March 03, 2015, 02:45:53 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - RGF

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 97
16
Photography Technique / Re: Game Ranches for photography
« on: February 27, 2015, 11:02:44 AM »
Key question in my mind is what is claimed.  If nothing is claimed and the viewer assumes something, then the viewer needs to own their own bias.  One could say that by not labeling the photographer is leaving out critical information but how much labeling is required.

Game farm and zoo / wild park animals are clear.  Their own food source is their handler.  What about habituated animals - wild animals that come to our feeders?  Should they be labeled?

In the end IMO the photographer should not lie but also the viewer should ask if the issue is important to them.  If the picture is "art" or simply illustrative then it probably does not matter.
I think that "attracted" animals should be labelled as such, but there's more to it.  If it's a simple portrait, then I don't think it matters much to the average viewer.  Wildlife photographers may view it as cheating in terms of getting the shot, but the average person won't care. 

If the shot is of the animal's behavior, however, I think the ethics are much more serious.  If you see action shots of a animal doing something really interesting and think it's a natural, wild animal behavior, when it's actually been trained or enticed that's not right.  A wild wolf won't sit or stand on its hind legs, but a trained one will.  If someone sees a wolf doing that and thinks it's a natural behavior, that is a distortion of the truth.

On some levels, it may seem innocent (say an exciting photo of a jumping tiger), but consider what Walt Disney did for lemmings.  Me and just about everyone I know grew up believing that they all commit suicide by throwing themselves off cliffs.  This is not true, it was staged and edited to appear that way (see here), but ask 100 people and I bet 95-99 of them would say that they commit suicide.  There are many other examples of this kind of distortion and some of it has been very harmful to the animals that are depicted.  Fiction can be bad enough (consider the number of sharks killed senselessly after Jaws came out), but when fiction is presented as the truth, it's far more damaging.

If you label a show "wild life kingdom" or such, then you are claiming something. 

I tell people that I have been licked by a wolf, which is true, but also quickly add it was habituated and use to being around people. 

If a publisher / forum has rules  about labeling then of course they need to be followed.  If I show someone a picture of a xxx I let them enjoy it.  If they ask, I tell the back story.

Game farms have a real use.  I don't want 100s or 1000s of people out in the wilds stressing animals, perhaps causing them to abandon their young.  No picture is worth the animal's life (or yours - but you can control the latter in most cases).

There is a fine line between game farms and animals that are free but are regularly feed/protected or baited.  How do you honestly label the latter?

17
Lenses / Re: 16-35 F4 Restock Date in Canada?
« on: February 27, 2015, 10:43:21 AM »
Heard that it will take 3-6 months to get everything back to normal.  Not that it will take 3-6 months to get lens to the stores, just the time before normalcy returns.

BTW I saw what the "average" dock work makes.  Foreman tops $200K so I am not feeling too bad for them.

18
Lenses / Re: Anyone receive 11-24 yet (or shipping notice)
« on: February 27, 2015, 09:56:36 AM »
Mine will be delivered tomorrow.  Dealer got it Thursday and sent it via 2 day UPS.

19
Photography Technique / Re: Does this photo work?
« on: February 27, 2015, 09:14:18 AM »
The revised work is better.  If you can, getting a better eye (perhaps paint it in) would help.

20
Photography Technique / Re: Game Ranches for photography
« on: February 27, 2015, 09:11:59 AM »
As others have said, there are a number of ethical considerations, and each person has to decide how they feel about going to these places.

One thing I don't think should be up for debate is honest captioning of your work.  If it's a captive animal, that should be called out in the caption.  If it's at a open area that attracts animals in some way, e.g., a watering hole in dry area or as they do here in Florida, a gator infested swamp with nice trees, you should label where the photo was taken.

The people that routinely post (on 500px, Flickr) photos of Snow Leopards up close (from Wyoming) or Lynx and Elephants, etc. (from the park in Spain) and don't label their photos as such really irritate me.  It's still a spectacular photo, but the viewer deserves to know it wasn't shot in the Himalaya, high Alps, or Serengeti.

The North American Nature Photography Association (NANPA) requires its members to comply with something they call Truth in Captioning.

+10

Thanks for posting this link.  A year or two ago we had a similar debate here, I believe it centered on the famous "impossible" Peter Lik photo.  There were several people who argued vehemently that a photo stands on its own, that its origin is irrelevant.  They argued that aesthetic value was the only thing that mattered, and that origin, whether it was a composite, fauxtoshopped, etc, were irrelevant unless a person explicitly claimed the photo was a work of journalism or science. Bollocks to that!

Key question in my mind is what is claimed.  If nothing is claimed and the viewer assumes something, then the viewer needs to own their own bias.  One could say that by not labeling the photographer is leaving out critical information but how much labeling is required.

