I discovered where the vixen is living. Under my shed there's an old disused
badger set. I had a look around and found a recently dug entrance, so I left
the wildlife camera peering at it last night. Here's some of the results:

https://tinyurl.com/2rwen277
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b68mq9w5gxx2m6r/AAAg00l44eoyXdHgsYBBXUo5a?dl=0

I've replaced the camera and shan't disturb it for another week.

--
Peter
-----

Peter said:
> Under my shed there's an old disused badger set.

A complete set would be very "collectable". Put 'em on ebay.

Never mind, I'm just feeling trivial.

--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem

My email address is at http://qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html

On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:03:26 -0000 (UTC), Peter <myshed@prune.org.uk>
wrote:

>I discovered where the vixen is living. Under my shed there's an old disused
>badger set. I had a look around and found a recently dug entrance, so I left
>the wildlife camera peering at it last night. Here's some of the results:
>
>https://tinyurl.com/2rwen277
>https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b68mq9w5gxx2m6r/AAAg00l44eoyXdHgsYBBXUo5a?dl=0
>
>I've replaced the camera and shan't disturb it for another week.

Superb!

I'm a tiny bit confused by the Mum and Cub title on one of the
pictures because I can't see the mum. Is the title there to throw me
off the scent, as it were, or is the camouflage really, really good?

Nick

Nick Odell wrote:

> I'm a tiny bit confused by the Mum and Cub title on one of the
> pictures because I can't see the mum. Is the title there to throw me
> off the scent, as it were, or is the camouflage really, really good?

orangey thing top-left

Tease'n'Seize <tease-and-seize@invalid> wrote in news:wqCdnS9ktL2Lk_3
_nZ2dnUU7-RGdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk:

> Nick Odell wrote:
>
>> I'm a tiny bit confused by the Mum and Cub title on one of the
>> pictures because I can't see the mum. Is the title there to throw me
>> off the scent, as it were, or is the camouflage really, really good?
>
> orangey thing top-left

Well camouflaged, isn't she?

--
Peter
-----

On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 14:43:48 +0100, Tease'n'Seize
<tease-and-seize@invalid> wrote:

>Nick Odell wrote:
>
>> I'm a tiny bit confused by the Mum and Cub title on one of the
>> pictures because I can't see the mum. Is the title there to throw me
>> off the scent, as it were, or is the camouflage really, really good?
>
>orangey thing top-left

Oh my word, so she is! My colour sight's not brilliant anyway but it
really took your clue to point me in the right direction to sort her
out from the background. Thank you.

Nick

Nick Odell wrote:

> Tease'n'Seize wrote:
>
>> orangey thing top-left
>
> Oh my word, so she is! My colour sight's not brilliant anyway but it
> really took your clue to point me in the right direction to sort her
> out from the background. Thank you.

I wouldn't like to say which way she's facing thobut ...

On 20/04/2022 13:03, Peter wrote:
> I discovered where the vixen is living. Under my shed there's an old disused
> badger set. I had a look around and found a recently dug entrance, so I left
> the wildlife camera peering at it last night. Here's some of the results:
>
> https://tinyurl.com/2rwen277
> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b68mq9w5gxx2m6r/AAAg00l44eoyXdHgsYBBXUo5a?dl=0
>
> I've replaced the camera and shan't disturb it for another week.
>

Peter, may I pass these shots on to one of my neighbours who regularly
feeds foxen here, and maybe put the shots on our FB page credited to you?

Tone

Tone <tone@email.com> wrote in news:t3p9fi$u75$1@dont-email.me:

> On 20/04/2022 13:03, Peter wrote:
>> I discovered where the vixen is living. Under my shed there's an old
>> disused badger set. I had a look around and found a recently dug
>> entrance, so I left the wildlife camera peering at it last night.
>> Here's some of the results:
>>
>> https://tinyurl.com/2rwen277
>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b68mq9w5gxx2m6r/AAAg00l44eoyXdHgsYBBXUo5a?d
>> l=0
>>
>> I've replaced the camera and shan't disturb it for another week.
>>
>
> Peter, may I pass these shots on to one of my neighbours who regularly
> feeds foxen here, and maybe put the shots on our FB page credited to
> you?

