March 1st, 2006
The Argiope of Spider Ranch
I suppose I’m running some risk of being branded as at least slightly eccentric for the “garden” that I choose to keep. However, as someone who spends a considerable amount of time studying and photographing insects and spiders, it should come as no great surprise that I do what I can to encourage my subjects to inhabit the gardens, fields and woods around the farm. To that end, we’ve let a considerable section of the yard grow into what we have come to refer to as “Spider Ranch”
Those who aren’t dyed in the wool arachnophobes may be interested in a new section which I’ve just added to my website. It’s a sort of “photo essay” entitled The Argiope of Spider Ranch. It contains a distillation of some of my photos and notes gleaned from three summer’s worth of observation of the multitudes of Argiope spiders which inhabit the gardens here at the farm.
I’ve also created a short QuickTime video clip of a spider spinning an egg case. As per usual, it’s not exactly the stuff of nature documentaries (quality being seriously limited by the medium), but it might be of interest to those who haven’t had a chance to see one of these large spiders in the process of creating an egg case. Note: the video clip is approx. 50 seconds long and about 2.1 MB in size.
If your curiosity about these spiders has been tweaked, or if you just want to gawk and laugh at the chaotic state of the Spider Ranch part of the gardens, then please feel free to check out the new pages. — bev
Tags: argiope, spider, spider ranch
March 2nd, 2006 at 1:57 pm
Bev, that is a lovely pic, speaking of dyed in the wool. Just a barbarian question here that you might have already answered elsewhere – but what camera and photographic parameters are you using?
Spider Ranch – it sounds awfully good to me. I’ve enjoyed our own argiopes and look forward to them soon. I’m reminded of an old usenet post to rec.gardens from a newly arrived refugee from the city – she was very upset by the webs that appeared across her pathway overnight, and what could she do to stop it?
I probably needn’t go further, but in my mind at least was Why, WHY did you bother moving out into the country if you couldn’t stand spiderwebs?
March 2nd, 2006 at 2:43 pm
Thanks, Wayne. Regarding cameras, I use two for all of my work. I started out using a Nikon Coolpix 4500 for macro work and it is still my camera of choice for very tiny creatures such as small beetles and spiders. I’ve done a great deal of insect photography using that camera since 2003. However, it does require that you work very close to the insects. I use it in macro mode and never try to zoom in on anything. With the CP4500, you can put the lens within an inch of whatever you’re photographing, so you do get very close shots. Last year, I added a Nikon Coolpix 8800. It’s a bit more versatile and does a better job of shooting larger objects — crayfish, caterpillars, and other subjects where I can work from a few inches away. It’s also fairly decent for bird photography as it has a 10x zoom. With both cameras, as I do so much macro work, I shoot using the macro mode and autofocus and just adjust the AE levels based on my experience when shooting under different light conditions. I don’t fiddle around with settings too much as I do a huge amount of shooting each day throughout summer (usuallly 250-500 photos a day). When I get too technical about things, it tends to interfere with the zen part of my way of shooting (don’t think I can explain that part for you in a post!). As my interest in photography is tied to phenology, I don’t want to feel too bogged down by setting up shots, etc.. I just want to get out wandering around, recording all that I see in a place on a certain date, which is why I shoot so many photos each day. I always shoot hand-held and wander around with the smaller camera in my pocket and the larger in my hand. Sometimes I carry a DVcam along in a canvas lunch bag. As far as photography technique is concerned, I’ve been told I’m rather unconventional. (o:
March 2nd, 2006 at 2:58 pm
Thanks, Bev.
I started out five years ago with a Nikon Coolpix 990, and then it died last year. I was told by two independent sources that it was a “throwaway”. A throwaway, costing $1000 at the time, can you imagine? Yet it gave absolutely great photos, although as you say, you had to get really really close for macros. (But you *could* get really really close!)
After it died we decided on SLR and got the Nikon D70 and two SLR lenses. They’ve been a real chore to learn and besides exchanging lenses when necessary it’s quite an abrupt change to do a macro from a foot or two away when I was used to less than an inch.
Yet despite the learning curve I’m coming to like the SLR aspect quite a bit – it’s just taken a few months to figure it out, and hundreds of photos.
Zen. Exactly. Which is what that argiope is all about.
March 2nd, 2006 at 3:16 pm
Hey Bev,
Very cool posts and pictures. I’d never known the details of these big spiders for sure, though, as you surmise, my siblings and I ran into them frequently while running around in the fields a kids. So it’s fascinating to know their story now.
I’ll be back for more…
March 2nd, 2006 at 4:12 pm
Wayne, that camera should work out very well for you. Just a couple of days ago, I checked out an excellent gallery on Pbase that was put up by ‘cerumen’ who has photographed flies using a Nikon D70. I’ll post a couple of links here — the first being the link to the fly gallery, and the second to a page which shows and describes the gear typically used to take the shots. I must admit to having experienced some pretty serious twinges of camera envy after checking out these fly photos. However, I guess I know myself well enough to realize that I probably wouldn’t enjoy the fuss of having to carry and switch lenses when I’m out and about. If I switched to an SLR, I’d probably have to hire a sherpa porter to carry my camera bags — or perhaps a golf caddy type who could pass me my macro or telephoto lens as required. (-: