The Crossley ID Guide: Britain and Ireland
DiscussãoBirds, Birding & Books
Entre no LibraryThing para poder publicar.
Este tópico está presentemente marcado como "inativo" —a última mensagem tem mais de 90 dias. Reative o tópico publicando uma resposta.
1chrisharpe
I have just received a review copy of the new Crossley ID Guide: Britain and Ireland (published tomorrow - no touchstones) from the kind folks at Princeton University Press. My first impression leaves me slightly disappointed. The Britain & Ireland book is not as well crafted as the author's previous guides to North American birds and looks to have been rather hastily finished. Some of the birds appear at odd angles, in an unnatural perspective and with disconcerting shadow effects. Looking at some of the critical species for field identification - Willow Warbler and Chiffchaff, Willow and Marsh Tit - I am not sure whether these plates are up to the job. Nevertheless, with hundreds of photographs of birds collected in one book, there is plenty to enjoy here. I'll try to post a fuller review shortly.
The Crossley ID Guide: Britain and Ireland
Richard Crossley & Dominic Couzens
Princeton University Press | Publ. 11 October 2013
304 pp. | 16 x 24 cm | 300+ colour plates. 250 colour distribution maps
Paperback flexibound | $27.95 / £16.95 | ISBN: 9780691151946
The Crossley ID Guide: Britain and Ireland
Richard Crossley & Dominic Couzens
Princeton University Press | Publ. 11 October 2013
304 pp. | 16 x 24 cm | 300+ colour plates. 250 colour distribution maps
Paperback flexibound | $27.95 / £16.95 | ISBN: 9780691151946
2chrisharpe
More discussion and several links to reviews (mostly positive to glowing) on BirdForum.
I posted a more detailed review here. Since then I have given the guide some use, although not as a primary reference. I still feel that the book could have been finished to a considerably higher standard. I'm hopeful that a second edition can do the job properly. The photographic approach has been exploited very successfully in other publications, including some Crossley's own.
I posted a more detailed review here. Since then I have given the guide some use, although not as a primary reference. I still feel that the book could have been finished to a considerably higher standard. I'm hopeful that a second edition can do the job properly. The photographic approach has been exploited very successfully in other publications, including some Crossley's own.
3fuzzi
Thank you for your comments about The Crossley ID Guide. I don't live in either Britain or Ireland, but I still love to look at bird photographs and drawings.
4bluejw
I just read your review of the Crossley guide and found it well written and through. I find it interesting to read other birder/booker's views of new field guides as I can't resist buying most of the major North American guides as they are printed. I will say upfront that I am an art work fan vs a photo fan for field guides.
The major basis for that is that photos are of a specific bird and art work is of an average bird. For me I find that more productive and easier to use. I secured the Crossley Eastern North American guide as soon as it appeared. I used it a few times in the field (as an auto guide not carrying it) so have had some experience.
I do not find the montage style of photos to be very useful or helpful in trying to ID a bird and so it sits on a shelf as a reference guide. My second major issue with the book was the text font and color. I think it was a very poor design choice.
This leads however to my reason for sending you a comment.
From the images in your review which I assume are reproductions from the book, show one very major improvement that appears in the Britain and Ireland volume. It appears that the font style and darkness has been changed from the Eastern North American version. That is a big deal for useability. The NA version uses a very fine line "sans serif" font and a light color ink. For a "more mature" birder it is almost impossible to read the text in the field under less then ideal lighting conditions. The appearance in the image of the map that you show, has a much more readable font and it is darker. Crossley is to be commended in listening to complaints he undoubtedly received............and making a change!
Having spent some of my career in human factors work on display devices, I think the use of the "Ariel" style font is driven by a desire to look modern and "techy". The basics of rear illuminated, pixel composed characters results in a clearer, more readable text with a "sans serif" font for small text on digital devices. Hence their popularity in computer/phone displays. However that doesn't necessarily carry over into front lit displays like paper and print. Serif-type fonts can be produced much clearer and provide a more readable text for small print. The new long awaited 2nd edition of the Sibley North American bird guide made the same error that Crossley made in font selection and color. It escapes me how such a fundamental error was made. I hope a reprint is a serious consideration.
The major basis for that is that photos are of a specific bird and art work is of an average bird. For me I find that more productive and easier to use. I secured the Crossley Eastern North American guide as soon as it appeared. I used it a few times in the field (as an auto guide not carrying it) so have had some experience.
I do not find the montage style of photos to be very useful or helpful in trying to ID a bird and so it sits on a shelf as a reference guide. My second major issue with the book was the text font and color. I think it was a very poor design choice.
This leads however to my reason for sending you a comment.
From the images in your review which I assume are reproductions from the book, show one very major improvement that appears in the Britain and Ireland volume. It appears that the font style and darkness has been changed from the Eastern North American version. That is a big deal for useability. The NA version uses a very fine line "sans serif" font and a light color ink. For a "more mature" birder it is almost impossible to read the text in the field under less then ideal lighting conditions. The appearance in the image of the map that you show, has a much more readable font and it is darker. Crossley is to be commended in listening to complaints he undoubtedly received............and making a change!
Having spent some of my career in human factors work on display devices, I think the use of the "Ariel" style font is driven by a desire to look modern and "techy". The basics of rear illuminated, pixel composed characters results in a clearer, more readable text with a "sans serif" font for small text on digital devices. Hence their popularity in computer/phone displays. However that doesn't necessarily carry over into front lit displays like paper and print. Serif-type fonts can be produced much clearer and provide a more readable text for small print. The new long awaited 2nd edition of the Sibley North American bird guide made the same error that Crossley made in font selection and color. It escapes me how such a fundamental error was made. I hope a reprint is a serious consideration.