Yes, certainly.

--
Peter
-----

On 20/04/2022 16:51, Peter wrote:
> Tone <tone@email.com> wrote in news:t3p9fi$u75$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 20/04/2022 13:03, Peter wrote:
>>> I discovered where the vixen is living. Under my shed there's an old
>>> disused badger set. I had a look around and found a recently dug
>>> entrance, so I left the wildlife camera peering at it last night.
>>> Here's some of the results:
>>>
>>> https://tinyurl.com/2rwen277
>>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b68mq9w5gxx2m6r/AAAg00l44eoyXdHgsYBBXUo5a?d
>>> l=0
>>>
>>> I've replaced the camera and shan't disturb it for another week.
>>>
>>
>> Peter, may I pass these shots on to one of my neighbours who regularly
>> feeds foxen here, and maybe put the shots on our FB page credited to
>> you?
>
> Yes, certainly.
>

ta

Tone

On 2022-04-20, Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
> Peter said:
>> Under my shed there's an old disused badger set.
>
> A complete set would be very "collectable". Put 'em on ebay.
>
>
> Never mind, I'm just feeling trivial.
>
>
>

In open country, badgers and foxed dispute each other over holes, with
the ferocity of WWI trench warfare, when the badgers have control over
the holes, they sometimes dig a subhole out into the open field nearby,
and there they dig, with a little mound left in the middle, with just a few
inches of soil above them, where the badgers can hear anyone passing by
is gone away.

Can be a surprise to anyone driving over that spot with a heavy tractor
or 4wd suv,

--
greymausg@mail.com
He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord.

maus <maus@dmaus.org> wrote in news:slrnt60d67.7m9.maus@dmaus.org:

> On 2022-04-20, Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>> Peter said:
>>> Under my shed there's an old disused badger set.
>>
>> A complete set would be very "collectable". Put 'em on ebay.
>>
>>
>> Never mind, I'm just feeling trivial.
>>
>>
>>
>
> In open country, badgers and foxed dispute each other over holes,

I'm not sure that's krect. Fox families do sometimes live in the unused
parts of large sets but they stay well clear of brother Brock.

--
Peter
-----

On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:03:26 -0000 (UTC)
Peter <myshed@prune.org.uk> wrote:

> I discovered where the vixen is living. Under my shed there's an old disused
> badger set. I had a look around and found a recently dug entrance, so I left
> the wildlife camera peering at it last night. Here's some of the results:
>
> https://tinyurl.com/2rwen277
> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b68mq9w5gxx2m6r/AAAg00l44eoyXdHgsYBBXUo5a?dl=0

Dropbox runs a shireload of scripty bollox before failing to show me the pic.
A simple url to an img/jpg/png/ would be much preferred.

>
> I've replaced the camera and shan't disturb it for another week.
>
> --
> Peter
> -----

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On 20-Apr-22 13:03, Peter wrote:
> I discovered where the vixen is living. Under my shed there's an old disused
> badger set. I had a look around and found a recently dug entrance, so I left
> the wildlife camera peering at it last night. Here's some of the results:
>
> https://tinyurl.com/2rwen277
> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b68mq9w5gxx2m6r/AAAg00l44eoyXdHgsYBBXUo5a?dl=0
>
> I've replaced the camera and shan't disturb it for another week.
>
I think that mother is 'giving you a _look_'
- OK it's the camera, but still...

--
Sam Plusnet

"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote in
news:20220420210915.bbe9182e06ef77cef65bca0b@127.0.0.1:

> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:03:26 -0000 (UTC)
> Peter <myshed@prune.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> I discovered where the vixen is living. Under my shed there's an old
>> disused badger set. I had a look around and found a recently dug
>> entrance, so I left the wildlife camera peering at it last night.
>> Here's some of the results:
>>
>> https://tinyurl.com/2rwen277
>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b68mq9w5gxx2m6r/AAAg00l44eoyXdHgsYBBXUo5a?d
>> l=0
>
> Dropbox runs a shireload of scripty bollox before failing to show me
> the pic. A simple url to an img/jpg/png/ would be much preferred.

