Well, we can't blame THIS one on Photoshop...

amateriat

amateriat

We're all light!
Local time
5:40 PM
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
4,291
Location
Brooklyn, NY
View My Gallery
When I first read the headline on this, then quickly glanced at the picture, the words "digitally faked" came to mind. But it ain't always so, and not the only way to "cheat."


- Barrett
 
The most obvious thing is the lighting, a dead giveaway isn't it. The shot was obviously staged. The judging panel should have seen that from the get go. Did they think that the photographer got this close to a wild wolf, which just happened to be in a strongly lit area?
 
Steve M. said:
The most obvious thing is the lighting, a dead giveaway isn't it. The shot was obviously staged. The judging panel should have seen that from the get go. Did they think that the photographer got this close to a wild wolf, which just happened to be in a strongly lit area?
Click to expand...

Flash is used in a lot of nature photography. The photo was originally disputed by people with knowledge of wolf behavior based on the argument that it is not natural for a wolf to jump over a fence.
 
nikon_sam said:
So I guess that if your picture is "Too good" don't enter it because you could be banned for life...
Click to expand...
That is sort of an issue these days: If you manage to pull off an amazing shot where the timing is good, all the setting is right, and the stars are aligned just-so, some people will turn a jaundiced eye and say "So, how long did you have to sweat in front of Photoshop to come up with that?"


- Barrett
 
Last edited:
I like the shot. I don't like how the photographer has broken the rules. That's the point. I don't mid triggers and flashes or even photoshop to help achieving what you want, but there have been clear rules set up.

Cheers
Ivo
 
Steve M. said:
The most obvious thing is the lighting, a dead giveaway isn't it. The shot was obviously staged. The judging panel should have seen that from the get go. Did they think that the photographer got this close to a wild wolf, which just happened to be in a strongly lit area?
Click to expand...

It's not obvious that this photo is staged. A lot of wildlife photos are done with artificial light and remote trigger or photoelectric barrier. That's not what makes it staged. The guy had to give the the price back because he used a trained wolf for that and it was not a wild animal.
 
Many wildlife photographers who take nocturnal pics use motion-detection sensors to automatically fire off camera and strobes.

If this were a farm where wolves regularly "break in" to attack animals then this could an authentic shot.
 
Last edited:
I don't know what to make of the controversy over the photo. The accusation is it is a five year old photo of a wolf model. But generally photographers who get caught cheating, especially with all the experts who've looked at the photo arguing that it's a trained wolf, realize the jig is up and admit it. I mean, it's an excellent photo, staged or otherwise. But the photographer is still maintaining that that the photo is legit. Odd situation.
 
>>"They also considered the responses to specific questions put to the photographer."

To me, that's a pretty telling statement. I take it to mean he couldn't provide convincing evidence the photo is legit.
 
Kevin said:
If this were a farm where wolves regularly "break in" to attack animals then this could an authentic shot.
Click to expand...

It sounds like the wolf in the picture is known to be tame. From the article:
The experts compared the winning picture to pictures of Ossian, a tame wolf that lives at a zoological park near Madrid called Canada Real.
"You can see several very distinctive markings and the experts all agreed that, yes, it's the same wolf," said Mr Carwardine.
Click to expand...
 
Aside from whether the photo warranted inclusion or not because maybe the photographer failed to get a model release from the subject ... I find it incredibly static.

To me it looks like a stuffed wolf that's been supended over a gate on invisible wires ... there is absoulutely no sense of movement!


I prefer this: :angel:

675963154_bz4WN-M-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Hi Keith, well with strobe its always hard to get a sense of movment. If the wolf was a junior the wolf's parents would have to give the model release.
All that aside any dog, fox, dingo etc (unlike Queensland we dont have many wolves in S.A.) I have seen/photographed I reckon it would not jump the gate, rather twist sideways and go between the two top rails.
He has a strange look to him, doesnt he (the woluff that is)
cheers

ron

(I love Olympus , OM-2 , OM-10, better than Leica)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom