| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/22/2007 05:26:17 PM · #151 |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 05:32:56 PM · #152 |
Only 1 favorite.
23 comments though. |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 05:45:55 PM · #153 |
Votes: 96
Views: 141
Avg Vote: 6.3750
Comments: 7
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
Updated: 01/22/07 05:40 pm
I'm pretty happy so far with my score. If it stays near here it will be my highest or second-highest score yet ... hope I didn't just jinx myself.
Also about 30% through voting and commenting. There are some truly amazing pictures in this batch, though since I'm partial to animals that may be affecting my judgement. |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 05:51:55 PM · #154 |
Once again I am being slapped, but by the comments this time. This is the first time that most of my comments are bad, but my score might hold at 6.
95 votes
6.03
4 comments
|
|
|
|
01/22/2007 05:57:36 PM · #155 |
Originally posted by boomtap:
Once again I am being slapped, but by the comments this time. This is the first time that most of my comments are bad, but my score might hold at 6.
95 votes
6.03
4 comments |
Don't really have anything to add, although there are no wild animals in a zoo. The Zoo competitions are for zoo shots. Just wanted to see this guy b-slapped in stereo.
Votes: 102
Views: 231
Avg Vote: x.xxxx
Comments: 15 |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 06:00:14 PM · #156 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
...there are no wild animals in a zoo. |
Stand inside one of the cages with these "tame" animals and say that! ;-P |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 06:02:03 PM · #157 |
| When will I remember not to deviate form the challenge description, not even a little bit. DNMC comments abound on this one :( |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 06:05:31 PM · #158 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by hahn23:
...there are no wild animals in a zoo. |
Stand inside one of the cages with these "tame" animals and say that! ;-P |
Your point is well taken, in that sense. But, zoo animals are confined to the extent they cannot run away and escape. A zoo (hopefully, an accredited zoo) is a place where confined animals live, dependent on humans. When a wild animal is confined to a zoo (or heaven forbid, an unaccredited menagerie), it is no longer a wild animal.
It's up to each member to decide if the photography is the same in a zoo or in the wild. My humble opinion (interpretation) is this challenge was intended to be for wildlife, not for "shooting fish in a barrel". |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 06:15:55 PM · #159 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
When a wild animal is confined to a zoo (or heaven forbid, an unaccredited menagerie), it is no longer a wild animal. |
The same could be said of a bear so accustomed to getting food from humans that it no longer hunts, but we would make no distinction if that animal were photographed.
Message edited by author 2007-01-22 18:16:42. |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 06:16:29 PM · #160 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
"shooting fish in a barrel". |
Shooting fish in a barrel is no easy task. The lighting is wicked-difficult... :-P |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 06:18:06 PM · #161 |
Break out the banana in the Too household!
|
|
|
|
01/22/2007 06:21:19 PM · #162 |
Originally posted by timfythetoo:
Break out the banana in the Too household! |
That must mean Aimee is doing well again? |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 06:29:13 PM · #163 |
| The key is "in its natural habitat" I know of no zoo that really has totally natural habitat, ezpecially for non-native species. Zoos have habitat for wild species. In San Diego I've seen numerous wild birds like wrentit, Anna's hummingbird, California Quail, et al., but this is their adapted/natural habitat. If it were a flamingo, it is not natuarlly occuring anywhere in the USA but one or two in the Everglades, anf has to be the correct species. So if you shoot in a zoo, the tiger face better have some scaring or something to show it is wild. Or ya may get a low score from me. Just my thoughts. Van |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 06:32:13 PM · #164 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by hahn23:
When a wild animal is confined to a zoo (or heaven forbid, an unaccredited menagerie), it is no longer a wild animal. |
The same could be said of a bear so accustomed to getting food from humans that it no longer hunts, but we would make no distinction if that animal were photographed. |
