So, is it unfair to hold your dome underneath, say, a jellyfish on the surface and snap away? Is it unfair to use a rebreather because other divers have to deal with their bubbles? Is it unfair to take more than one frame?
I'm sorry to say that this reminds me of why I don't much like competitions (apart from not winning, that is....)!
Tim
What has any of these got to do with 'maybe' using a captive wolf in a contest that stipulates non captive subjects ... Although I do agree there's a certain advantage to using rebreathers over open circuit ...
Dive safe
DeanB
BTW, people have shot fish in aquaria before! Guilty as charged: I have a few shots that I took at the Monterey Bay aquarium that aren't too bad. I shot more than a card worth trying to get a decent shot those anchovies in the cylindrical tank.
I have seen published pix of salmon eggs and alevins that look like they were shot looking up a glass-bottomed aquarium, either that or up a petri dish! However, my UW salmon eggs shots were done in an ice-cold stream that involved stepping through ice and snow!
BTW, people have shot fish in aquaria before!
I see no problem in shooting in aquaria. In many instances this is the only way that some images can be taken - I HAD to use some aquarium shots in the fish book I worked on this year - or we wouldn't have had useful photos of certain subjects. However you have to bear in mind that some aquarium specimens are not representative of those found in the wild. As an example I shot some pix of a black goby in an aquarium. If they are compared with a wild shot black goby, the aquarium fish is old and fat with droopy jowls! Clearly such a fish survives well past its 'wild existence' sell by date and this one had been overfed too. This is obvious from the photos if you know what you are looking at. Although the close-up sh ts of it could be passed off as wild shot images they would give a very false impression of what that fish looks like.
Which goes back to the photo in question; does a wild wolf waste energy by leaping over gates?
Monterey IS a stunning aquarium.
I expect 90% of shooter peeps make use of tame/trained/captive/imprisoned ??? subjects for whatever purposes... The argument is that this wolf was 'maybe' captive and this was against the rules of the chosen comp /category ...
Dive safe
DeanB
The argument is that this wolf was 'maybe' captive and this was against the rules of the chosen comp /category ...
Dive safe
DeanB
Thats not entirely true. The rules say "Images of captive animals must be declared. The judges will take preference to images taken in free and wild conditions"
He could have just declared it, and who knows, he may even have won as well.
Thats not entirely true. The rules say "Images of captive animals must be declared. The judges will take preference to images taken in free and wild conditions"
He could have just declared it, and who knows, he may even have won as well.
Whoops ... Sorry, my bad, I haven't actually read the rules ... Its still a bit naughty if true, although the original picture showed the wolf juggling 5 oranges and smoking a cigar !!!
Dive safe
DeanB
the aquarium fish is old and fat with droopy jowls! Clearly such a fish survives well past its 'wild existence' sell by date and this one had been overfed too. This is obvious from the photos if you know what you are looking at.
Oh my. Now even fish have to worry about how they look? Maybe they'll invent botox for gobies.
He could have just declared it, and who knows, he may even have won as well.
Might have, yes - but the implication from the rules is that it would not have stood a chance in hell.
A museum spokesman said: “The Wildlife Photographer of the Year competition office has been made aware of an allegation concerning the veracity of the photo Storybook Wolf, specifically that an animal model was used."
“Using a trained animal model would break the competition rules and we take any such allegation very seriously. Consequently, we have been looking into the details of this claim, and we are reconvening our judging panel as soon as possible to consider the information that we have obtained."
“The judges will then consider the information we have, and report to the owners of the competition. The competition will decide on appropriate action based on the decisions reached by the panel of judges and we will make that public in the new year.”
Mr Rodríguez denies any wrongdoing or breach of competition rules.
Alex
Oh my. Now even fish have to worry about how they look? Maybe they'll invent botox for gobies.
One is in the wild, the other an aquarium -it will take a lot of botox!
I'd be pretty surprised if they do rescind the award. There's no 100% proof and if there's no confession, then I doubt they can do anything. Helluva PR nightmare though, but bad publicity is better than no publicity.
I'd be pretty surprised if they do rescind the award. There's no 100% proof and if there's no confession, then I doubt they can do anything. Helluva PR nightmare though, but bad publicity is better than no publicity.
I agree that – in the absence of incontravertable proof – they are unlikely to strip him of the award. However, from the little I know about the administrators of this award, they will be aghast at this controversy. It is casting a plausible doubt on their most prestigious award – and this is a competition that relies on prestige. For the winner of the 'Wildlife Photographer of the Year' to be proven to be, well, 'not wild' would be a PR disaster. That said, a previous winner was a portrait of a gorilla in a zoo, but the fact of its captivity was the point of the image.
I'd be pretty surprised if they do rescind the award. There's no 100% proof and if there's no confession, then I doubt they can do anything. Helluva PR nightmare though, but bad publicity is better than no publicity.
If the shooter is guilty of using a captive animal and not submitting the fact to the judges then he should be honourable enough to admit to it ... This is a prestigueous competition and there are shooters out there braving all sorts of conditions and tasks to get the end result in their image and to be beaten by what 'maybe' a cheat is going to be disheartening at the very least ... Admitting to making a mistake by not reading the rules can be excused in some cases but not in this comp me thinks ...
I think its down to the shooter to be honest and have the decency to reveal the truth behind 'Wolf-Gate' ... Do you like what I did there
Dive save
DeanB
I think its down to the shooter to be honest and have the decency to reveal the truth behind 'Wolf-Gate' ... Do you like what I did there
Nice move on the Wolf Gate Dean. As to whether the truth will ever be known on this, who knows. Perhaps one side or the other will give in, but don't see it happening. Overall, it is a bad situation and unless the photographer can clearly show it was not a "cheat" he is going to have this dog him also. His reputation took a hit, rightly or wrongly, and like most things when the stuff hits the fan intially it gets big press and if it turns out it was not his dishonesty, things like that seem to not get as much play.
unless the photographer can clearly show it was not a "cheat" he is going to have this dog him also.
..."dog him"...?
You wag!
Nice move on the Wolf Gate Dean. As to whether the truth will ever be known on this, who knows. Perhaps one side or the other will give in, but don't see it happening. Overall, it is a bad situation and unless the photographer can clearly show it was not a "cheat" he is going to have this dog him also. His reputation took a hit, rightly or wrongly, and like most things when the stuff hits the fan intially it gets big press and if it turns out it was not his dishonesty, things like that seem to not get as much play.
This IS turning into another 'gate', like 'watergate'.
..."dog him"...?
You wag!
Well the press will hound him now ...
Dive safe
DeanB
This IS turning into another 'gate', like 'watergate'.
Hello over here ...
Dive safe
DeanB
Yes. Senor Rodriguez will become the OJ Simpson (did he or didn't he?) of the photography world. You gotta admit... the gaps on the gate are wide enough that the wolf would've walked right through it. And he does have that 2nd shot from a 2nd camera. Seems pretty confident to set up 2 cameras with pretty much the same angles.
Then again, if they allowed "assisted flying" octopodes, they gotta allow wolves to leap tall gates in a single bound.
Wolfgate. Classic, I love it Dean.
Wolfgate. Classic, I love it Dean.
Looks like its official. My spanish is a bit rusty but a friend says the news is breaking all over Spain. They are taking back the prize.