Not sure how to do that. I don't have a website for the url to point to.
I'll probly stick them on farcebuk later today.

--
Peter
-----

Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote in
news:kj%7K.241205$Xa1.111818@fx10.ams1:

> On 20-Apr-22 13:03, Peter wrote:
>> I discovered where the vixen is living. Under my shed there's an old
>> disused badger set. I had a look around and found a recently dug
>> entrance, so I left the wildlife camera peering at it last night.
>> Here's some of the results:
>>
>> https://tinyurl.com/2rwen277
>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b68mq9w5gxx2m6r/AAAg00l44eoyXdHgsYBBXUo5a?d
>> l=0
>>
>> I've replaced the camera and shan't disturb it for another week.
>>
> I think that mother is 'giving you a _look_'
> - OK it's the camera, but still...
>

Yes, interesting. I've seen that quite often - animals caught looking
directly at the camera. At night they might be able to see the infra-red
flash but in daylight the camera is quite passive, so maybe the fox is just
appraising an unfamiliar object to see whether it might be a threat.

--
Peter
-----

Nick Odell <nick@themusicworkshop.plus.com> wrote in
news:7e826hhkvc47sdi7vk98vbjll3gdho68k0@4ax.com:

> On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 09:00:45 -0000 (UTC), Peter <myshed@prune.org.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote in
>>news:kj%7K.241205$Xa1.111818@fx10.ams1:
>>
>>> On 20-Apr-22 13:03, Peter wrote:
>>>> I discovered where the vixen is living. Under my shed there's an
>>>> old disused badger set. I had a look around and found a recently
>>>> dug entrance, so I left the wildlife camera peering at it last
>>>> night. Here's some of the results:
>>>>
>>>> https://tinyurl.com/2rwen277
>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b68mq9w5gxx2m6r/AAAg00l44eoyXdHgsYBBXUo5a
>>>> ?d l=0
>>>>
>>>> I've replaced the camera and shan't disturb it for another week.
>>>>
>>> I think that mother is 'giving you a _look_'
>>> - OK it's the camera, but still...
>>>
>>
>>Yes, interesting. I've seen that quite often - animals caught looking
>>directly at the camera. At night they might be able to see the
>>infra-red flash but in daylight the camera is quite passive, so maybe
>>the fox is just appraising an unfamiliar object to see whether it
>>might be a threat.
>
> On the contrary, given the fact that you have probably handled the
> camera and that the fox's sense of smell is orders of magnitude better
> than ours, my guess would be that it's thinking you are out there but
> even more cunningly camouflaged than itself.

Yes!

--
Peter
-----

In article <7e826hhkvc47sdi7vk98vbjll3gdho68k0@4ax.com>, Nick Odell
<nick@themusicworkshop.plus.com> on Thu, 21 Apr 2022 at 10:23:58 awoke
Nicholas from his slumbers and wrote
>On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 09:00:45 -0000 (UTC), Peter <myshed@prune.org.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote in
>>news:kj%7K.241205$Xa1.111818@fx10.ams1:
>>
>>> On 20-Apr-22 13:03, Peter wrote:
>>>> I discovered where the vixen is living. Under my shed there's an old
>>>> disused badger set. I had a look around and found a recently dug
>>>> entrance, so I left the wildlife camera peering at it last night.
>>>> Here's some of the results:
>>>>
>>>> https://tinyurl.com/2rwen277
>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b68mq9w5gxx2m6r/AAAg00l44eoyXdHgsYBBXUo5a?d
>>>> l=0
>>>>
>>>> I've replaced the camera and shan't disturb it for another week.
>>>>
>>> I think that mother is 'giving you a _look_'
>>> - OK it's the camera, but still...
>>>
>>
>>Yes, interesting. I've seen that quite often - animals caught looking
>>directly at the camera. At night they might be able to see the infra-red
>>flash but in daylight the camera is quite passive, so maybe the fox is just
>>appraising an unfamiliar object to see whether it might be a threat.
>
>On the contrary, given the fact that you have probably handled the
>camera and that the fox's sense of smell is orders of magnitude better
>than ours, my guess would be that it's thinking you are out there but
>even more cunningly camouflaged than itself.
>
In addition is it possible that the cameras circuitry is emitting a
sound inaudible to ourselves? Fox hearing range is biased towards the
high frequency and much more sensitive than ours.

