Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
p.37 #1Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
duncangr wrote:
Nice - but when are you going to start posting full res images ??
These downsampled images look ordinary on my screen so I just have to image how good they actually are ?What's the best way to post full res on FM?
I'm on a 55" 4K monitor and his images look as good, if not better than yours - which should be full res, right?Not surprising as your display pixel density is around 80ppi and mine is 218ppi - so yours is low resolution and would better suit viewing of low resolution images as it simply doesn't have the ability to display fine detail.
The typical high resolution display would have a pixel density of at least 150ppi. Retina displays typically are over 200 because at that pixel density and at normal viewing distances the eye is unable to discern the individual pixels, so for example text looks completely smooth.
A 4K monitor displays 4K of image detail regardless of the display size, and, consequently, regardless of the display PPI. A large 4K monitor with a lower PPI displays the same amount of image detail as a small 4K monitor with a higher PPI, and if viewing distance is adjusted the angular subtense of pixels is the same.
Visual acuity depends on angles.
For continuous tone images (i.e. photographs), most 4K or higher monitors at normal viewing distance exceed the visual acuity of humans with 20/20 vision.
nmerc_photos wrote
duncangr wrote
arbitrage wrote
...These downsampled images look ordinary on my screen so I just have to image how good they actually are ?
I'm on a 55" 4K monitor and his images look as good, if not better than yours - which should be full res, right?
The typical high resolution display would have a pixel density of at least 150ppi. Retina displays typically are over 200 because at that pixel density and at normal viewing distances the eye is unable to discern the individual pixels, so for example text looks completely smooth.
A 4K monitor displays 4K of image detail regardless of the display size, and, consequently, regardless of the display PPI. A large 4K monitor with a lower PPI displays the same amount of image detail as a small 4K monitor with a higher PPI, and if viewing distance is adjusted the angular subtense of pixels is the same.
Visual acuity depends on angles.
For continuous tone images (i.e. photographs), most 4K or higher monitors at normal viewing distance exceed the visual acuity of humans with 20/20 vision.
Sep 13, 2025 at 08:19 PM
p.37 #2Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
GBH
Great Blue Heron by Jose Raposo, on Flickr
Great Blue Heron by Jose Raposo, on FlickrSep 14, 2025 at 04:59 PM
p.37 #3Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
Downy Woodpecker, one of the smaller woodpeckers in our area.
Sep 14, 2025 at 09:19 PM
p.37 #4Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
duncangr wrote:
Nice - but when are you going to start posting full res images ??
These downsampled images look ordinary on my screen so I just have to image how good they actually are ?What's the best way to post full res on FM?
I'm on a 55" 4K monitor and his images look as good, if not better than yours - which should be full res, right?Not surprising as your display pixel density is around 80ppi and mine is 218ppi - so yours is low resolution and would better suit viewing of low resolution images as it simply doesn't have the ability to display fine detail.
The typical high resolution display would have a pixel density of at least 150ppi. Retina displays typically are over 200 because at that pixel density and at normal viewing distances the eye is unable to discern the individual pixels, so for example text looks completely smooth.
A quick google search shows 218ppi would be like the iMac 27" 5K monitor. Which I'm guessing puts you in the extreme minority of viewers.
Also, resolution and pixel density are different things. Nobody is calling a 4K monitor low resolution lol. I can also just downsize the image on the monitor to increase the PPI if you think that matters.
How do you suggest people present the images on FM to maximize resolution?
nmerc_photos wrote
duncangr wrote
arbitrage wrote
...These downsampled images look ordinary on my screen so I just have to image how good they actually are ?
I'm on a 55" 4K monitor and his images look as good, if not better than yours - which should be full res, right?
The typical high resolution display would have a pixel density of at least 150ppi. Retina displays typically are over 200 because at that pixel density and at normal viewing distances the eye is unable to discern the individual pixels, so for example text looks completely smooth.
A quick google search shows 218ppi would be like the iMac 27" 5K monitor. Which I'm guessing puts you in the extreme minority of viewers.
Also, resolution and pixel density are different things. Nobody is calling a 4K monitor low resolution lol. I can also just downsize the image on the monitor to increase the PPI if you think that matters.
How do you suggest people present the images on FM to maximize resolution?
Sep 14, 2025 at 09:48 PM
p.37 #5Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
nmerc_photos wrote:
Nice - but when are you going to start posting full res images ??
These downsampled images look ordinary on my screen so I just have to image how good they actually are ?What's the best way to post full res on FM?
I'm on a 55" 4K monitor and his images look as good, if not better than yours - which should be full res, right?Not surprising as your display pixel density is around 80ppi and mine is 218ppi - so yours is low resolution and would better suit viewing of low resolution images as it simply doesn't have the ability to display fine detail.
The typical high resolution display would have a pixel density of at least 150ppi. Retina displays typically are over 200 because at that pixel density and at normal viewing distances the eye is unable to discern the individual pixels, so for example text looks completely smooth.A quick google search shows 218ppi would be like the iMac 27" 5K monitor. Which I'm guessing puts you in the extreme minority of viewers.
