| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/22/2010 03:05:02 PM · #51 |
| That kind of thing would never happen here on this site.........:P |
|
|
|
01/22/2010 03:09:01 PM · #52 |
|
|
|
01/22/2010 03:42:37 PM · #53 |
Why can't they just ask the owners of the "Ossian" at the wild life park for confirmation? If he used Ossian, they would surely know.
|
|
|
|
01/22/2010 03:44:06 PM · #54 |
|
|
|
01/22/2010 03:52:34 PM · #55 |
really. i would be pretty pissed if my entry was DQ'd because it was 'concluded' that i might have used a tame animal...
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Why can't they just ask the owners of the "Ossian" at the wild life park for confirmation? If he used Ossian, they would surely know. |
|
|
|
|
01/22/2010 04:13:31 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by soup:
really. i would be pretty pissed if my entry was DQ'd because it was 'concluded' that i might have used a tame animal...
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Why can't they just ask the owners of the "Ossian" at the wild life park for confirmation? If he used Ossian, they would surely know. |
|
if the park consented to let him in, set up, etc. would it have looked liked they were in "cohorts" to "deceive?"
|
|
|
|
01/22/2010 04:15:57 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by soup:
really. i would be pretty pissed if my entry was DQ'd because it was 'concluded' that i might have used a tame animal...
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Why can't they just ask the owners of the "Ossian" at the wild life park for confirmation? If he used Ossian, they would surely know. |
|
if the park consented to let him in, set up, etc. would it have looked liked they were in "cohorts" to "deceive?" |
Maybe, maybe not. The photographer could have given the park an entirely different reason for the photo session, and even if they knew what contest it was for they'd still be clear IMO. Now if the park was taking a kickback or percentage of the winnings that'd be a different story... |
|
|
|
01/22/2010 04:20:12 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by soup:
really. i would be pretty pissed if my entry was DQ'd because it was 'concluded' that i might have used a tame animal...
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Why can't they just ask the owners of the "Ossian" at the wild life park for confirmation? If he used Ossian, they would surely know. |
|
if the park consented to let him in, set up, etc. would it have looked liked they were in "cohorts" to "deceive?" |
Maybe, maybe not. The photographer could have given the park an entirely different reason for the photo session, and even if they knew what contest it was for they'd still be clear IMO. Now if the park was taking a kickback or percentage of the winnings that'd be a different story... |
ooo, hadn't even thought of that.
regardless, the park and the wolf are getting a lot of attention now! |
|
|
|
01/22/2010 04:20:16 PM · #59 |
my point is they disqualified based on assumption.
i 'probably' killed that guy isn't gonna get me behind bars.
|
|
|
|
01/22/2010 04:26:16 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by soup:
my point is they disqualified based on assumption.
i 'probably' killed that guy isn't gonna get me behind bars. |
but if they interview witnesses and look at video tapes and stuff and see you doing it, you may. :P
It was an assumption. Anything beyond the photog "confessing" would be an assumption. However, based on what I read, it was an assumption that came about after doing a fairly extensive investigation. |
|
|
|
01/22/2010 05:05:40 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Why can't they just ask the owners of the "Ossian" at the wild life park for confirmation? If he used Ossian, they would surely know. |
But surely Ossian leapt the boundary fence of his pen and obligingly trotted off to meet up with the photog...*smirk* |
|
|
|
01/22/2010 05:11:39 PM · #62 |
Well, the articles mentioned that Ossian is a model wolf, available for photography when paid. So maybe the photogs story about tosssing a buncha meat on the ground is really describing how he paid Ossian.
|
|
|
|
01/22/2010 06:23:16 PM · #63 |
if they are SO certain, he hired a trained wolf. the word 'probably' ought be changed to 'certain'.
if he cheated he cheated... i just dont like the thought they aren't certain he cheated. maybe he did. maybe he didn't. he probably did, or he probably didn't.
from the words of a jack johnson song. 'It seems to me that maybe,
It pretty much always means no' ©
Originally posted by karmat:
but if they interview witnesses and look at video tapes and stuff and see you doing it, you may. :P
It was an assumption. Anything beyond the photog "confessing" would be an assumption. However, based on what I read, it was an assumption that came about after doing a fairly extensive investigation. |
|
|
|
|
01/22/2010 06:28:11 PM · #64 |
Originally posted by soup:
if they are SO certain, he hired a trained wolf. the word 'probably' ought be changed to 'certain'. |
In American jurisprudence the term used to convict is "beyond a reasonable doubt," not "certain." |
|
|
|
01/22/2010 06:57:58 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by soup:
if they are SO certain, he hired a trained wolf. the word 'probably' ought be changed to 'certain'. |
In American jurisprudence the term used to convict is "beyond a reasonable doubt," not "certain." |
...and a Confession of guilt is not necessary to establish it.
In this instance, the contest folks are probably being very careful with public statements to avoid slander claims. One level of information is required to remove a prize award (not unlike here) but it is another thing entirely to publicly state as fact that someone cheated. This guy could claim "oh, crap, I submitted the wrong picture! I did use a tame animal to work out the lighting and such, and I "accidentally" submitted that one. I'd love to produce the real shot of the wild animal, but gee, my drive just crashed and I don't have a backup. It was all just a big misunderstanding." So they soften the words as they revoke the prize, leave the ball in his court: he can decide how public and official he wants this to get.
No doubt they have enough evidence to prove their case should the photographer challenge them in court, etc. but they probably just want this over. And it is doubtful the photographer will push it in any official way, as the evidence/proof would then surface very publicly. Since he apparently fabricated an entire story about how he managed to photograph this "wild" wolf, he really dug himself a hole. If he had not made any such wild claims of wildness, he could have pretended not to know he was supposed to clearly note that his photograph was of a tame or captive animal.
Kinda sounds like someone else in another thread recently, describing in great (false) detail how she got shots that actually didn't belong to her at all. They'll both likely slink off and do it again under different names.... |
|
|
|
01/22/2010 07:08:03 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by chromeydome:
Well, the articles mentioned that Ossian is a model wolf, available for photography when paid. So maybe the photogs story about tosssing a buncha meat on the ground is really describing how he paid Ossian. |
Yeah, models are always hungry! |
|
|
|
01/22/2010 07:14:10 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
Originally posted by chromeydome:
Well, the articles mentioned that Ossian is a model wolf, available for photography when paid. So maybe the photogs story about tosssing a buncha meat on the ground is really describing how he paid Ossian. |
Yeah, models are always hungry! |
Photographers too!
I was participating in a big shoot event recently: by big I mean 10 photographers, 12 models rotating thru, 2 looks/rotations each. One model and I were shooting, in the zone, and when we finished the set we were both suddenly struck by the complete silence, noticed we were completely alone in the studio: the food had arrived and everyone was in the back room snarfing.... |
|
|
|
01/22/2010 09:04:21 PM · #68 |
| that's a nice picture of a wolf jumping over a fence. |
|
|
|
01/22/2010 09:13:21 PM · #69 |
| Food = Models = need feeding |
|
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: 06/01/2025 10:42:35 PM EDT.
