Animal Photography

Effects

smelltheglove wrote: »

I dont like it as an album cover. I dont think it is really something that can be adapted to a musical album, this man took his life for much greater reasons than gracing the cover of an album in his moment of death.

Maybe gracing an album cover brought more attention to the monks protest than could have been achieved otherwise. Maybe that's what the band wanted to do. I'm sure they were full of ideals in their early days. Now they charge €80 to see them play. The kind of money I couldn't have paid to see them when I was into them as a young teenager. Capitalist scum.

Thecageyone

RATM were politically charged, I'm sure they fought to use the picture as it carries a message. I think it works great. I never really was into their music, had the usual singles that's all.

pullandbang

sprinkles wrote: »

I have to agree with Animalrights about the picture of the dead bird. On first viewing I actually thought it was put up to insight and argument (obviously not the case) but my immediate reaction - and others too - was "wait til AR sees this". It did look like someone, not necessarily Pullandbang, killed the bird and tied it to a stick for fun rather than for any discernible reason. I think this whole thing may have been avoided if an explanation was included with the original post of the bird.

Just to make things clear, I do shoot pigeons and grey crows and magpies and ducks and pheasants and snipe and woodcock and partridge and geese - mostly for the pot (excluding the vermin). However, I didn't shoot that particular pigeon (with a gun), that was probably the farmer or local shooter on crop protection duties. I certainly don't kill for fun and wouldn't "arrange" dead birds just to make a photo.
I disagree with you regarding offering an "explanation" with the post. Other than a title I don't think anything else is needed (unless there is a particular story in the image that requires explanation). An image should stand on it's own and allow each individual to draw their own conclusions.

sprinkles

pullandbang wrote: »

I certainly don't kill for fun and wouldn't "arrange" dead birds just to make a photo.

I never meant to insinuate that you do kill birds for fun, I hope it didnt' come across like that. However the picture you posted, without an explanation and merely the word "Crucifixion" before it led me to believe that you had indeed done just that. It was misleading to me at least.

pullandbang wrote: »

I disagree with you regarding offering an "explanation" with the post. Other than a title I don't think anything else is needed (unless there is a particular story in the image that requires explanation). An image should stand on it's own and allow each individual to draw their own conclusions.

That's ok, just my opinion that a picture that may be taken in the wrong way should be accompanied with an explanation as to the story behind the picture - when you explained it was used as a scarecrow then the picture made sense, before that I had thought it was a bit sick tbh. Nothing against you or the fact that you shoot birds etc, each to their own et al.

Effects

pullandbang wrote: »

I certainly don't kill for fun.

I don't believe that at all.

magicbastarder

Mountainsandh wrote: »

wouldn't your usual traditional scarecrow have the same effect ?

i read once that traditional scarecrows tend to lose a lot of their effectiveness when the human smell fades from the clothes.

pullandbang - which of those birds are classed as vermin?
it's not a term i'm comfortable with, btw.

pullandbang

magicbastarder wrote: »

pullandbang - which of those birds are classed as vermin?

Magpies and grey crows are classed as vermin. As are rats and mice etc. Pigeons used to be classed as vermin but I think they're now classed as game and they have their own closed season when they can't be shot.

BTW, Geese are a game bird here but in Scotland they are vermin

Ricky91t

pullandbang wrote: »

Magpies and grey crows are classed as vermin. As are rats and mice etc. Pigeons used to be classed as vermin but I think they're now classed as game and they have their own closed season when they can't be shot.

BTW, Geese are a game bird here but in Scotland they are vermin

Really? I thought to be classed as vermin they'd have to do something bad, spread disease, destory habitats etc?

I'm just gonna' give my opinion, I'm not a vegetarian, but I'm an animal lover. Me and my family have owned loads of pets over the past years, strays rescues everything, but that's where I draw the line. I wouldn't get attatched to say a cow in a field or a sheep on a mountain I just know there's no point.

They're bred for food not to be kept as pets. Don't get me wrong, I hate seeing any animals getting killed. Once I saved a rat, that my dogs were trying to kill (cat's brought it into the house and then the dogs found it) and yes it's vermin but It wasn't right. We feed our dogs, they don't need to kill a rat, I'm sure a fox or bird of prey fed on it.

It's just the circle of life, There's no point complaining It's always gonna' happen, some things should be done more humanely but we don't live in a perfect world and probably never will.

jpb1974

I met a farmer once who told me he shoots Crows and Magpies due to the fact that they terrorize the sheep.

Basically if a sheep fell ill the Crows and Magpie attack and start by gouging out there eyes before the poor bugger kicks the bucket and then they munch the rest.

Don't know if this is fact or not... so don't shoot the messenger here.

Personally I'm a bit of a bird lover... spending a fortune feeding them. I don't mind the Magpies but the Crows are a feckin nuisance and can be destructive. I've often contemplated taking a few out with a Black Widow (*note* contemplated only).

Ricky91t

jpb1974 wrote: »

I met a farmer once who told me he shoots Crows and Magpies due to the fact that they terrorize the sheep.

Basically if a sheep fell ill the Crows and Magpie attack and start by gouging out there eyes before the poor bugger kicks the bucket and then they munch the rest.

Don't know if this is fact or not... so don't shoot the messenger here.

Personally I'm a bit of a bird lover... spending a fortune feeding them. I don't mind the Magpies but the Crows are a feckin nuisance and can be destructive. I've often contemplated taking a few out with a Black Widow (*note* contemplated only).

Magpies aren't exactly brilliant either, They used to steal food off our puppys and when we had ducklings(totally fenced in for their safety) magpies still attempted to get them.

magicbastarder

magpies are a terror but are also insanely intelligent.

this book is well worth a read; by a woman in scotland who took in a rook, and ended up minding all sorts of birds:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Corvus-Life-Birds-Esther-Woolfson/dp/1847080294