The other interesting thing was that the winning entry had been disqualified
for faking it (though the photographer denied the claim). How was it
faked, you ask, in this world of digital photographic manipulation? Well,
is claimed to have put a stuffed, posed wolf in the
scene used a trained wolf hired from a zoo (correction thanks to
On the one hand I'm left wondering what other little manipulations have
gone on in the other photos to 'enhance' scene and enhance the chances of
winning. On the other, if faking a scene is more likely to be done by
putting a prop tame animal in, then I don't think we have
too much to worry about yet.
And on the gripping hand, the actual manipulation of scenes from the 'wild' wasn't confined to just that: other photographers had tacked bacon hidden on a tree branch to attract bears, scattered seed for birds and food for foxes and wolves. If this is what 'nature' photography is all about, I think a fair number of our 'nature' photographers need to get it out of their heads that the world is a kind of studio to be staged and set as they will - especially since most of the categories were looking for 'wildness'. But when you're talking about prizes, there's always going to be a bit of surreptitious 'what can I get away with' thinking - some people just end up carrying through with their thoughts.
All posts licensed under the CC-BY-NC license. Author Paul Wayper.