Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more
Can't Access your Account?
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
I did not define wild animals in that way, I was responding to a statement that animals in a zoo are still wild.
I would define a wild animal simply as one that is not kept in captivity or prevented from freedom of mobility by other methods (such as wing clipping of wildfowl).
Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.
Would a pet be considered as such then?
No, pets are domesticated animals, which places then firmly as non-wildlife.
Under the above definition they'd be wildlife. Its a sticky subject.
I was fortunate recently to spend some time in a mountain valley dotted with quite reasonably spaced housing. It backs onto forest area with I was told some 300 mating bear couples and both deer and elk also come into the valley, they particularly like our neighbour who is a bit of a green finder and grows nice grass as a lawn.
One hot day I spotted this deer sitting in the shade on the neighbours lawn, house and car in background.
Is this wild or captive?
The situation I'm used to is that the animal should be in it's normal surroundings to qualify in a nature competition. A zoo bred animal is in it's natural, if un-natural, state in the zoo.
It is a challenge to get rid or work through wire mesh/bars just as the problem of setting up a hide in the wild ... unless as one young lady did in the above area come around a corner of the track to find a quite large bear up front. There was an even larger bear nearby ... the classical situation that every hiker dreads ..... Mummy bear and the kid[s].
A good photo is a good photo and where is it taken should be stated.
Quote: Under the above definition they'd be wildlife. Its a sticky subject.
No it isn't: you're confusing yourself with your own semantics.
You can't expect to impose sharp edged categories on the real world, unless you're religious, in which case you don't need to debate anything anyhow.
If you really can't tell if what you're shooting is wild or not, just post it along with some context and people here will help you decide.
Isn't the definition simply:
Is the animal owned by a person/company?
I shot the dog yesterday
Was he mad?
He wasn't very pleased
I don't see a difficulty, seeing as the categories are Pets/Captive animals and Wildlife.
It really doesn't take a lot of common sense to seperate the two!
You say that, Ian, but there isn't much common sense around.
We have a Cardinal in Ireland who did his doctrinal (is that the name?) thesis on how many angels you could fit on the head of a pin.
Now I know where he got most of his information from. You lot
I'm sorry, but I must dissagree. To me 'Pets/Captive' anamals should be for the domesticated anamils (cats, dogs etc), and 'Wildlife' should be for the undomisticated stuff.
The purpose is to take photograph of an anmial, rather than to show off that you can afford to go out to Africa etc is it not? If you can show the animal in it's enviroment then so much the better, but to draw a distiction between two photos of a common subject in such a way does not make any sense to me.
What is the difference between photographing a captive bird of prey at Eagle Heights or whatever, and one taken at the feeding station at the Welsh farm?
I agree also, but i suppose if you went to the sahari and took pictures of tigers and that there, then i suppose they could go under wildlife, but otherwise yeah put them in Pets/Captive.
and as somebody has already pointed out, there are wild birds and animals which are so used to human presence that they actively seek them out, thus making it easy to photograph them.
Get the latest photography news straight from ePHOTOzine in your email every month and win prizes!
01/09/2014 - 30/09/2014
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
View September's Photo Month Calendar