uz2work wrote:
When I first saw the ad on TV a few days ago, what struck me was that the two "photographers" were going through all that effort to compete with each other over trying to get a picture of a turkey vulture. Most wildlife photographers that I know, when they see a turkey vulture, shrug their shoulders and don't even bother to take a picture of it.
Les
TVs are awesome, why turn down a potentially neat shot?
that's just being wildlife snobby
uz2work wrote:
That makes more sense. Given that I live in an area where I see turkey vultures every day and that I have never seen a condor, I saw the head and made a careless ID. In any case, if I had been making the commercial, with the similarity in appearance between the vulture and the condor, I think I might have chosen to use a golden eagle. But that may be why they don't pay me to create commercials.
Les
condor looks way different and it's much larger and far more endangered
skibum5 wrote:
condor looks way different and it's much larger and far more endangered
In UZ2's (Les') defense, you can't really tell in the commercial. Looks like another vulture. It wasn't until I looked at Ian's post and saw the white underwings and then the number tag. I tried looking up where #18 was released. There are several #18s since they drop the 100s digit. [Edit: after reviewing the video again] Could be the male Benito #318 released in the Ventana wilderness near Big Sur judging by the background terrain. But the bird could have been stock footage from anywhere considering Ian's astute observation of the body/focus point miss match.
Was there a car in the commercial? My wife's comment was "big lens, but a black one". She's learning way to much!
trenchmonkey wrote:
My '12 Xterra Pro X eats Rovers for breakfast. Fastest of the 'brute utes' and climbs like a mtn goat. Just sayin'
I thought that thing was just a scoobie snack for your old truck when I saw that Will. You could park that in the back of the Duramax and I wouldn't even know it was there. Saw some one pushing a new Rover back into the stealer today when I drove by. There may have been a dark side bumper sticker on it but I was going too fast to say for sure.
Jeff Nolten wrote:
In UZ2's (Les') defense, you can't really tell in the commercial. Looks like another vulture. It wasn't until I looked at Ian's post and saw the white underwings and then the number tag. I tried looking up where #18 was released. There are several #18s since they drop the 100s digit. Could be the female #418 released near Pinnacles, CA judging by the background terrain. But the bird could have been stock footage from anywhere considering Ian's astute observation of the body/focus point miss match.
Was there a car in the commercial? My wife's comment was "big lens, but a black one". She's learning way to much! ...Show more →
Thanks for the "defense".
I just saw the commercial again on TV. And, on my 46 inch Sony XBR LED, if I hadn't seen the screen shots in this thread, I still would have wondered why they were chasing a turkey vulture, which, again, is why, had I been making the commercial, I would have used a golden eagle.
hmm all i'm saying is the commercial opens with a shot of a bird book titled "California Condor" and there are multiple shots with the white parts totally wrong areas for TVs and even a head on snapshot freeze frame 100% clearly showing a CC
also another reason to not deem a wildlife subject unworthy, sometimes you can get things wrong at first glance and even if you don't care about the artistry of a nice shoot of a common bird you may just have let a true rarity go by (or some sudden dramatic behavior), and when it comes to vultures, i find most people to be quite excited by shots of them, no matter how common the species, people just love vultures
anyway i will end my somewhat over the top defense of vultures
sorry i'm starting to sound like Benjamin Franklin (well with bald for golden and turkey for turkey vulture )
(granted, so often in commercials when it comes to birds, they will do weird things, like have people doing crazy things and then screaming in glee when they get a look at and mark in their list oh say a Northern Cardinal or a Rock Pigeon and have the characters say they had been hoping to see one for their entire lives so that in itself might make one expecting it'd be a turkey vulture and then seeing it as a TV)
skibum5 wrote:
hmm all i'm saying is the commercial opens with a shot of a bird book titled "California Condor" and there are multiple shots with the white parts totally wrong areas for TVs and even a head on snapshot freeze frame 100% clearly showing a CC
also another reason to not deem a wildlife subject unworthy, sometimes you can get things wrong at first glance and even if you don't care about the artistry of a nice shoot of a common bird you may just have let a true rarity go by (or some sudden dramatic behavior), and when it comes to vultures, i find most people to be quite excited by shots of them, no matter how common the species, people just love vultures
anyway i will end my somewhat over the top defense of vultures
sorry i'm starting to sound like Benjamin Franklin (well with bald for golden and turkey for turkey vulture )
...Show more →
You are really in a mood inclined to argue today, aren't you. Okay, I'll let you win this one. I must be an idiot.
skibum5 wrote:
hmm all i'm saying is the commercial opens with a shot of a bird book titled "California Condor"
Wow! I had to go back and play the commercial full frame (FF ) to even see that one. I saw the commercial during the olympics and only vaguely noticed the lenses.
Say, I just found the Peterson bird guide is available as a $5 app for the iPad and it even allows you to keep a digital life list of birds you've seen. I know everyone will want that! I know, I know, Sibley is better. Has anyone seen the movie The Big Year? A window into a culture just as wierd and wonderful as photo gear heads.
It looks like the Canon shooter only uses a tiny 70-200mm f/4 handheld from inside his car while the Nikon shooter uses some supertele prime on a giant tripod. What are they trying to say? Surely they can get a big Canon lens as well. I don't get this commercial.
Man, I despise vultures... I had one take me off my motorcycle at about 75mph in a turn. Totaled bike and shattered hand. I still ride by them all the time when their eating carrion on the side of the road, but I slow down to like 5mph and pass them. F' those birds!
skibum5 wrote:
hmm all i'm saying is the commercial opens with a shot of a bird book titled "California Condor"
You and Ian have a very keen sense of observation.
I didn't see any of those details, and the entire commercial makes little sense to me, particularly the part where one shoots with a black supertelephoto lens off a tripod, and the other one does it with a 70-200 zoom thru his vehicle's window. I am not even sure what were the automotive merits of the commercial.....those LRs looked totally nondescript and unremarkable to my eye.
The only thing I did get was the Condor ID, but that was kinda trivial.
) to even see that one. I saw the commercial during the olympics and only vaguely noticed the lenses.
