"Birdscapes" - does it work?

First time in part of the world (i.e. critics corner), so bear with me....

I don't know if this is something that's been done to death or common or if it even works (may be its a terrible idea)

But its something I have tried to "see" and photograph a few times when the setting allows for it. I have a few pictures of birds but in a more landscape-like setting than a the standard get as close as possible shots!

#1


#2


#3 - same as above with selective colour for obvious reason. if selective colour feels like -> I don't blame you


#4 - less leafy and more watery setting (though I am pretty sure this is common)


if people feel I should stop wasting time go back to what I normally do and get close to these I shall also oblige

Absolutely!
I agree, and not only because I don't have the lenses (or the skill and patience ) to get amazing close-ups.
I like your pictures, Anand, and I think the ones you show here are almost perfectly framed. I'd only comment that I personally find human and animal subjects look better looking to the centre from a short distance away (not necessarily the 1/3 often suggested) so I would probably put the heron a bit to the left and the razorbills nearer the centre.

Interestingly, I've been thinking exactly the same as you about train pictures. Almost everyone seems to want either close-ups or tight crops from further away (and to be fair they've been doing this for a century) but I prefer to see the train in a setting.
Tight crops are okay of you're making an identification guide, or if you're hoping to wow your audience with your skill at getting close-ups, but they can get terribly boring and it's also very far from how most of us actually see birds (or trains).
So, no, Anand, don't give up your concept - run with it, explore more or less, and keep us in the loop!

I think I will voice a nod more critical opinions on these:

1. Perhaps bit too central composition and despite that these are "birdscapes" I think tighter framing might been better...

2. & 3. Somehow I think that the position of the bird in the frame should be different: perhaps more conformant with the rule of thirds and the bird closer to the right edge.

3. As a positive thing: the selective colouring works fine.

4. In its current form this is quite boring picture IMHO. I think lower shooting angle would have made this more interesting.

I quite like these. The norm is bird faces close up, "tight crop", and "birdscapes" are a nice alternative. I agree with Hez on nr 1, at least that the bird would perhaps fit better some ways down and to the left.

Now where is that Oktoberfest..

For me the m2 versions work slightly better, still showing enough of the environment, but just a bit more emphasis on the birds.

I appreciate a tight detailed bird photo, but like them in environment better. They can still be large in the photo in that case as well. I see it as documentary versus story telling.

Continuing on the theme, this has got be my recent favourite...