The first third of the book had objective value. It had a few step-by-step bird drawing tutorials and basic bird biology, which was nice as someone who loves natural history but tends to gravitate to non-birds and has rarely drawn birds. However, the rest of the book was a waste of time for me.

I think it's more geared toward adults who didn't grow up with direct observation-based interests like drawing and natural history. The books spends a large amount of text on reiterating to draw what you see (what else would you draw? The imaginary monster you dreamed as a kid?), don't draw everything you presume you should see (like, as mentioned 10 times with no exaggeration and this is not a long book, individual feathers), and other ways of tediously spelling out what I thought was common sense. We didn't even get talked to like that as kids and teens in art class. However, I think there's a different mentality in adults that are just starting to express interest in art and birds, and they may need the reinforcement to observe what's immediately before them as opposed to preconceived notions ("but that's SUPPOSED to be red" or "it's TECHNICALLY red" when that's not how the color actually looks in context) or some other conditioned thinking.

I think those people would benefit from this book. I simply don't think I was an appropriate audience. There were few tutorials and a lot of text explaining what's already obvious to the way my brain works. I got bitter by the end, tired of thinking, "No ****." I had to remember I was thinking of four stars at the beginning. ( )