Bears in my state CO (currently hibernating in the wild, btw), who become dependent on garbage raids, will find they have stepped over the line. A one time offender is drug darted, tagged and hauled back to the wilderness. Second offense, a little further into the wilderness. Third strike... and they are out! So, your point is good, in the respect that a bear who becomes accustomed to getting food from humans... no longer hunts. And, the "defenseless animal" will be euthanized because of its mistake of becoming dependent on humans... all a result of suburban sprawl encroachment on the wilderness. Not a rant here.... just an observation pertinent to the wildlife discussion. |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 06:34:50 PM · #165 |
Originally posted by Tygerr:
Originally posted by hahn23:
"shooting fish in a barrel". |
Shooting fish in a barrel is no easy task. The lighting is wicked-difficult... :-P |
Agree 100%. If the zoos opened during the golden hours, there might be a chance to get some good lighting! I like your comment! |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 07:19:15 PM · #166 |
Originally posted by vtruan:
So if you shoot in a zoo, the tiger face better have some scaring or something to show it is wild. Or ya may get a low score from me. |
If you camp out for three days in Montana and capture a stunning shot of a grizzly, but there's a chain link fence in the background, or find a Sandhill Crane deep in a southern swamp, but there's a band on its leg, I'm pretty sure you won't get bonus points for the effort. Image is everything, and second guessing the "degree of wildness" is a sure path to lunacy. |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 07:34:17 PM · #167 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by vtruan:
So if you shoot in a zoo, the tiger face better have some scaring or something to show it is wild. Or ya may get a low score from me. |
If you camp out for three days in Montana and capture a stunning shot of a grizzly, but there's a chain link fence in the background, or find a Sandhill Crane deep in a southern swamp, but there's a band on its leg, I'm pretty sure you won't get bonus points for the effort. Image is everything, and second guessing the "degree of wildness" is a sure path to lunacy. |
Van can certainly answer this for himself. In the meantime, just want to say...
Yes, maybe I've been in the mountains too long. But, I can absolutely tell the difference between a wild animal and an animal that has been confined in a human "arrangement". There is vibrancy and "life" in the eyes of a wild animal... lost when the animal is subjugated to zoo conditions. It's not my imagination. There is a loss of spirit, enthusiasm and energy when an animal submits to the confinement by humans. You can see it in their eyes and their zest for life (or rather, lack thereof), when an animal has resigned itself to a life in confinement.
So, to your point.... the incidental "chain link fence" or "leg band" are incidental and irrelevant. It's the life force of the animal that matters. The wild animals in the wilderness still have it. The zoo animals are sadly.... without spirit.
(edited to correct typographical errors.)
Message edited by author 2007-01-22 19:35:41. |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 07:37:53 PM · #168 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
Van can certainly answer this for himself. In the meantime, just want to say...
Yes, maybe I've been in the mountains too long. But, I can absolutely tell the difference between a wild animal and an animal that has been confined in a human "arrangement". There is vibrancy and "life" in the eyes of a wild animal... lost when the animal is subjugated to zoo conditions. It's not my imagination. There is a loss of spirit, enthusiasm and energy when an animal submits to the confinement by humans. You can see it in their eyes and their zest for life (or rather, lack thereof), when an animal has resigned itself to a life in confinement.
|
Curious, have you been to a zoo during feeding hours? Or been there before it is open to the public?
|
|
|
|
01/22/2007 07:48:14 PM · #169 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
I can absolutely tell the difference between a wild animal and an animal that has been confined in a human "arrangement". |
To an extent that's true, and shootin' animals is certainly your forté, but I doubt you could tell the difference between a wild animal and one that's been captive for a day or two, and good luck finding that wild look in the eyes of a bird or reptile (or an animal that's not facing you). |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 07:50:33 PM · #170 |
Originally posted by jaysonmc:
Originally posted by hahn23:
Van can certainly answer this for himself. In the meantime, just want to say...
