using my fish eye lens for habitats, does anyone else use one?

Central bearded dragon (Pogona vitticeps) by Jasmine Vink, on Flickr

MonarchzMan · Post by **MonarchzMan** » March 22nd, 2016, 6:15 pm

Jazz wrote:Some great photos being posted! Fantastic to see

Antonsrkn wrote:Jasmine, I have commented on that photo before but every time I see it my jaw drops. You've taken the herp photography thing to a whole new level.

I don't have anything in my portfolio that can compare to that spadefoot shot. But I do have a few photos I specifically shot to show off the habitat as well as the herp. How about this?
Haha Anton I really dont think you understand how jealous I am over your Galapagos photos! Your photography has just kept getting better and better since I started following your work.

Thought id post another one up. This is a pretty typical sight in Australia, a central bearded dragon (Pogona vitticeps). I really love using my fish eye lens for habitats, does anyone else use one?

I'm really digging your shots. I'd love for you to include your equipment here. I typically do the habitat shots with my 17-40, but you're making a good case for a fish eye.

Jazz · Post by **Jazz** » March 23rd, 2016, 1:34 am

MonarchzMan wrote:
I'm really digging your shots. I'd love for you to include your equipment here. I typically do the habitat shots with my 17-40, but you're making a good case for a fish eye.

Yeah thats a good idea, would be great if everyone could include their equipment. I recently got a canon 5dmkiii which i am in love with! Lens wise i used a canon 24-70 for the notaden shot and a samyang 8mm fish eye for the beardie. I really enjoy my fish eye but it can be really difficult to use!

MonarchzMan · Post by **MonarchzMan** » March 23rd, 2016, 2:23 am

I've had my 5DIII for about 6 months now, and I love it. It is ridiculous how different a full frame is. It's hard to describe how much of a step up it is from even a good prosumer body like my old 7D.

Antonsrkn · Post by **Antonsrkn** » March 23rd, 2016, 7:37 am

Jazz wrote:Haha Anton I really dont think you understand how jealous I am over your Galapagos photos! Your photography has just kept getting better and better since I started following your work.

You'll get your own Galapagos shots before too long I'm sure! Can't wait to see them!

Yeah, getting better bit by bit. I haven't been able to get out as much as I'd like for photography purposes lately as I have been stuck in the lab and office but very soon I'll be back in the field and opportunities for photography will abound! There's definitely a few things I can't wait to try out.

MonarchzMan wrote:I've had my 5DIII for about 6 months now, and I love it. It is ridiculous how different a full frame is. It's hard to describe how much of a step up it is from even a good prosumer body like my old 7D

Would you be willing to elaborate on that? I'd love to hear some thoughts of the advantages of a full frame especially from a herp photography standpoint, I've read a bunh of general articles about full frame Vs crop sensor but its always good to hear it from another user. I'm torn between a Nikkor 200-500mm lens (especially since I recently retired my 400mm lens) and upgrading to a fullframe. I can't afford both, so one will have to be delayed for quite a while potentially. Both have their advantages, and i'm trying to make my mind up.

And to keep on topic here is another one of my photos from the Galapagos....

Sandy Skirmish by Anton, on Flickr
Shot with a Nikon D7100 with a 10-20 sigma lens. F/8 1/250

MonarchzMan · Post by **MonarchzMan** » March 23rd, 2016, 2:31 pm

Antonsrkn wrote:
MonarchzMan wrote:I've had my 5DIII for about 6 months now, and I love it. It is ridiculous how different a full frame is. It's hard to describe how much of a step up it is from even a good prosumer body like my old 7D
Would you be willing to elaborate on that? I'd love to hear some thoughts of the advantages of a full frame especially from a herp photography standpoint, I've read a bunh of general articles about full frame Vs crop sensor but its always good to hear it from another user. I'm torn between a Nikkor 200-500mm lens (especially since I recently retired my 400mm lens) and upgrading to a fullframe. I can't afford both, so one will have to be delayed for quite a while potentially. Both have their advantages, and i'm trying to make my mind up.

I have two camera bodies at the moment. A crop sensor 7DII and a full frame 5DIII. I use my 7DII pretty much exclusively with my 100-400mm telephoto because with the crop, I get that much more distance out of the camera. The 5DIII, I use for macro and wide angle/wide angle macro. Prior to getting the full frame, I had been starting to get into landscape and in habitat photography, but the crop sensor on my old 7D (1.6x) just cut too much to really get a sense of the animal in the habitat. It's not so much like that anymore. I am still considering upgrading my 17-40 to something wider, but for now, I'm much happier with the results.

I'd say it depends on what you like taking photos of more. If you think you're more likely to do the wide-angle herp-in-habitat shots, a full frame might benefit you. But if you're looking to get more bird shots or skittish turtle shots, then maybe the telephoto is better. If you're still really up in the air, maybe rent a full frame body for a weekend and play with it. Like I said, it's hard to describe.