Being nocturnal hunters their colour vision is not as well developed as
that of primates and their rods are more sensitive at the blue end of
the spectrum. My camera emits a human visible red light in order to auto
focus in low light levels. The foxes do not show any sign that they have
seen this when I am preparing to take a picture of them.

Smell and possibly high frequency sound seem more likely to be the
culprits. Foxes can locate the source of high frequency sound (mouse
squeak for instance) at quite great distance. They do not need to see a
mouse to be able accurately locate and pounce on such critters. There
are many clips of film of foxes diving into deep snow and coming out
with a mouse in their mouths.

Mammals seem have lost their reptilian colour vision at the time that
they become nocturnal feeders. Primates had to re-acquire that ability
as they became diurnal feeders.
--
0sterc@tcher -

"Où sont les neiges d'antan?"

"Nicholas D. Richards" <nicholas@salmiron.com> wrote in
news:76JhWWAi7SYiFAGi@salmiron.com:

> In article <7e826hhkvc47sdi7vk98vbjll3gdho68k0@4ax.com>, Nick Odell
> <nick@themusicworkshop.plus.com> on Thu, 21 Apr 2022 at 10:23:58
> awoke Nicholas from his slumbers and wrote
>>On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 09:00:45 -0000 (UTC), Peter <myshed@prune.org.uk>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote in
>>>news:kj%7K.241205$Xa1.111818@fx10.ams1:
>>>
>>>> On 20-Apr-22 13:03, Peter wrote:
>>>>> I discovered where the vixen is living. Under my shed there's an
>>>>> old disused badger set. I had a look around and found a recently
>>>>> dug entrance, so I left the wildlife camera peering at it last
>>>>> night. Here's some of the results:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://tinyurl.com/2rwen277
>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b68mq9w5gxx2m6r/AAAg00l44eoyXdHgsYBBXUo5
>>>>> a?d l=0
>>>>>
>>>>> I've replaced the camera and shan't disturb it for another week.
>>>>>
>>>> I think that mother is 'giving you a _look_'
>>>> - OK it's the camera, but still...
>>>>
>>>
>>>Yes, interesting. I've seen that quite often - animals caught looking
>>>directly at the camera. At night they might be able to see the
>>>infra-red flash but in daylight the camera is quite passive, so maybe
>>>the fox is just appraising an unfamiliar object to see whether it
>>>might be a threat.
>>
>>On the contrary, given the fact that you have probably handled the
>>camera and that the fox's sense of smell is orders of magnitude better
>>than ours, my guess would be that it's thinking you are out there but
>>even more cunningly camouflaged than itself.
>>
> In addition is it possible that the cameras circuitry is emitting a
> sound inaudible to ourselves? Fox hearing range is biased towards the
> high frequency and much more sensitive than ours.

I think that is quite feasible. It's a pretty basic camera and I wouldn't
be too surprised if, instead of semiconductor switching, there are sub-
miniature reed relays in it, which would emit a very quiet click when
activated (used them myself in home-made camera gear - they are very quiet
but not totally inaudible). Badgers and cats also look directly at the
camera from time to time.

But then again, the number of shots I get when the animal is *not* looking
at the camera is very much larger - if I leave it out for the night I
typically get 200-300 photos. These particular photos were a special case
wher the camera was covering ony a small field of view rather than a big
chunk of garden.

I doubt that there are any near-audio oscillators running.