Also, resolution and pixel density are different things. Nobody is calling a 4K monitor low resolution lol. I can also just downsize the image on the monitor to increase the PPI if you think that matters.
How do you suggest people present the images on FM to maximize resolution?
Pixel: This is the smallest building block of your screen. Resolution: This is refers to the size of the pixel. The smaller the pixel, the higher the resolution.
And yep I am calling a 55" 4K monitor low resolution - no different to a 19" 2K monitor from 10 years ago - just physically a much bigger monitor. But then if it were a TV and viewed at TV distances you might consider it to be high resolution when compared to a 55" 2K TV.
Of course you are free to use whatever definitions you choose.
The only way I know of to present images on FM at higher resolution is to post links to images hosted elsewhere.
Personally I use an AWS S3 bucket and post links to the images stored there - AWS S3 storage is relatively inexpensive, a couple of dollars a month for a 100+ GB. Of course you need to know your way around setting up S3 storage.
duncangr wrote
nmerc_photos wrote
duncangr wrote
arbitrage wrote
...These downsampled images look ordinary on my screen so I just have to image how good they actually are ?
I'm on a 55" 4K monitor and his images look as good, if not better than yours - which should be full res, right?
The typical high resolution display would have a pixel density of at least 150ppi. Retina displays typically are over 200 because at that pixel density and at normal viewing distances the eye is unable to discern the individual pixels, so for example text looks completely smooth.
Also, resolution and pixel density are different things. Nobody is calling a 4K monitor low resolution lol. I can also just downsize the image on the monitor to increase the PPI if you think that matters.
How do you suggest people present the images on FM to maximize resolution?
Pixel: This is the smallest building block of your screen. Resolution: This is refers to the size of the pixel. The smaller the pixel, the higher the resolution.
And yep I am calling a 55" 4K monitor low resolution - no different to a 19" 2K monitor from 10 years ago - just physically a much bigger monitor. But then if it were a TV and viewed at TV distances you might consider it to be high resolution when compared to a 55" 2K TV.
Of course you are free to use whatever definitions you choose.
The only way I know of to present images on FM at higher resolution is to post links to images hosted elsewhere.
Personally I use an AWS S3 bucket and post links to the images stored there - AWS S3 storage is relatively inexpensive, a couple of dollars a month for a 100+ GB. Of course you need to know your way around setting up S3 storage.
Sep 15, 2025 at 04:56 AM
p.37 #6Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
Some shots from Brooks Lodge in Katmai Alaska
ILCE-1M2 FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II lens 65535 lens 200mm f/8.0 1/2000s 2500 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II lens 65535 lens 200mm f/8.0 1/2000s 2500 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II lens 65535 lens 200mm f/14.0 1/15s 50 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II lens 65535 lens 70mm f/22.0 1/15s 50 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS lens 65535 lens 600mm f/8.0 1/1000s 1250 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS + 1.4X Teleconverter lens 65535 lens 840mm f/5.6 1/2000s 2500 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS lens 65535 lens 600mm f/4.0 1/2000s 3200 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS lens 65535 lens 600mm f/4.0 1/2000s 640 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS lens 65535 lens 600mm f/4.0 1/2000s 400 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS lens 65535 lens 600mm f/4.0 1/2000s 1000 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS lens 65535 lens 600mm f/4.0 1/2000s 800 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS + 1.4X Teleconverter lens 65535 lens 840mm f/5.6 1/2000s 320 ISO 0.0 EV
Sep 15, 2025 at 08:18 AM
p.37 #7Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
and a few more
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS lens 65535 lens 600mm f/4.0 1/100s 5000 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS lens 65535 lens 600mm f/5.6 1/2000s 1600 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS lens 65535 lens 600mm f/4.0 1/2000s 2000 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS lens 65535 lens 600mm f/5.6 1/2000s 500 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II lens 65535 lens 200mm f/8.0 1/2000s 1250 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II lens 65535 lens 200mm f/8.0 1/2000s 1250 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II lens 65535 lens 200mm f/8.0 1/2000s 1600 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS + 1.4X Teleconverter lens 65535 lens 840mm f/5.6 1/4000s 1600 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS + 1.4X Teleconverter lens 65535 lens 840mm f/8.0 1/2500s 3200 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS lens 65535 lens 600mm f/4.0 1/2000s 1250 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS lens 65535 lens 600mm f/5.6 1/2000s 1250 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 600mm F4 GM OSS + 1.4X Teleconverter lens 65535 lens 840mm f/5.6 1/2000s 2000 ISO 0.0 EV
Sep 15, 2025 at 08:23 AM
p.37 #8Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
Dragonfly by Jose Raposo, on FlickrSep 15, 2025 at 10:34 AM
p.37 #9Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
Great series Nmerc, especially those slow shutter captures 
Sep 16, 2025 at 03:45 PM
p.37 #10Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
A few backyard Pileated Woodpeckers.