The only real complaint I have with the 5DIII is that it doesn't have a pop up flash. Not that I would use that to illuminate subjects, but the 7DII has one that triggers remote flashes, so I have to get a separate trigger for the 5DIII. But otherwise, it's fantastic in low light, has great image quality, and for a person who came from a 7D, there are very few changes in overall usage of the body (controls and the like). It was quite a natural transition, which I liked. While there were some differences between it and the 7D, those have been changed on the 7DII so they're basically identical in control.

Jazz · Post by **Jazz** » March 23rd, 2016, 3:28 pm

I also came from a 7D so this is from a purely Canon perspective. My usable ISO range on the 5Dmkiii is ridiculous! For example this Majors skink photo was taken in a dark rainforest at dusk with no flash or additional light source at ISO 2500. A photo like that would have been impossible with my 7D, it would have been far too noisy to be usable.

Land mullet (Egernia major) by Jasmine Vink, on Flickr

5Dmkii, Canon 24-70 2.8L at 57mm, f/6.3, 1/160, ISO 2500

I also really love the colours and dof i have on the 5D, its something thats hard to explain but i just love 'the look' of my recent photos. Its also really handy, from a lighting perspective, to be able to get closer to my subjects without the 1.6x crop and still keep them completely in frame. The 5D is also a far hardier, more weather sealed camera then my old 7D which is actually how it met its demise :/ The only thing that is frustrating is that i cant use my fish eye on it as it comes up as a circle. I have to borrow my partners 7dmkii for all of my fish eye photos.

If your unsure i would also suggest trying to hire or borrow one for a day and see how you go. As i said, this is purely a canon perspective so your limitations in your current body probably wont match mine.

Also South America 2017, Its locked in!!

MonarchzMan · Post by **MonarchzMan** » March 23rd, 2016, 4:08 pm

Southern Water Skink by J.P. Lawrence, on Flickr

Canon 5DIII, 17-40mm f/4L (20mm), 100 ISO, f/13, 1/80s

This is probably taken from about 18" away. I actually had to zoom in slightly so that my shadow was not obviously my shadow (seen on the rock in the front left - just looks like a possible rock shadow, which I'm okay with). But with the full frame, I'm able to get the 8-9" animal completely in frame and get some of the surrounding habitat so that you can see why it's called a water skink, for example.

I'd second Jasmine's assessment about the "look." It's hard to explain, but there is definitely something different. And I am far more liberal with the ISO than I was with my 7D. For the 7D, I wouldn't go much past ISO 400 because images would start getting noisy. But for the 5DIII, I can easily go past 1600 without too much in the way of issues. I still do correct noise in Lightroom with these ISOs, but it's not terrible.

ChadHarrison · Post by **ChadHarrison** » March 24th, 2016, 4:56 am

MonarchzMan wrote: I'd second Jasmine's assessment about the "look." It's hard to explain, but there is definitely something different. And I am far more liberal with the ISO than I was with my 7D. For the 7D, I wouldn't go much past ISO 400 because images would start getting noisy. But for the 5DIII, I can easily go past 1600 without too much in the way of issues. I still do correct noise in Lightroom with these ISOs, but it's not terrible.

JP makes a great point here. I recently moved up from prosumer crop censor to full frame; the Sony A65 to the Sony A99. While I still haven't quite figured out the A99, right off the bat there are some obvious, and pleasant, differences.

Number one, image quality. With something like the Canon 7D or the 7DII, you're already dealing with really nice image quality. But there is still a very noticeable difference between the 7DII and the 5DIII. One place you really notice the quality difference is in post processing. I started noticing how clear my shots could be when I would zoom in, and everything in focus was still tack sharp. With my A65, especially while shooting Zeiss glass, my images would still be pretty sharp. But once you zoom in you really do see some grain, even on the areas in focus. Because of that, you are able to be much more liberal with cropping if you have to, without losing clarity or sharpness.

But the full frame ISO is really a game changer. Being able to shoot at ISO 50, 64, and 80 is out of the question with almost all crop censors. But what is really fantastic is the low light capability. As JP said, I would probably never go below ISO 400. My macro lens is pretty dope. So I could get away with ISO 800. But forget about anything more than that. With my full frame, my images have less noise at ISO 2500 than I did at ISO 800 on my crop sensor. And I don't know about other cameras, but with my A65, I had a limited range. 100, 200, 400, 600, 800, 1600, etc. While with my full frame it goes 50, 64, 80, 100, 160, 200, 260, 300, etc. All the way up to a simply ludicrous number for which I can't think of a single reason to ever need.

dwakefield · Post by **dwakefield** » March 24th, 2016, 5:20 am

I recently upgraded my camera body from an old Nikon D70 to a Nikon D7100. The change has been mind blowing. It's still a prosumer crop sensor, but there are some significant changes. On the old camera, I couldn't really shoot above ISO 800. Anything above that would be TERRIBLY noisy. On my new D7100, I have gotten shots at ISO 3200 that have little or no noise, like this Cottonmouth shot at dusk:

Florida Cottonmouth, Miami-Dade County by Daniel Wakefield, on Flickr

As far as lenses, I am using a Sigma 18-250mm lens (use it for all my habitat shots) and a Nikon 50mm f/1.8G.