Yes, maybe I've been in the mountains too long. But, I can absolutely tell the difference between a wild animal and an animal that has been confined in a human "arrangement". There is vibrancy and "life" in the eyes of a wild animal... lost when the animal is subjugated to zoo conditions. It's not my imagination. There is a loss of spirit, enthusiasm and energy when an animal submits to the confinement by humans. You can see it in their eyes and their zest for life (or rather, lack thereof), when an animal has resigned itself to a life in confinement.
|
Curious, have you been to a zoo during feeding hours? Or been there before it is open to the public? |
No, I haven't seen the "non-public" hours for the animals. Assume they might be better times for the animals. I have seen some great accredited zoos... Omaha, San Diego (zoo & wild animal park), Minneapolis, Denver... a clear difference in the degree of "spirit" of the confined animals compared to the "spirit" the wild animals I see in my mountains of Colorado. |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 07:54:14 PM · #171 |
What about those animals that have been born in captivity? Not all (if any) of these animals can be returned to the wild and be expected to survive. For these animals, their surroundings (in captivity) are their natural surroundings.
How do you tell the difference between an animal that has been taken from the wild and put in a zoo and one that knows nothing other than the zoo?
Just another angle. You don't have to agree. |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 07:58:59 PM · #172 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by hahn23:
I can absolutely tell the difference between a wild animal and an animal that has been confined in a human "arrangement". |
To an extent that's true, and shootin' animals is certainly your forté, but I doubt you could tell the difference between a wild animal and one that's been captive for a day or two, and good luck finding that wild look in the eyes of a bird or reptile (or an animal that's not facing you). |
I readily admit to ignorance, or lack of ability to recognize personality in reptiles and amphibians. (lol!) We don't have snakes in the mountains above 8000'. (My significant other prefers it that way.)
However, with regards to birds... I'm a wildlife photographer... and, the most important thing in a photographic sense, is capture of the eye catch glint. Wild animals, maybe especially birds, will watch you "like a hawk" (humor intended). In zoos, I've seen many animals with a denied eye catch glint.... their conscientious objection... I'd guess! |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 08:01:00 PM · #173 |
3's I keep getting 3's and lower. 5's I can handle but 3's. Grrrr.
I am really becoming a complainer. I think it is about time I turn the scores off. |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 08:01:56 PM · #174 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
If you camp out for three days in Montana and capture a stunning shot of a grizzly, but there's a chain link fence in the background, or find a Sandhill Crane deep in a southern swamp, but there's a band on its leg, I'm pretty sure you won't get bonus points for the effort. Image is everything, and second guessing the "degree of wildness" is a sure path to lunacy. |
Shannon,
As an experienced wildlife biologist, I think I can tell in most cases. I have been giving the challenge shots that I cannot tell, the benefit of a doubt. But some are extremely obviously domesticated or zoo shots. Also, I have no problem with fences, cages maybe. A wild bear can and will get through or over most fences, thats why zoos have them behind cages or moats.
Bands on cranes and Canada Geese (about 50% of our local park geese are wild and have bands) are seen commonly. But seeing a band on a species like flamingo, parrot, small brightly colored birds, etc. usually means caged bird. I have seen about 95% of the birds nesting north of Mexico in USA and Canada and have personally banded over 150 species of wildbirds. Most species that are encountered with bands are waterfowl and raptors. I think zoos are required to band all birds, even penguins (seems stupid to me, but most have wing tages).
If you watch nature programs on TV, you will seen many lions, almost all have scaring on their faces from their experiences with other lions, prey, or other encounters. How many shots of really wild tigers have you even seen on TV? I'd say very few, since they are rarely seen and getting even a fading view is a rarity.
I think the main problem is wild, If you can't get out and shoot a wild sparrow or pigeon or something better, don't enter. Just more thoughts. Van
edit typing
Message edited by author 2007-01-22 20:04:30. |
|
|
|
01/22/2007 08:03:28 PM · #175 |
| I'm losing the thread, who has a higher score right now? The bitchers or the moaners? |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/30/2025 03:14:09 PM EDT.