--
Peter
-----

On 21/04/2022 12:01, Peter wrote:
> "Nicholas D. Richards" <nicholas@salmiron.com> wrote in
> news:76JhWWAi7SYiFAGi@salmiron.com:
>
>> In article <7e826hhkvc47sdi7vk98vbjll3gdho68k0@4ax.com>, Nick Odell
>> <nick@themusicworkshop.plus.com> on Thu, 21 Apr 2022 at 10:23:58
>> awoke Nicholas from his slumbers and wrote
>>> On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 09:00:45 -0000 (UTC), Peter <myshed@prune.org.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote in
>>>> news:kj%7K.241205$Xa1.111818@fx10.ams1:
>>>>
>>>>> On 20-Apr-22 13:03, Peter wrote:
>>>>>> I discovered where the vixen is living. Under my shed there's an
>>>>>> old disused badger set. I had a look around and found a recently
>>>>>> dug entrance, so I left the wildlife camera peering at it last
>>>>>> night. Here's some of the results:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://tinyurl.com/2rwen277
>>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b68mq9w5gxx2m6r/AAAg00l44eoyXdHgsYBBXUo5
>>>>>> a?d l=0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've replaced the camera and shan't disturb it for another week.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I think that mother is 'giving you a _look_'
>>>>> - OK it's the camera, but still...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, interesting. I've seen that quite often - animals caught looking
>>>> directly at the camera. At night they might be able to see the
>>>> infra-red flash but in daylight the camera is quite passive, so maybe
>>>> the fox is just appraising an unfamiliar object to see whether it
>>>> might be a threat.
>>>
>>> On the contrary, given the fact that you have probably handled the
>>> camera and that the fox's sense of smell is orders of magnitude better
>>> than ours, my guess would be that it's thinking you are out there but
>>> even more cunningly camouflaged than itself.
>>>
>> In addition is it possible that the cameras circuitry is emitting a
>> sound inaudible to ourselves? Fox hearing range is biased towards the
>> high frequency and much more sensitive than ours.
>
> I think that is quite feasible. It's a pretty basic camera and I wouldn't
> be too surprised if, instead of semiconductor switching, there are sub-
> miniature reed relays in it, which would emit a very quiet click when
> activated (used them myself in home-made camera gear - they are very quiet
> but not totally inaudible). Badgers and cats also look directly at the
> camera from time to time.
>
> But then again, the number of shots I get when the animal is *not* looking
> at the camera is very much larger - if I leave it out for the night I
> typically get 200-300 photos. These particular photos were a special case
> wher the camera was covering ony a small field of view rather than a big
> chunk of garden.
>
> I doubt that there are any near-audio oscillators running.
>

What model wildlife camera ar you using Peter?

Tone

Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

> Peter wrote:
>
>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b68mq9w5gxx2m6r/AAAg00l44eoyXdHgsYBBXUo5a?dl=0
>
> A simple url to an img/jpg/png/ would be much preferred.

If you're sure ...

Cub1
<https://uc8f984a09e3457405b1e2ba92d7.previews.dropboxusercontent.com/p/thumb/ABgvWgXEm-GjhoPs62FrhSPc7ztICFUQXntGl94Gn3qj8SjEh5rEHnUK4PyiI8ZAXaRH8G5b55tjoI5ciwMw8HoMc-IJJDVswya9SAhs703XSFFYwA0q8JjbqCgFB8HS8iSHNegRUpblPP3m7OqIm2A19O1qFWUrfP7dhZFjuL9kVSNPBDtHczK3wByyK2TMjBw7uaYeWf5rRxXj1EYbHhmCGvRSjI3VUoIxdyaF4UgZFGhgfZfbckF-EfFwBCGsvQYk2xw8Y6hrBn23WlHYysynnQ8dm_hDgDwQEOO4NF_csXHdSxJa7cH_JLJwDOSWN-ZhylbbnxMRw05NWdmkuPUTL-6uOwJXL-9DB6p2b1mO8xjeJ6DBkI3H-yVjA61CEF0VR8tloC0qXwx1rcWVc4tCDX_H-t4PDwJY6tsnT20kVjYE9Mpp-k0trMlseYMssRc/p.jpeg>