Antonsrkn · Post by **Antonsrkn** » March 24th, 2016, 7:45 pm

Thanks all, appreciate the info. Its a tough decision I can't quite decide what I'm more likely to photograph more.

Yeah Daniel, I made a similar switch from a Nikon D80 to a D7100, the ISO performance knocked my socks off! I probably don't push the ISO as much as I could and rarely shoot above 800, but once in a while I'll crank it up. Like in this shot: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected] ... ateposted/ ISO 3200 Would not have been an option with the old set up. Thats the main draw of a fullframe to me as well, I rarely shoot high ISOs with macro but it would be invaluable with longer lenses as the jungle is often too dark for me to get the images I want with my telephoto.

Nikon d7100 with 10-20 sigma again

Dipsas by Anton, on Flickr

Also South America 2017, Its locked in!!

You're gonna love it, one trip won't be enough!

MattSullivan · Post by **MattSullivan** » March 25th, 2016, 3:03 pm

i always enjoy these full frame vs crop sensor debates. each has its advantages and disadvantages in certain situations, i still have a don't think there can ever be a definitive one is better than the other for everything all the time. i prefer full frame on land, and apsc underwater where i use artificial light 99% of the time so the ISO advantage of full frame all but disappears. Wood turtle below was apsc. some real nice pics in this thread too!

Underwater Wood Turtle by Matthew Sullivan, on Flickr

Jazz · Post by **Jazz** » March 25th, 2016, 3:38 pm

Antonsrkn wrote:Thanks all, appreciate the info. Its a tough decision I can't quite decide what I'm more likely to photograph more.

Yeah Daniel, I made a similar switch from a Nikon D80 to a D7100, the ISO performance knocked my socks off! I probably don't push the ISO as much as I could and rarely shoot above 800, but once in a while I'll crank it up. Like in this shot: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected] ... ateposted/ ISO 3200 Would not have been an option with the old set up. Thats the main draw of a fullframe to me as well, I rarely shoot high ISOs with macro but it would be invaluable with longer lenses as the jungle is often too dark for me to get the images I want with my telephoto.

Also South America 2017, Its locked in!!
You're gonna love it, one trip won't be enough!

Yeah see your current camera sounds far better then the 7D so the reasons i upgraded arent going to fit with your situation. You could always just do what i did, break your camera and then youre forced to upgrade

I just really like not being limited by my set up! Even astro photography was a stretch with my 7D when using a 2.8 lens.

Were hoping to spend a couple of months in South America at least. There will be tears of happiness when we find our first poison dart frog!

MattSullivan wrote:i always enjoy these full frame vs crop sensor debates. each has its advantages and disadvantages in certain situations, i still have a don't think there can ever be a definitive one is better than the other for everything all the time. i prefer full frame on land, and apsc underwater where i use artificial light 99% of the time so the ISO advantage of full frame all but disappears. Wood turtle below was apsc. some real nice pics in this thread too!

God i love your underwater work Matt. What set up was this taken with? Is your lighting specifically for underwater work or is it normal speedlites in an underwater casing?

Chaitanya · Post by **Chaitanya** » March 25th, 2016, 8:23 pm

Here is one of my favourite lizard in situ. I didn't take habitat shot as they are collected illegally for pet trade.

IMG_9722 by Chaitanya Shukla, on Flickr

MattSullivan · Post by **MattSullivan** » March 26th, 2016, 7:01 am

thanks Jasmine

hopefully soon i can start getting underwater more. that shot was with a sony a6000 and zeiss 12mm in a nauticam housing with a dome port (don't have that setup anymore though). I use dedicated underwater strobes, you can get housings for speed lights also but they're just as expensive if not more so than strobes

sorry idk how to reply specifically to a quote...oops

bgorum · Post by **bgorum** » March 26th, 2016, 8:44 am

Gorum_150719_3331-Edit by Bill Gorum, on Flickr

Here's one of my experiments with herp astro shots from last summer. This was really just trying to work out how to do this. I'm not a big fan of road shots, but that's kind of what I was limited to last summer. This summer I should have a lot more flexibility and I'm looking forward to working with this technique during night hikes with in situ animals.

Also I'll throw my 2 cents into the DX vs FX debate. I'm still using DX because I do a lot of telephoto work. Using DX effectively makes my telephoto lens 1.5x longer. I'm often shooting a 500mm, (my longest focal length), and still having to crop for the composition I want. FX would be of no advantage to me in those cases because I would just have to crop more and would actually end up with a lower resolution picture than I get using DX, (for example the Nikon D810 is only 15.9 megapixels when in DX crop mode). Also I recently replaced my D7000 with a D7200 and the difference in high ISO performance is noticeable. I have no qualms about using ISO 1600 on the D7200. The lack of the anti aliasing filter also results in pictures that are noticeably sharper than the D7000. If my pictures are not tack sharp at actual pixel level its because I missed focus or failed to use proper long lens technique, not because of any limitations of the camera. However, having said all that I will admit that for non-telephoto work an FX camera would be an advantage. I'll probably add an FX camera soon for landscapes and some macro, but I'll be keeping the DX for wildlife work.