Edited on Sep 17, 2025 at 10:22 AM · View previous versions
ILCE-9M3 FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS lens 300mm f/2.8 1/1000s 6400 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS lens 300mm f/2.8 1/2500s 6400 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS lens 300mm f/2.8 1/2500s 6400 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-9M3 FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS lens 300mm f/2.8 1/3200s 4000 ISO 0.0 EV
Edited on Sep 17, 2025 at 10:22 AM · View previous versions
Sep 16, 2025 at 09:25 PM
|
p.37 #11Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
Australia Sampler 6: Kookaburras
Another iconic Australian bird seen during the trip. Images 1-4 were of the Laughing Kookaburra. Mostly seen perching among branches. Detected one tree with several noisy Kookaburras from one of the spots visited. The BIFs were rather instinctive (just aimed as I detected a movement) as two came from my blind side and even against the light. Had to take the shots as I might not have the chance anymore (so true as limited further flights were quite far or heavily obstructed). Quite passable shots (most likely just documentary BIFs).
Image 5 - Only one Blue Winged Kookaburra (on a wire) seen in Tablelands (near Cairns) and shot taken from the car along the road. Could not stay long.
Images 6-7 - Our veteran guide (Shane from Tropical Birding Australia) made a hard turn upon seeing this along the road. He was quite interested. It was mostly light/dark brown back and breast areas (hybrid? morphed? molting?). We stayed for some minutes placing the car at three different possible angles. As we were about to leave, it flew away. Caught mostly back views from instinctive BIF pan.
Another iconic Australian bird seen during the trip. Images 1-4 were of the Laughing Kookaburra. Mostly seen perching among branches. Detected one tree with several noisy Kookaburras from one of the spots visited. The BIFs were rather instinctive (just aimed as I detected a movement) as two came from my blind side and even against the light. Had to take the shots as I might not have the chance anymore (so true as limited further flights were quite far or heavily obstructed). Quite passable shots (most likely just documentary BIFs).
Image 5 - Only one Blue Winged Kookaburra (on a wire) seen in Tablelands (near Cairns) and shot taken from the car along the road. Could not stay long.
Images 6-7 - Our veteran guide (Shane from Tropical Birding Australia) made a hard turn upon seeing this along the road. He was quite interested. It was mostly light/dark brown back and breast areas (hybrid? morphed? molting?). We stayed for some minutes placing the car at three different possible angles. As we were about to leave, it flew away. Caught mostly back views from instinctive BIF pan.
 |
||
 |
||
|
|
||
 |
||
|
|
||
 |
||
|
|
||
 |
||
|
|
||
 |
||
|
|
||
 |
||
|
|
||
 |
||
|
Sep 17, 2025 at 12:18 AM
p.37 #12Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
...
ILCE-1M2 FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS + 2X Teleconverter lens 600mm f/5.6 1/2500s 1600 ISO 0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2 FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS + 1.4X Teleconverter lens 420mm f/4.0 1/2000s 2500 ISO 0.0 EV
Sep 17, 2025 at 09:24 AM
p.37 #13Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
arbitrage wrote:
...
WOW Geoff. I'm partial to the first one but both are exceptional.
...
WOW Geoff. I'm partial to the first one but both are exceptional.
Sep 17, 2025 at 11:49 AM
p.37 #14Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
Red-tailed
Red-tailed Hawk by Jose Raposo, on Flickr
Red-tailed Hawk by Jose Raposo, on FlickrSep 17, 2025 at 11:50 AM
p.37 #15Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
“It’s always darkest just before it becomes totally black”.
Sony A1 70-200 2.8
Eric
Sony A1 70-200 2.8
Eric
Sep 17, 2025 at 05:36 PM
p.37 #16Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
Red-tailed Hawk by Jose Raposo, on FlickrSep 17, 2025 at 05:57 PM
p.37 #17Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
Red-tailed Hawk by Jose Raposo, on FlickrSep 18, 2025 at 04:44 AM
p.37 #18Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
A few from a trip to Florida Circle B Preserve and Hilochee on the Anole and hopper shots
Karl
1 Brown Anole
2 Big hopper
3
Karl
 |
||
 Karl Witt 2025 |
||
|
1 Brown Anole
ILCE-7RM3 FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS lens 600mm f/6.3 1/160s 2000 ISO -0.3 EV
 |
||
 Karl Witt 2025 |
||
|
2 Big hopper
ILCE-7RM3 FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS lens 600mm f/8.0 1/400s 1000 ISO +0.3 EV
|
||
 Karl Witt 2025 |
||
|
3
ILCE-7RM3 FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS lens 600mm f/8.0 1/1600s 640 ISO 0.0 EV
|
||
 Karl Witt 2025 |
||
|
ILCE-7RM3 FE 24-105mm F4 G OSS lens 105mm f/5.6 1/800s 400 ISO -0.3 EV
|
||
 Karl Witt 2025 |
||
|
ILCE-7RM3 FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS lens 600mm f/8.0 1/1250s 2000 ISO -0.3 EV
Sep 18, 2025 at 12:22 PM
p.37 #19Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
Coming in for a landing.
Red-tailed Hawk by Jose Raposo, on Flickr
Red-tailed Hawk by Jose Raposo, on FlickrSep 18, 2025 at 06:46 PM
p.37 #20Nature and Wildlife image thread - a Sequel
Red-tailed Hawk by Jose Raposo, on FlickrSep 19, 2025 at 11:24 AM