ooF Fighters said:In the end, it's your own ethics that determine what goes into your portfolio. Just know that you may be at a distinct disadvantage, having held yourself to standards higher than National Geographic photographers.-
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/12/shark-pictures-not-fake-brain-skerry/
Interesting video that highlights why totally natural may not be feasible. Thanks.
The nice thing about hobby nature photography is that by shear chance opportunities arise that can produce photos that are occasionally/more likely rarely, award winning. It's the "chance" fun factor that makes the endeavor worthwhile along with all the great photos that are not award winning but really nice to view while reliving the experience.
While there are certain practices that I personally would never engage in (i.e. feeding wildlife on trips through national parks where it is forbidden and where numerous people may feed and then the feeding disappears for a season leaving the animals disadvantaged or creates safety hazards), I still think the key is being honest about the techniques used.
Jack
Upvote
0