regalringneck · Post by **regalringneck** » March 26th, 2016, 3:17 pm

Hello Jazz & welcome, ... try 2 4give me... but i find a thimble, & perhaps a bushel … of irony; that your post title seems to be completely incongruous w/ your thread title as well as your chosen posted pix.
While a gr8t thread concept, [ one, i note that has recurred throughout the history of this forum ] ... I suggest we also ought to consider line 22 of the US 1040 or equivalent ... therefore, & prior to the "unwashed" ladling the accolades too heavily, & despite having worked for & achieved a rarefied level of income myself, over many years; i note their seems to be a link between income & what one can fortuitously “discover in-situ” : }
I for one ( as a professional biologist) am far more impressed w/ a simple cell phone pix of something really rare & special vrs/ that which than can be created via sophisticated software that saturates colors &/or blends images … if knowledge is in fact the goal & not impression; the proximate objective … like a body builder poising.
I have no objection to illusion nor "reptile art" (& in fact often pay good $$ to obtain said illusion ) but hate to see it commingled w/ reality… & thus feel this ought 2 be pointed out … tho sometimes the art in fact indicates where we might be looking, & in any case these creatures inevitably bring our comparatively brilliant minds … back a million years or so … & that in itself is a good thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PzQuKXwOaA

perhaps i otta also leave a visual cookie in spirit w/ your original intent ...

MonarchzMan · Post by **MonarchzMan** » March 26th, 2016, 3:43 pm

regalringneck wrote:Hello Jazz & welcome, ... try 2 4give me... but i find a thimble, & perhaps a bushel … of irony; that your post title seems to be completely incongruous w/ your thread title as well as your chosen posted pix.
While a gr8t thread concept, [ one, i note that has recurred throughout the history of this forum ] ... I suggest we also ought to consider line 22 of the US 1040 or equivalent ... therefore, & prior to the "unwashed" ladling the accolades too heavily, & despite having worked for & achieved a rarefied level of income myself, over many years; i note their seems to be a link between income & what one can fortuitously “discover in-situ” : }
I for one ( as a professional biologist) am far more impressed w/ a simple cell phone pix of something really rare & special vrs/ that which than can be created via sophisticated software that saturates colors &/or blends images … if knowledge is in fact the goal & not impression; the proximate objective … like a body builder poising.
I have no objection to illusion nor "reptile art" (& in fact often pay good $$ to obtain said illusion ) but hate to see it commingled w/ reality… & thus feel this ought 2 be pointed out … tho sometimes the art in fact indicates where we might be looking, & in any case these creatures inevitably bring our comparatively brilliant minds … back a million years or so … & that in itself is a good thing.

As a professional biologist and photographer, I am somewhat offended by this. A blurry or crappy cell phone photo of a rare animals is worthless to me. The reason why I am a photographer is that I get to travel around the world as a biologist and see incredible animals both common and rare, pretty and ugly. Given that I primarily work on herpetofauna, I, as I'm sure everyone here would agree, am dealing with an uphill battle in public acceptance of these animals. Consequently, I seek to create photos that inspire others to care about these animals as I do. A crappy cell phone picture will not do that.

As a photographer, I absolutely love the Notaden image that Jasmine created. It shows forethought of wanting to capture the intrigue and biology of the animal and have it represented in the habitat in which it is found. There is absolutely nothing in her photos that gives false sense of what is actually happening in life. As a photographer, I recognize that a camera is not equal to the eye and cannot see what the eye sees. In order to get a more realistic image as to what the eye sees, a photographer must understand the medium in which he or she works, which can include taking multiple photos and stacking them or taking long exposures or what have you. This has absolutely nothing to do with income as you suggest. It only has to do with knowledge of the subject and knowledge of the camera.

As a professional biologist, I recognize that finding a rare or unusual animal is a great treat. But I also recognize that most people will not have the same opportunities I have, so it is my job to ensure that A) they can appreciate the rare animal for what it is and B) can also gain appreciation for common animals so that they are more likely to care for them and the rare animals together. I would take a well composed and visually engaging photo of common animal any day over a crappy cell phone picture of a rare one.

Ultimately, it comes down to Jasmine is taking time to compose a photo. You're just taking a picture.

And to keep with the theme of the thread. Here is a Northern Red-Legged Frog in Oregon. Hopefully its commonness or smoothness of the water doesn't offend anyone's photographic tastes.