Cubs3
<https://uc8ade367857e6b6a208fde606f7.previews.dropboxusercontent.com/p/thumb/ABgBT1H-obRtNgwKs-acSVwvP6kVolIPdPjZ-1-lqrgiz_SkcN6wGDiStIqohLfEqjUg54ne5BlfgMpVwpX0Vo6XKXuFbPG3Uw466s2OEKDy-3RedvrMvedMuAWEgTIBUhn8nAMOS_6PAAHVOITepMVDUdwamqDqHSyKVOaZhU_JTWMqGVaY4JeV9BzyaUygYx58A7WqbwLz6mRfm23VrTCFPVxFslh5Y8wVDIaaRB_eFkdzEynBDbYGfyGNEJCRMpCv9T3213gZpX9LrO5shUn1pKoVIb2w8GJIBlOrt89fXehNWiK5ESF9QOEzLJlVRCc-_fK7deLCEMySanNOovx5CkElg5EtzUYWpTckMBQVUmbb5p4fGqCkhx3DWa2XaVMJF_A9EN66FV_M70b_BnaZKiiP9iqtyX00TsoP7kEQxljWlwqv7ehJWk-KS2zAfAQ/p.jpeg>

Mum&Cubs
<https://uc20a497df5b8441371b0957f02c.previews.dropboxusercontent.com/p/thumb/ABhFVo4YdkSlIk7apPbeAuhMB5RECOvBurqtDLOZX4U3_UIHm2lhf1cI12CrCUjrscS99DzCYxNWvBTxcb8Qdjx0Yk5LuLWsws4ZAhkioc-ztC7HIL-izVev6KGGMSSJsxEvy6ofQzqazv5ecISeI0iv18rhRxpzkSNZdcQfLj1Z0JiRMbUWlRC1nUiedBvNVeVyVq7_DyNgJUHRKRjT85YOy8SOYCVbGHdNh1jAOsaXjNJ5gjj2qL0ukeW_SZ0eouDO8i8nCwUYV4JiyM7nPaUu94pMr44QhpOIV4DNiBfSM4pV8Nm36UhTzKwWzceCYycQv9QDHo64v9_XK9cQV-56ggeoO__JEYcRGKvny1RclEX4jwJRF-NCkSVV6xHaKurVO9kcEBvd7bQwZGGkpb8e2PqXy1jpyLSq3_RAT8Wxt61Vtbg6RcwBF5fKDSGbgTU/p.jpeg>

Mum
<https://ucc8901b19a495183d1700a66272.previews.dropboxusercontent.com/p/thumb/ABj-EhzWwMc6C2PH8WnnvEXomjIdP46LG4RzO7I3W97yyzLEm33STb_VccPjuQZN6W-xfr18o-Cu6XioybDXkIcwAvuD_LNmqik0-F_zhPZVv6LzuxyOz6sv5Xl43Zhn-EfejWpOzg_HQoKmB5o05phTFnkWFToOYV-CIoctCK68h2kMDylL3R4NNipICyI4Cx8Qxr8QU2SB2F0qbzpFzKdwGS1UpIeG_Pu_RrzhUY4X-b4MkGc51p0yzhxtFNNKrBulQ-VfDscD3kOnV_PQo-2ii0thCjUaHGz8Nb1rV6R7x6K3r_b4tNFrpmDd_ATdTFCKLU9DgpiZ3LiD-ZxhW-bK71qNh_NSMuziZOmJtOfO3EJ8rahIYghZOexeEia_m0ZKyde461GoZUpRsll8bqAoy0ouMyBoKQiVdKPwA1fw8eWCSX4TTfYTYBAbW1-kRwA/p.jpeg>

Tease'n'Seize said:
> Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>
>> Peter wrote:
>>
>>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b68mq9w5gxx2m6r/AAAg00l44eoyXdHgsYBBXUo5a?dl=0
>>
>> A simple url to an img/jpg/png/ would be much preferred.
>
> If you're sure ...

I'd hate to see your idea of "complicated".

Dropbox also removes things afer a while.

