Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Photos of chickens, taken by chickens

chicken.photos

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 202 posts

Re: Photos of chickens, taken by chickens

#171

Post by Perenti »

a1pulley wrote: post #51
silisili wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing that always stood out to me about fresh/real chicken eggs I got from my father was the color of the yolk. Much, much darker than store bought, though I don't know what even plays a role determining that. Hoping to get a coop up later this year and start experimenting!

Yolk color is a function of xanthophyll in the diet. Backyard chickens tend to get food scraps that contain more xanthophyll than there is in commercial feed, which is why backyard eggs yolks tend to be more orange. If you want more orange in your yolks, you can feed your chickens stuff like marigolds or cooked carrots.

We'd feed birds crab shells every second day for a week or two. When the hard boiled eggs were cut open we'd have concentric red/orange rings in the yolk.

Re: Photos of chickens, taken by chickens

#172

Post by neoberg »

jacobbijani wrote: post #108
neoberg wrote: post #59

If the author reads this: How does the downloading images from SD card part work?

gphoto2, specifically the --capture-image-and-download command http://www.gphoto.org/doc/manual/ref-gphoto2-cli.html

Oh I see thank you. I was hoping for a more generic solution that I can use with a device that is not a camera.

Re: Photos of chickens, taken by chickens

#173

Post by IIAOPSW »

WaitWaitWha wrote: post #97
calibas wrote: post #95

Some interesting legality here, if these photos are really "taken by chickens" then they can't be copyrighted: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_disput... However, if this counts as being "taken by chickens" then it also implies that when a burglar triggers a motion-activated camera, the burglar owns the rights to the image.

>The chickens are using an input device (the motion sensor) to invoke a computer function [...] No, per the description and your legal context, the chickens are not taking the pictures.

So then a hypothetical bugler would be guilty of unauthorized use of a computing resource under the computer fraud and abuse act?

Re: Photos of chickens, taken by chickens

#174

Post by npteljes »

LesZedCB wrote: post #103
0daystock wrote: post #73

Chickens are beautiful creatures worthy of at the least the respect we give to household pets. The unimaginable horror we put billions of them through on an ongoing basis, while dissonantly admiring their charm and brilliance, is a sobering realization.

indeed, the line between "pet" and "food" is disturbing in both where it's drawn, and it's fundamental relativism.

OP's point is different though. They're simply asking: "How about we don't treat our food animals horribly". And I agree, personally.

Re: Photos of chickens, taken by chickens

#175

Post by Markoff »

These photos are not taken by chicken, they are taken by camera with motion sensor, camera will take photo of anything, no matter whether chicken, thief, deer or squirell. Misleading title.

I was expecting I will see photos of chicken taken by chicken wearing GoPro, though dunno what would be trigger.

Re: Photos of chickens, taken by chickens

#176

Post by sph »

gameshot911 wrote: post #152
sph wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. Chicken have been seen as food for the majority of our existence on this planet, not pets. That now we see them as pet as well talks about the complexity and capacity for contradiction and paradoxes of our culture and our minds. I accept that biologically I thrive on chicken meat yet I am intellectually capable of thinking chicken are very lovely animals. Humans are walking contradictions. As much as many…

>I accept that biologically I thrive on chicken meat yet I am intellectually capable of thinking chicken are very lovely animals. But today you have the capacity to biologically thrive equally as well without needing to eat chick en meat, so "lovely beings" are being slaughtered for no more than a few moments of sensory pleasure. A terrible price for such a lowly payoff.

No, I do not thrive on a meatless diet. I do not want to go into the particulars of my digestion and body, but it certainly isn't the diet for me.

In general my opinion is meatless diets are possible, but not as healthy as omnivore ones. Thus the complexity of the matter, whose answer is not that simple. That said, I honestly do not think this is the place for such a debate.

Re: Photos of chickens, taken by chickens

#178

Post by yc-kraln »

technothrasher wrote: post #135
karaterobot wrote: post #5

I think when you say the photos are taken by chickens, I was imagining a chicken wearing a GoPro or something. These are motion-activated pictures from a stationary camera. They're still very cool though.

My thought too. When I saw it was just a home made camera trap I was a little deflated. Their claim that it is the same as human selfie because the chicken is "using" the motion sensor as an input device is a bit of a stretch. The pictures are fun though.

Their claim is also 100% wrong. The difference, of course, is intent. It's easy enough to ferret out the difference here: If you set up such a motion-triggered camera and a person walks through it, unknowingly resulting in a picture being taken, is it their picture?

Re: Photos of chickens, taken by chickens

#179

Post by cbozeman »

sph wrote: post #134
LesZedCB wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

indeed, the line between "pet" and "food" is disturbing in both where it's drawn, and it's fundamental relativism.

I disagree. Chicken have been seen as food for the majority of our existence on this planet, not pets. That now we see them as pet as well talks about the complexity and capacity for contradiction and paradoxes of our culture and our minds. I accept that biologically I thrive on chicken meat yet I am intellectually capable of thinking chicken are very lovely animals. Humans are walking contradictions. As much as many…

There is no contradiction here.

Just because something is a lovely animal doesn't mean I won't put a round through it's heart and butcher it's corpse to sustain my life. Elk are beautiful animals, but I have no problem killing one and eating it. We are the greatest predator Nature has ever evolved and I can accept that. More's the pity others can't.

Re: Photos of chickens, taken by chickens

#180

Post by effisfor »

jjice wrote: post #27
tppiotrowski wrote: post #24

A good reminder that one of the basic tenets of good wildlife photography is to photograph at eye level. So if you want to take a picture of your cat or dog, squat down to their level instead of pointing the camera downwards.

Why is that?

Depth of field, quite literally here! Here are some rules of thumb: If you increase depth of scene, you can use depth of field in two ways. In portraits, you can create greater subject separation because the closer focal point of chicken will be in focus, but the horizon line will be very blurred. Taken at human eye-level, most of the background of a chicken will be grass that's close-by, and therefore a similar blurriness (or 'bokeh'). That makes it harder to discern subject.

Secondly, if you open up the depth of field with a very deep scene, you create more possibilities for composition, framing or storytelling. Again, all you have at human eye level is chicken/grass. At chicken eye level, with a very deep focal range, you might also be able to tell the story of the chicken in 'the great outdoors', you may see mountains and forests on the horizon etc.

Hope that helps.

Post reply on HN