Northern Red-Legged Frog by J.P. Lawrence, on Flickr

Canon 5DIII, 17-40mm f/4L (at 20mm), f/10, 3.2s, off camera flash with diffuser.

regalringneck · Post by **regalringneck** » March 26th, 2016, 4:05 pm

line 22 broe ... mine goes past 6 ... then b offended ... as ewe wish

MonarchzMan · Post by **MonarchzMan** » March 26th, 2016, 4:15 pm

regalringneck wrote:line 22 broe ... mine goes past 6 ... then b offended ... as ewe wish

I have no idea what you're talking about. And honestly, I do not care to. It does not appear to be anything about A) herps in habitat or B) full frames vs. crop sensors. You need to not be so critical of others and just appreciate things as they are. Jasmine posted beautiful photos of herps essentially from her backyard, which most people here would absolutely love to see, and rather than complimenting her on her photos, you criticize them and post a photo of something I honestly have no idea what it is supposed to be. This isn't the first time you've said something offensive, whether intentional or not. Perhaps you should, rather than post, think long and hard first, before you say anything. Or just be cordial.

And FYI, I'm not a female sheep.

regalringneck · Post by **regalringneck** » March 26th, 2016, 4:33 pm

... heh heh ... yes, yes ewe r ...

edit ... & yes i know ewe dont have a clue, listen to the song & that might hep ...
& yes your pix is beautiful ... searchn for quality ... having to have the very best ... not scrounching for quality ... never having time t do the test ...

can't put it down ...

Jannico_k · Post by **Jannico_k** » March 26th, 2016, 5:44 pm

Wow, how can a professional biologist be so unprofessional. Also, your sentence is insanely bad. How are you a scientist. haha.

Any way, photography is art and I don't think Jasmine or anyone takes photos to please people like you.

Here's another false sense of reality lol.

Olive Python (Liasis olivaceus) Milky Way by Jannico Kelk, on Flickr

Sorry for the quality on this one, I took this photo around two years ago.

Antonsrkn · Post by **Antonsrkn** » March 26th, 2016, 5:45 pm

MonarchzMan wrote: I am somewhat offended by this. A blurry or crappy cell phone photo of a rare animals is worthless to me. The reason why I am a photographer is that I get to travel around the world as a biologist and see incredible animals both common and rare, pretty and ugly. Given that I primarily work on herpetofauna, I, as I'm sure everyone here would agree, am dealing with an uphill battle in public acceptance of these animals. Consequently, I seek to create photos that inspire others to care about these animals as I do. A crappy cell phone picture will not do that.

....

As a professional biologist, I recognize that finding a rare or unusual animal is a great treat. But I also recognize that most people will not have the same opportunities I have, so it is my job to ensure that A) they can appreciate the rare animal for what it is and B) can also gain appreciation for common animals so that they are more likely to care for them and the rare animals together. I would take a well composed and visually engaging photo of common animal any day over a crappy cell phone picture of a rare one.

As another professional biologist and photographer here, I concur with what J.P. said in the excerpts above and with the text I didn't include in the quote as well, he's spot on and put it more eloquently than I could have managed. Everyone's opinion is their own and you of course are welcome to yours even if I can't quite decipher exactly what it is. I don't mean that as a knock to you or your grammar really, but there are times when I really can't understand what you're trying to say.

One other point, the image you seem to have taken issue with has over 60,000 views just on Flickr. Try reaching that many people with a cell phone pic... A phone pic may be interesting to a small select group of individuals while a well put together image has the ability to reach and touch untold numbers of people. I grew up looking at beautiful photos in NatGeo and other places and now I'm in the Biology field working with herps, quality images certainly played their part getting me interested, educated, and getting me here I wouldn't have paid much attention to cell phone pics then, as a blurry low quality image just didn't engage my imagination like a quality shot. And I'd like to think that there are younger people out there whose interests are in turn getting fostered and refined by a rich and varied photographic community of wildlife photographers. You really can't understate the value of a good well put together image to educate the public and to bring out various emotions in its viewers.

Jazz · Post by **Jazz** » March 26th, 2016, 5:48 pm

MattSullivan wrote:thanks Jasmine hopefully soon i can start getting underwater more. that shot was with a sony a6000 and zeiss 12mm in a nauticam housing with a dome port (don't have that setup anymore though). I use dedicated underwater strobes, you can get housings for speed lights also but they're just as expensive if not more so than strobes

What set up do you have for underwater photography at the moment? Its something id love to get into but its just so expensive :/ Ill just have to admire your work for the time being!

bgorum wrote: Here's one of my experiments with herp astro shots from last summer. This was really just trying to work out how to do this. I'm not a big fan of road shots, but that's kind of what I was limited to last summer. This summer I should have a lot more flexibility and I'm looking forward to working with this technique during night hikes with in situ animals.

