I think this photo from yesterday morning resembles an Audubon painting more than any photo I’ve ever taken.
1/3200, f/5.6, ISO 800, Canon 7D Mark II, Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS II USM + EF 1.4 III Extender, not baited, set up or called in
While I was photographing a Broad-tailed Hummingbird in the Wasatch Mountainside yesterday morning this male MacGillivray’s Warbler unexpectedly landed in the same serviceberry bush. At first he was facing away from me but I fired off a quick burst just as he began an incredibly quick turn on his perch to face me and caught him in this position.
If I remember correctly the somewhat unusual (for this time of year) background color is provided by an out of focus patch of dead willows.
The moment I saw the photo on my big screen at home I thought it strongly resembled a typical Audubon print. I’m not saying that’s necessarily good or bad, it just is.
I’m including the next shot in the burst for no other reason than to show his position on the perch 1/10th of a second later. It isn’t any good but it allows perspective.
Blog readers have occasionally mentioned in the past that one of my photos reminded them of an Audubon painting but I’ve never seen it as strongly as I do in the first photo above. I’m certainly no expert on Audubon’s painting style but I once had a book of all of his “The Birds of America” prints and I became quite familiar with them.
On the other hand, I’m quite sure ol’ John would never have included the ‘out of focus’ leaves and berries at the bottom of my photo nor would he have placed a dead and crinkly old leaf right behind the tip of the bird’s bill.
Any resemblance between my photo and his prints only goes so far.
Ron
Late to the party – but very grateful for this charmer.
Unlike the (few) Audubon prints I have seen your warbler is unmistakeably, triumphantly alive. A decided win.
Thanks, EC.
My first thought when you mentioned Audubon’s work was that I did not agree as it does not look as if it is a cadaver wired into some unnatural shape. Then I thought of it as a work of art, its color, posture, twisting around to provide the best exposure of its plumage (even the little left wing lift), how it so nicely fills the frame– yes it has the intimacy if not the artsy background, and is very pleasing to the eye!
Thank you, Kenneth.
Wonderful photos. Don’t be concerned if the background doesn’t look like Audubon because many of the detailed plants in Audubon’s work were painted by a man maned Joseph Mason who travelled with Audubon from 1820-1822. Audubon considered him to be more skilled at painting flowers and plants than he himself was so Audubon had him paint these details. He had Mason sign the paintings in pencil while he used ink in what may have been an attemp to not give him proper credit later. He was also apparently a better shot than Audubon and did much of the collection during that two year period.
Dan, it seems I remember reading that Audubon used very small bird shot to kill his birds. Seems to me that picking off small songbirds that way would be easy for just about anyone who could see…
Lovely again. It is nice when they co-operate.
Especially when THIS species cooperates!
Before I read a word, my first thought was that needs to be framed ❗️Everything about this picture is perfect.
👍🏽 Ron
I also think it would look pretty darned good framed, Diana. The detail in that image is very good.
Truly artistic and beautiful.
Thank you, Betty.
I really admire the colors in that shot, and the natural posture of the bird–
I have always been uncomfortable with the tortured postures in Audubon’s
paintings, even though ( maybe especially because ) I know that he was
not only arranging a corpse, but also trying to fit its entire form into a
rectangle– an heroic of dedication to his mission, but STILL…….
I agree, Kris. Some of the postures of the birds he painted were more than a bit… strained.
For my two cents, what captured me first is is how the soft light makes the Warbler pop against the background. After looking at it for a few more seconds, the impeccable detail of the feathers doesn’t hurt anything either. Very nice picture Ron.
I appreciate your two cents, David. Thank you.
Fantastic shots Ron!
Thanks, Charlotte.
I’ll do you one better. Your photo evokes Audubon’s style even more than Audubon’s own paintings of MacGillivray’s Warbler.
I tried to find his painting of a MacGillivray’s. Don’t know why but I came up empty.
Beautiful shots. I like the color of the backyard. Matches the dried up flower. Very nice!!
I’m glad you like it, Jean. Thanks.
I agree! Fantastic photo…it doesn’t come any better than this! 😍
Thank you, Kathy.
It surely does look like an Audubon painting Ron. Excellent work even though your background does not look like one of his paintings. You are limited as to what you can do with a camera whereas he with a brush in his hand was completely in charge. 🙂
Thanks, Everett. If I had my druthers that background would be some shade of green.
I think the first photo is enchanting, and I agree with Dick Harlow!
Thank you, Alison.
Fun……. 🙂 The color of the background DOES make it appear more like a painting……..
Thanks, Judy.
WOW – these are two terrific shots!
Yup, have to admit it looks like an Audubon painting.
Like the photo better, since the bird is still alive and well!!
Dick, Audubon lived in different times but I still don’t understand how he could kill so many of the creatures that he clearly cared a lot about.
A thing of beauty for sure. How far away were you when taking these shots?
Cathy, I’d estimate about 20′.
Thanks, Ron. Your photos always make a wonderful start to the day! 🙂