Game farm and zoo / wild park animals are clear.  Their own food source is their handler.  What about habituated animals - wild animals that come to our feeders?  Should they be labeled?

In the end IMO the photographer should not lie but also the viewer should ask if the issue is important to them.  If the picture is "art" or simply illustrative then it probably does not matter.

21
Hunter & Fuqua: Light: Science & Magic
Ray: Applied Photographic Optics
Margulis: Photoshop LAB Color; the Canyon Conundrum ...

I tried to read the Margulis' Lab Color book and got lost / over my head quickly.  I'll retry again.

22
Photography Technique / Re: What is your keeper rate?
« on: February 27, 2015, 08:59:11 AM »
For wildlife in good shooting conditions, I aim to keep 10-20%
For landscape work, 25-33% (I will make in camera dups, habit from film days) and select one
For city scapes and candids, can be all over the map but try filter between 20-40% (if I am lucky)

23
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1Dx replacement speculations.
« on: February 26, 2015, 12:58:06 PM »
Electronic shutter so no mirror.

So you are suggesting that the new model will have no dedicated phase detect AF system, but will have only DPAF?  That's about as likely as Canon setting the MSRP at $50.

okay, I admit that I am way out of knowledge when it comes to hardware.  How do video cameras get 30 /60 FPS?  Mirrors are not flapping that fast?  How do they manage high FPS and still get AF to work?

At some point I imagine that video and stills will merge.

24
Canon General / Re: Lens stuck on the dock in California
« on: February 26, 2015, 10:28:29 AM »
There are ships stacked up off shore that cannot unload due to the Longshoreman's strike.  A settlement has been reached, and unloading has begun.  It will take at least 2 months to clear the backlog.

Hope only 2 months - I have heard estimates of 3-6 months.

25
Canon General / Lens stuck on the dock in California
« on: February 25, 2015, 07:14:43 PM »
I talked to my dealer today and he told me he is not getting inventory because shipments are stuck on the docks in California.

Has anyone else heard this?

26
Lenses / Re: $2,000 14-24 f2.8, vs $1,800 16-35 f2.8 IS, vs $3,000 11-24 f4
« on: February 25, 2015, 04:11:53 PM »
Of course IQ needs to be the same on all the lens to make a decision.

27
Lenses / Re: 400mm DO II - sleazy sale by Amazon/Adorama
« on: February 25, 2015, 04:10:31 PM »
What does the box say?

Also look at the Exif data.

If the box does not say Mark II and the exif data is consistent, then you ordered the wrong item (check the page you used to order the item) or then accidentally sent the wrong item. 

I don't think either company would pull a bait and switch.  Other NYC operators might, but I don't think either of these would.  Just my opinion.

28
Lenses / Re: Anyone receive 11-24 yet (or shipping notice)
« on: February 25, 2015, 04:06:33 PM »
My dealer tells me it will arrive tomorrow.  I should have Saturday.

29
Lenses / Re: Gear for upcoming trip to Italy and Greece
« on: February 25, 2015, 04:04:50 PM »
I'm going on a cruise this summer that starts and ends in Venice and stops at a couple ports in Greece. We will also be taking a train to Rome for a couple days before coming home. I'm trying to pack light but also get great images. Here is my current lens/camera gear:
Canon 6D
16-35mm F4 IS, 35mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 135mm F2, 70-200mm F4 IS

The 16-35mm will definitely be coming and possibly the 70-200 (haven't decided yet). I'm wondering what low-light lenses to bring. I'm also considering switching out the 35mm 1.4 for the newer 35mm F2 IS. I love having lenses with IS. Anyone made that switch? Should I consider bringing the 85 or 135 or will that be too much gear? Thanks for your feedback in advance! If anyone can recommend a good bag to carry everything that would be helpful as well.

What do you want to photograph?

If architecture, considering dropping the 35 F1.4 and going with 24 TS-E.  I seldom use primes so I can not comment on 85 and 135.  Though for the weight you might be better off with 70-200F2.8 IS II. 

If you want to waste your weight, don't we all, consider the 70-300L.  Great lens and more reach than the 70-200.

Also you lacking a mid range zoom.  The new 24-70 F2.8II  another great lens but is not light weight (except on your wallet).

I can not comment on photographing people, mostly do architectures in the cities.  For this I find the 14 helpful and I am looking forward the new 11-24.  I hope it worth its price.

30
Lenses / Anyone receive 11-24 yet (or shipping notice)
« on: February 24, 2015, 01:26:02 PM »
If you have your 11-24 or know it is one its way, please share with the group.

Thanks

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 97