Was this in a single shot or layered as well? I keep meaning to sit down and try and do it in one but were always so rushed when were out herping. Excited to see what you come up with next season

regalringneck wrote:Hello Jazz & welcome, ... try 2 4give me... but i find a thimble, & perhaps a bushel … of irony; that your post title seems to be completely incongruous w/ your thread title as well as your chosen posted pix.
While a gr8t thread concept, [ one, i note that has recurred throughout the history of this forum ] ... I suggest we also ought to consider line 22 of the US 1040 or equivalent ... therefore, & prior to the "unwashed" ladling the accolades too heavily, & despite having worked for & achieved a rarefied level of income myself, over many years; i note their seems to be a link between income & what one can fortuitously “discover in-situ” : }
I for one ( as a professional biologist) am far more impressed w/ a simple cell phone pix of something really rare & special vrs/ that which than can be created via sophisticated software that saturates colors &/or blends images … if knowledge is in fact the goal & not impression; the proximate objective … like a body builder poising.
I have no objection to illusion nor "reptile art" (& in fact often pay good $$ to obtain said illusion ) but hate to see it commingled w/ reality… & thus feel this ought 2 be pointed out … tho sometimes the art in fact indicates where we might be looking, & in any case these creatures inevitably bring our comparatively brilliant minds … back a million years or so … & that in itself is a good thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PzQuKXwOaA

perhaps i otta also leave a visual cookie in spirit w/ your original intent ...

Ah haters gonna hate. Im pretty comfortable with my standard of photography and how its received. I completely disagree with you saying it is an 'illusion' though. This is how the habitat looked, the sky was spectacular and the dunes were coming alive with these frogs. There is not a chance in hell i could have taken anything close to that on a phone. I was upfront with my photography technique, i didnt try to hide the fact the image was layered in camera.

From this photo i will get to educate people about Notaden, which is one of my favourite genus, as it is going to be on the cover of the Herpetological Review. This is why i love photography, so that i do get the opportunity to educate people about the animals i love and admire.

It would be great if you could stop derailing the thread now though.

MonarchzMan wrote:
As a professional biologist and photographer, I am somewhat offended by this. A blurry or crappy cell phone photo of a rare animals is worthless to me. The reason why I am a photographer is that I get to travel around the world as a biologist and see incredible animals both common and rare, pretty and ugly. Given that I primarily work on herpetofauna, I, as I'm sure everyone here would agree, am dealing with an uphill battle in public acceptance of these animals. Consequently, I seek to create photos that inspire others to care about these animals as I do. A crappy cell phone picture will not do that.

As a photographer, I absolutely love the Notaden image that Jasmine created. It shows forethought of wanting to capture the intrigue and biology of the animal and have it represented in the habitat in which it is found. There is absolutely nothing in her photos that gives false sense of what is actually happening in life. As a photographer, I recognize that a camera is not equal to the eye and cannot see what the eye sees. In order to get a more realistic image as to what the eye sees, a photographer must understand the medium in which he or she works, which can include taking multiple photos and stacking them or taking long exposures or what have you. This has absolutely nothing to do with income as you suggest. It only has to do with knowledge of the subject and knowledge of the camera.

As a professional biologist, I recognize that finding a rare or unusual animal is a great treat. But I also recognize that most people will not have the same opportunities I have, so it is my job to ensure that A) they can appreciate the rare animal for what it is and B) can also gain appreciation for common animals so that they are more likely to care for them and the rare animals together. I would take a well composed and visually engaging photo of common animal any day over a crappy cell phone picture of a rare one.

Ultimately, it comes down to Jasmine is taking time to compose a photo. You're just taking a picture.

And to keep with the theme of the thread. Here is a Northern Red-Legged Frog in Oregon. Hopefully its commonness or smoothness of the water doesn't offend anyone's photographic tastes.

Couldnt agree with what you said more MonarchzMan! Thanks for sticking up for me

For the record the smoothness of the water in your photo doesnt offend me at all. Im a massive fan of long exposures, another kind of shot ive been meaning to try out for ages.

To get back on track heres a frilly we found up in Darwin last year. The toads are smashing them and their populations are declining, along with most other wildlife in the region.

Chlamydosaurus kingii by Jasmine Vink, on Flickr

Canon 7D, 8mm Samyang fish eye, 1/250 sec, ISO 500

Jannico_k · Post by **Jannico_k** » March 26th, 2016, 5:49 pm

Chameleon Gecko by Jannico Kelk, on Flickr
Back light Chameleon Gecko

Continuing with what Antonsrkn was saying. Photography is one of the best science communication tools we have. A great photo can invoke emotion and henceforth care for the subject and it dosent matter if it's rare, common, extinct or what have you.

Jannico_k · Post by **Jannico_k** » March 26th, 2016, 5:55 pm

Mangrove snake (Boiga dendrophila) by Jannico Kelk, on Flickr

Mangrove Snake from Kalimantan

Antonsrkn · Post by **Antonsrkn** » March 26th, 2016, 5:59 pm

Also thanks everyone for the further thoughts on the crop vs full sensor talk, a lot of what is being said I have thought about before but its really good to hear others takes on it. Thank you! Need to mull it all over, these decisions are never easy!

Jazz wrote: You could always just do what i did, break your camera and then youre forced to upgrade

....

Were hoping to spend a couple of months in South America at least. There will be tears of happiness when we find our first poison dart frog!

Haha my camera breaking is my nightmare, especially after my 6 months in Ecuador where my camera equipment started breaking down after the first month and I was really limited by it and couldn't get the shots I wanted.

