Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,889   Posts: 1,520,803   Online: 1164
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 32 of 32
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Monterey Co, CA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    303
    I'm saddened to hear of the controversy of the wolf, and/or that the image is sullied. I liked the image immensely upon first seeing it had won the BBC WPOY contest. Noted that it had been captured in the Spanish wilds by an IR triggering array and a Hasselblad, if I recall correctly. Such images are indeed possible with seldom-seem and rare creatures, and make a good case for the viability of MF film cameras even today.

    Having myself successfully captured wildlife remotes of a wild mountain lion I'd prospected and attempted to call to the camera for many months beforehand, I can state with some authority that a subject-triggered remote is sometimes the only way to get an unobstructed view. It's not nearly as simple a project as the first-time poster above suggests.

  2. #32
    Markster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Denver area
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    307
    Just to chime in: A wolf is not a wolf. As a dog owner and cat owner all my life and a watcher of documentaries I can tell you that the markings are quite unique. Even 2 black-striped tabby cats with similar size have different facial structure, different stripe patterns, etc. I've had different black labs with distinctive faces. It's all black, you say, and you're right. But there are differences.

    They said that experts checked the wolf's colors, the fur marking patterns, and compared those to the tame wolf. It's the same wolf.

    I'm sure that's how they also track wolves in the wild (or, used to before GPS tags). You would think sharks have next to no markings, right? Actually they look at the pattern where the upper color turns to the white belly on great white sharks to identify them, and it's a reliable method as well.

    I don't take it as some spiteful attack or some false claim. It's very logical and for wildlife photographers they probably already instinctively know this. I don't quite see why some folks turn the blame on the people that pointed it out, rather than the guy that did it.

    I would also say that if he was actively taking the photo, it's suspect. it's a wide angle with a flash and the wolf is right in his face jumping past. I doubt a wild animal would do that. You get anywhere near a wolf and they'll look at you. Often. They will be aware of you.

    If it was on some sort of tripod or rig -- well IMO that takes a lot of the effort out of it (as mentioned by the replies above me). IMO if you're not tripping the shutter, remotely or directly, you didn't take the photo. You shouldn't win a contest for something a computer sensor did. You're just taking credit for it. Also, if this is the case the wolf is jumping for no reason past a foreign stand/tripod in the middle of open ground. I would think this is an unusual/unlikely event unless the wolf was baited somehow.
    -Markster

    Canon AE-1P 35mm | 50mm/f1.8 FDn | 28mm/2.8 FD | 70-200mm/f4-5 FD | 35-70mm/F2.8-3.5 Sigma FD

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin