Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Please keep the Wildlife gallery free of captive animals

Attention!

This topic is locked.

Reason : Problem solved


KatieR 10 6.2k 6
26 Jul 2005 1:04PM
ah, but where did you release it?
Was it a genuine wild space?

And I believe that Christopher Robin domesticated Alexander Beetle in a matchbox.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

StrayCat e2
10 15.0k 2 Canada
26 Jul 2005 1:29PM
If the animals are being controlled in some way by humans, then they're captive. I visit the websites of many pro wildlife togs, and as far as I know, the 11th commandment is; "Thou shalt not try to fool thy viewers into thinking the animal was free."
u08mcb 10 5.8k
26 Jul 2005 1:33PM
That definition's too broad.
StrayCat e2
10 15.0k 2 Canada
26 Jul 2005 1:39PM
It works for me.
roxpix 11 2.2k 11 Scotland
26 Jul 2005 1:45PM
"If the animals are being controlled in some way by humans, then they're captive."

Just to be pedantic cos it's 10.30.... when a rain forest is reduced to a tenth of its original size (by humans) therefor controlling its habitat/movement etc, the surviving wildlife is condensed into this much smaller space....then photographed. Would it still be wild?

Just curious
roxpix 11 2.2k 11 Scotland
26 Jul 2005 1:51PM
I thought I had the answer for a minute there...

If we agree on a X factor, X being a measurement of available space in relation to body mass, then we'd know if it was captive or wild....then I saw a fly bang its head off the window half a dozen times trying to get outside..D'oh
u08mcb 10 5.8k
26 Jul 2005 1:53PM
Its probably easier to set out criteria for something that is captive than it is for something that is wild but as with most attempts to compartmentalise stuff like this, there's no point.
cambirder 10 7.2k England
26 Jul 2005 2:12PM

Quote:its probably easier to set out criteria for something that is captive than it is for something that is wild


I don't see what is difficult about it, it is very straight forward.
Hazard 11 1.2k United Kingdom
26 Jul 2005 2:18PM
Are we not all restricted in some way ?
I'm mentally restricted for a start Smile
StrayCat e2
10 15.0k 2 Canada
26 Jul 2005 2:29PM
I agree with Paul, I know which categories to use for either, it's simple.
NickdeBug 9 391
26 Jul 2005 2:41PM
It seems to be something that people struggle to define acturately. When is an animal classed as captive? With the majority of 'wild' habitats managed (to all intents and purposes) by man, could an elephant in the Kruger National Park be considered truely wild. Or is it merely in a bigger cage?

If the classification is designed to show the relative difficulty of capturing a shot, can this be shown definitively by the 'wild' status of the animal. Each time a photographer is faced with a shot to take there are a set of decisions to be made and actions taken accordingly. You could argue that using captive animals simply allows you either more time to make those decisions, or offers a higher number of opportunities to get it right. At the end of the day, the result will still be determined by the photographer's skill and maybe this is how we should judge it.

Personally I think that it is a matter of common sense as to which category to include the image. Those photographers that have spent hours knee deep in mud to get the shot have the opportunity to highlight this in the description section (something that I think always adds to the image - the story behind it!).

I know a photographer who captive breeds various animals (most are rescue animals). He then uses them as models for photo shoots. These are basically tame animals, but he is able to put them in a setting that gives the appearance of being wild. Some may call it cheating, but most animal shots used in advertising are captive. When I worked for OSF I regularly used to find all sorts of beasties in the studio. My first day there I witnessed a 12 foot anaconda dragging a lighting cameraman across the floor (much to the amusement of his colleagues!).

This is the link for those interested Dan Cox Pet Lynx (not all the shots are of his tame lynx)
u08mcb 10 5.8k
26 Jul 2005 3:44PM

Quote:I don't see what is difficult about it, it is very straight forward.


Took 1 insect to pick a hole in one of your definitions...
sillyconguru 10 4.4k
26 Jul 2005 4:00PM

Quote:when a rain forest is reduced to a tenth of its original size (by humans) therefor controlling its habitat/movement etc, the surviving wildlife is condensed into this much smaller space....then photographed. Would it still be wild?


Wild? I would think it would be furious Wink
cambirder 10 7.2k England
26 Jul 2005 4:45PM

Quote:Took 1 insect to pick a hole in one of your definitions...


How exactly?
u08mcb 10 5.8k
26 Jul 2005 4:52PM

Quote:No animal in a zoo is truely wild, it has too much contact with humans and would be unlikely to survive very long in the wild if it did manage to break free.


If you're going to make a definition of wild that hinges on contact with humans, it can only apply to animals that can recognise they are in contact with humans in the first place.

Which is why it is easier to say something is not wild than it is to say something is wild. For everyone to agree something is wild, it'll have to satisfy a list of criteria as long as your arm. For it to be recognised as not wild, it need only fail to satisfy one.