I'm sure you & Jannico will see more poison frogs than you know what to do with! I think I might cry too when I get down to Peru and see my first ones there, I can't explain how tired I am of the office and my laptop I just want to reach the field portion! Soon now....

Antonsrkn · Post by **Antonsrkn** » March 26th, 2016, 6:03 pm

Chironius grandisquamis from Ecuador, shot with a 10-20mm and a Nikon d7100. Really a fun snake to photograph, kept striking at my eyes until I got my wide angle lens out. Then he must have decided that was a big eye and started going for it, I don't like things smacking my lenses but I felt better when he started focusing on that rather than my eyeballs.

Cranky Chironius by Anton, on Flickr
1/60 F/9

Jannico_k · Post by **Jannico_k** » March 26th, 2016, 6:05 pm

Antonsrkn wrote:Also thanks everyone for the further thoughts on the crop vs full sensor talk, a lot of what is being said I have thought about before but its really good to hear others takes on it. Thank you! Need to mull it all over, these decisions are never easy!

Jazz wrote: You could always just do what i did, break your camera and then youre forced to upgrade

....

Were hoping to spend a couple of months in South America at least. There will be tears of happiness when we find our first poison dart frog!
Haha my camera breaking is my nightmare, especially after my 6 months in Ecuador where my camera equipment started breaking down after the first month and I was really limited by it and couldn't get the shots I wanted.

I'm sure you & Jannico will see more poison frogs than you know what to do with! I think I might cry too when I get down to Peru and see my first ones there, I can't explain how tired I am of the office and my laptop I just want to reach the field portion! Soon now....

Ha, coming back from field work is the worst!

The first time we went to Borneo, Jasmines macro lens got stuck on her camera, my focus screen fell out and I think one or two speed lights died in the first day. We were really impressed. haha

I guess this is an in habitat shot too.

Pobblebonk by Jannico Kelk, on Flickr

Jazz · Post by **Jazz** » March 26th, 2016, 6:06 pm

Antonsrkn wrote:Also thanks everyone for the further thoughts on the crop vs full sensor talk, a lot of what is being said I have thought about before but its really good to hear others takes on it. Thank you! Need to mull it all over, these decisions are never easy!

Jazz wrote: You could always just do what i did, break your camera and then youre forced to upgrade

....

Were hoping to spend a couple of months in South America at least. There will be tears of happiness when we find our first poison dart frog!
Haha my camera breaking is my nightmare, especially after my 6 months in Ecuador where my camera equipment started breaking down after the first month and I was really limited by it and couldn't get the shots I wanted.

I'm sure you & Jannico will see more poison frogs than you know what to do with! I think I might cry too when I get down to Peru and see my first ones there, I can't explain how tired I am of the office and my laptop I just want to reach the field portion! Soon now....

Ah yeah i remember when your camera broke. It was something to do with your flash wasnt it? I may have taken mine out into sustained rain to photograph frogs and it may have been a pretty bad idea... At least i was home when it happened and not on a trip.

God im excited! Childhood dreams coming true in 2017. Getting a bit of cabin fever? How long until youre back in the field?

Antonsrkn · Post by **Antonsrkn** » March 26th, 2016, 6:57 pm

Jannico_k wrote: Ha, coming back from field work is the worst!

The first time we went to Borneo, Jasmines macro lens got stuck on her camera, my focus screen fell out and I think one or two speed lights died in the first day. We were really impressed. haha

Yeah, the camera gear really does take beating out there. There are certainly ways to minimize it but its still gonna happen, no matter what.

Yikes, thats a lot of issues. It would be funny if it wasn't a bit tragic. But its in the past now

Jazz wrote:Ah yeah i remember when your camera broke. It was something to do with your flash wasnt it? I may have taken mine out into sustained rain to photograph frogs and it may have been a pretty bad idea... At least i was home when it happened and not on a trip.

God im excited! Childhood dreams coming true in 2017. Getting a bit of cabin fever? How long until youre back in the field?

Yeah my ability to use an off camera flash was the first to go. But it didn't stop there, by the end of the trip I had broken speedlights, a non-functioning macro lens, I had to retire my 80-400mm due to fungus issues, and my camera wouldn't always recognize the lens as being attached... I still have flashbacks...

haha yeah I start getting cabin fever approximately 1.5 days after getting back from the field but its extra bad now, I have spent more hours than I can count designing this project, reading papers, preparing for the field season, permit stuff, etc... Only a month until the field season now, and then 3 months+ in Peru

regalringneck · Post by **regalringneck** » March 26th, 2016, 7:10 pm

... oooohh ... & yeah das good baby .. its all abot the h8te ... simplify to absurdum... pheel the truth ... its good eh ? noe bebe ? ... yeah ... ahm jus sayen ... or izzat 2cliche now2ewe ? mebbe wanna axe ewer daddy ? ...so ... ahm groovn ryte wit chew babe ..anna lyke ... aahhhh lyke whatever .. but hey ... when we're "on the clock " ... lets all pretend ... environmental ... aaahhhh ecological justice ...ahhh matterz ... heh .. heh ... phreakout ... hehe heh ... so hard to understand ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVZh4WcdC3s

u'r phooln noe1 dat mattas hon...any1 dat mattas ... oxo ... rxr ...