--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem

My email address is at http://qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html

Tone <tone@email.com> wrote in news:t3reds$d6u$1@dont-email.me:

>
> What model wildlife camera ar you using Peter?

I don't know, Tone. I bought it many years ago and I've lost the paperwork
- there are no manufacturers' marks. It's pretty standard, 12Mp, 2-level IR
flash, motion-triggered, options for still or video photography (the video
only works in daytime), takes a standard SD card, no wifi or bluetooth.
There is a more expensive version which does have wifi but it's a bit heavy
on batteries - on mine, 8 AA batteries will keep it going unattended for
about 6 weeks (in theory, though the most I've left it unattended for is
two weeks). It comes with a strap for tree-mounting and a standard tripod
fitting for fitting to a tripod.

Glancing at the big river it looks identical to this one:

https://tinyurl.com/ezs4ne7e

but was cheaper (but that was about 10 years ago). It can produce very good
photos but is a bit sensitive to flare and there are blank periods early
and late in the day when it doesn't know whether to use IR or visible so it
does neither. But on the whole, I've been very pleased with it.

--
Peter
-----

On 21/04/2022 15:31, Peter wrote:
> Tone <tone@email.com> wrote in news:t3reds$d6u$1@dont-email.me:
>
>>
>> What model wildlife camera ar you using Peter?
>
> I don't know, Tone. I bought it many years ago and I've lost the paperwork
> - there are no manufacturers' marks. It's pretty standard, 12Mp, 2-level IR
> flash, motion-triggered, options for still or video photography (the video
> only works in daytime), takes a standard SD card, no wifi or bluetooth.
> There is a more expensive version which does have wifi but it's a bit heavy
> on batteries - on mine, 8 AA batteries will keep it going unattended for
> about 6 weeks (in theory, though the most I've left it unattended for is
> two weeks). It comes with a strap for tree-mounting and a standard tripod
> fitting for fitting to a tripod.
>
> Glancing at the big river it looks identical to this one:
>
> https://tinyurl.com/ezs4ne7e
>
> but was cheaper (but that was about 10 years ago). It can produce very good
> photos but is a bit sensitive to flare and there are blank periods early
> and late in the day when it doesn't know whether to use IR or visible so it
> does neither. But on the whole, I've been very pleased with it.
>

Thank's for t'info, Peter. Considering.

Where I am located lots goes on at night, animalwise. (Not analwise).

Tone

Tone <tone@email.com> wrote in news:t3rqhn$eln$1@dont-email.me:

> On 21/04/2022 15:31, Peter wrote:
>> Tone <tone@email.com> wrote in news:t3reds$d6u$1@dont-email.me:
>>
>>>
>>> What model wildlife camera ar you using Peter?
>>
>> I don't know, Tone. I bought it many years ago and I've lost the
>> paperwork - there are no manufacturers' marks. It's pretty standard,
>> 12Mp, 2-level IR flash, motion-triggered, options for still or video
>> photography (the video only works in daytime), takes a standard SD
>> card, no wifi or bluetooth. There is a more expensive version which
>> does have wifi but it's a bit heavy on batteries - on mine, 8 AA
>> batteries will keep it going unattended for about 6 weeks (in theory,
>> though the most I've left it unattended for is two weeks). It comes
>> with a strap for tree-mounting and a standard tripod fitting for
>> fitting to a tripod.
>>
>> Glancing at the big river it looks identical to this one:
>>
>> https://tinyurl.com/ezs4ne7e
>>
>> but was cheaper (but that was about 10 years ago). It can produce
>> very good photos but is a bit sensitive to flare and there are blank
>> periods early and late in the day when it doesn't know whether to use
>> IR or visible so it does neither. But on the whole, I've been very
>> pleased with it.
>>
>
> Thank's for t'info, Peter. Considering.
>
> Where I am located lots goes on at night, animalwise. (Not analwise).

One thing I should have mentioned, though you'll know this already, is that
infra red photography only gives B&W images. So I get excellent colour
rendition during the day, but any photos taken at night will only be black
and white. Makes no difference when photographing badgers, of course.

--
Peter
-----