Re: Wild or Captive, does it matter?
Really comprehensive response from Colin in my opinion and I would't disagree with any of it.
I've been to Gigrin to photograph red kites and to a trout farm near Rutland to photograph ospreys. These birds are obviously wild but are artificially attracted to the locations. I feel the same about feeding stations to attract woodlands birds and even setting up feeders in the garden and putting more attractive perches alongside them to get a natural looking shot. Are these birds genuinely wild or starting to become tame?
I've always stated if an animal is captive. In some respects I think captive is more of a challenge because you often have to deal with an unnatural background. I have two excellent zoos (even though they don't like to use the word zoo) near me and will spend a long time waiting for an animal to get in front of vegetation to make the shot appear more natural, rather than have a mesh background.
I think one area where, for me, a shot taken in the wild will always score over a captive one, is shot satisfaction. For example, some years ago I was in Skye and managed a shot, in very poor light, of an otter on some rocks on the shoreline. I've also taken much better otter shots, which can look quite natural, at the British Wildlife Centre. The genuine wild ones gave me much more satisfaction. though 'photographically', nowhere near as good.
John
Really comprehensive response from Colin in my opinion and I would't disagree with any of it.
I've been to Gigrin to photograph red kites and to a trout farm near Rutland to photograph ospreys. These birds are obviously wild but are artificially attracted to the locations. I feel the same about feeding stations to attract woodlands birds and even setting up feeders in the garden and putting more attractive perches alongside them to get a natural looking shot. Are these birds genuinely wild or starting to become tame?
I've always stated if an animal is captive. In some respects I think captive is more of a challenge because you often have to deal with an unnatural background. I have two excellent zoos (even though they don't like to use the word zoo) near me and will spend a long time waiting for an animal to get in front of vegetation to make the shot appear more natural, rather than have a mesh background.
I think one area where, for me, a shot taken in the wild will always score over a captive one, is shot satisfaction. For example, some years ago I was in Skye and managed a shot, in very poor light, of an otter on some rocks on the shoreline. I've also taken much better otter shots, which can look quite natural, at the British Wildlife Centre. The genuine wild ones gave me much more satisfaction. though 'photographically', nowhere near as good.
John
Comment