.. ahm tryn 2 tellewe ... ahmtalkn bout ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otCpCn0 ... 1_BI88CDjg

Antonsrkn · Post by **Antonsrkn** » March 26th, 2016, 7:27 pm

Sigh... I'm sorry that you seem to feel several people level-headedly taking the time to explain their point of view to you is some sort of "freak out" (if I correctly interpreted your word spew).

regalringneck · Post by **regalringneck** » March 26th, 2016, 7:34 pm

ann im still w8tyng 4 ewe chillunz of us 1%'s ... babinoe-putas ... to declare u/r line 22 ... knowing u cant wear out a pair of boots ... hehhhheh .... give us the gps track w/ those photoshopt images ... ... yeah but daddy ( hooe made a damn good living off the drug war whyle blowing bowls wit chew ) .... sed ... best 2 ignore dat ... : }

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YvAYIJ ... a-KpnLdMdQ

oxo ... rxr ...

bgorum · Post by **bgorum** » March 26th, 2016, 7:41 pm

Jazz wrote:
bgorum wrote: Here's one of my experiments with herp astro shots from last summer. This was really just trying to work out how to do this. I'm not a big fan of road shots, but that's kind of what I was limited to last summer. This summer I should have a lot more flexibility and I'm looking forward to working with this technique during night hikes with in situ animals.

Was this in a single shot or layered as well? I keep meaning to sit down and try and do it in one but were always so rushed when were out herping. Excited to see what you come up with next season

Mine is two shots with the camera remaining stationary for both. I don't see much point in trying to do it in one shot. The milky way requires a completely different ISO, focus, and aperture than the herp. I think my camera allows for double exposures, but that would just add one more layer of complexity. As far as this regalringneck guy is concerned, does anyone else smell a troll?

MonarchzMan · Post by **MonarchzMan** » March 26th, 2016, 7:45 pm

Antonsrkn wrote:Sigh... I'm sorry that you seem to feel several people level-headedly taking the time to explain their point of view to you is some sort of "freak out" (if I correctly interpreted your word spew).

It's best to just ignore him. Aside from being pretty much incomprehensible, what can be deciphered doesn't contribute at all to the thread.

I think if I am understanding him, he's referencing line 22 on a 1040 tax form (your income), which for one, is quite rich, given that he first asked it of an Australian. But he seems to think that in order to take good pictures, you have to be rich. It's apparently not possible to save or be responsible with money so that you can afford good photography equipment. And it's apparently not possible to learn about the photography equipment and techniques so that you can improve your photography with what you do have. But maybe I'm not understanding him correctly.

Either way, I'd vote to keep on posting excellent photos of herps in their habitats and let him be jealous that he is incapable of capturing such fine imagery.

My next one is a baby Leatherback Sea Turtle heading to the ocean in French Guiana at sunrise.

Leatherback Sea Turtle by J.P. Lawrence, on Flickr

Canon 7D, Canon 17-40mm f/4L (at 17mm), f/4, 1/500, ISO 320

MonarchzMan · Post by **MonarchzMan** » March 26th, 2016, 7:47 pm

bgorum wrote:As far as this regalringneck guy is concerned, does anyone else smell a troll?

Definitely. Either that or he's so oblivious and full of himself that he doesn't realize how inconsiderate and offensive his views are. Just have to look at the other threads he participates in. It's much the same thing.

regalringneck · Post by **regalringneck** » March 26th, 2016, 8:44 pm

... that little cee turtle was nyce ... photoshoppt / embedded .... or whatever ? & if not ... good on ewe ... but getta clue ... ya'll just mostly make me sicc : ( ... & i dont care how ewe dew it ... i node what tastes good & that what smells nasty ... so in the vernacular of sales .. EWE FAILS .... now can ewe even get a wrap around that ? .... & noe i didnt think sew ... : }
.... & right now you may not be selln... but understand ... the end game is always just that .... the more tech/software you employ / deploy ... the further some of us ( w/ major $$$) will move away ... hhhmmmm ,,, now so is there an app 4that ? heh .... & there my freng ... iz ewer fundamental condrum ... good luck ... oxo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezd7fRvJgtc

Antonsrkn · Post by **Antonsrkn** » March 26th, 2016, 9:34 pm

MonarchzMan wrote: It's best to just ignore him. Aside from being pretty much incomprehensible, what can be deciphered doesn't contribute at all to the thread.

Agreed. I saw a quote online a little while ago. it went something like this: "Arguing on the internet is like playing chess with a pigeon, you may be good at chess, but all that happens is it knocks the pieces down, shits on the board, and struts around victoriously". That sounds oddly appropriate here.

Here is a herp in habitat shot taken with a telephoto lens, not the lens I'd usually use for a herp in habitat shot.
Nikon D7100 with 70-300 mm lens, F/11 1/320

Iguanascape by Anton, on Flickr