Posted by Peter Cairns on March 28, 2009 at 1:53 PM
So many fantastic eagle shots (golden and white-tailed) around on this forum, I thought I'd join in celebrating their splendour.
I walked for three miles through 2 metre snow drifts to get in the hide for this. After 14hours at minus 20c, an eagle finally landed for just three seconds before leaving me for another six days in a godforsaken wooden box...at least that's the version I'd like to lay claim to!
In reality this image was taken around 50m from my house during a recent workshop weekend. Is it any better or worse an image now I've put it in context? I don't know.
What I did see recently however (in a well known photo-mag) was a very similar image taken on a workshop with a very elaborate description of how difficult the shot was to obtain.
For me it's more about what you do with your images than the difficulty with which they were obtained BUT (and it should be a big BUT), if asked, we should surely be honest about the circumstances?
Canon 1dIIn, 300mm, ISO200. Hare predated on by a motor vehicle.
I totaly agree Peter. Just be honost about your images. I think this image is stunning and very natural looking. You did a great job and I would give my kingdom (if I had one) for a place like this near my home. I don't care if it's captive, wild, done by very hard work or made easy. Enjoy the moment, be honost and above all...respect for your subject.
Its a cracking shot regardless!Love the low viewpoint!
A good shot is a good shot regardless of whether its captive or not, a lot of the bird of prey shots on here recently whilst being wild they are still controlled with bait and most of the hard work has been done by the owner of the hide prebaiting the spot so all the photographer has to do is wait for the bird to come in!
If this was in any good wildlife mag I don't think the majority of the general public would give it a second thought, I have a lot of respect for the individual that does all the above for himself,puts the time and effort in and gets the results he's had in mind,but it does'nt mean that his shot will sell over shots of a captive bird,always an interesting topic!
Like your first description more!!
Cheers
Craig
www.craigchurchill.co.uk
Posted by Barry Southon on March 28, 2009 at 2:13 PM
Peter
I couldn't agree more a fine image and as is. People that elaborate are only fooling themselves and for what? Self ego perhaps.
a lot of the bird of prey shots on here recently whilst being wild they are still controlled with bait and most of the hard work has been done by the owner of the hide prebaiting the spot so all the photographer has to do is wait for the bird to come in!
True, but then again you can't expect people to fly to Norway every day and build a hide and lay out fresh prey, can you?
Believe me when I say that if there are any Golden Eagles here in Holland I will work on that every single day as long as it needs. I'm driving 20 kilometers every day for the the last 3 weeks to get the Bearded Tits where I want them. I have to walk 30 meters through 1 meter of water to get to the spot. I've spend more then €200 on meal worms and the only thing I have are Reed buntings. But I will not give up. I will get my Beardies. OK, it's not an Golden Eagle but it's the same thing.
Personally, I'm not fussed either way i.e., baited or not. Provided the well-being of the subject remains paramount.
Now if this shot had been described as being completely wild, only Peter would have known the truth and to me, that would be like playing a round of golf on your own, and then lying about your score
Hi Pete
Nice picture
I like when you say
"I walked for three miles through 2 metre snow drifts to get in the hide for this. After 14hours at minus 20c, an eagle finally landed for just three seconds before leaving me for another six days in a godforsaken wooden box...at least that's the version I'd like to lay claim to! "
They are a several photographer who are specialist in these kind of descriptions......
Just needs the carrion to be more prominent for it to really work, particularly as it a set up.
Posted by Craig Jones on March 28, 2009 at 3:51 PM
Nice photo peter and a lovely bird, well done
Posted by Andy Astbury on March 28, 2009 at 4:53 PM
50m from my house would put it Macdonalds car park - now that would be fun
Only nit for me is as Ray mentioned - that snow-line isn't quite working for me Pete, but that's just me.
Posted by John Robinson on March 28, 2009 at 9:06 PM
Great shot Peter
I have known smaller common birds take two days in a hide to get decent stuff (no bull, had to do it many times ) bit the pics do'n't get the comments or interest the biggies do, which is a shame.
JR
Posted by Matt Peaster on March 29, 2009 at 4:45 AM
Peter
Another good question posed here with lots of views. I would echo the thoughts that if photographed under controlled conditions then it should be stated in any info supplied with the image. There are people who would claim this to be wild and as Graham's 'golfing' comparison suggests, they are only fooling themselves.
I think the baited sites with wild birds / animals is different again to captive birds. Wild birds still have their fear and tollerance zone of humans whereas most captive ones have overcome this.
It also touches on whether 'wild' in wildlife means exactly that, although using captive birds for tutorials or workshops is a great way to achieve shots which would require hiking through 6ft snow drifts and shivering at -16!
Is there a definitive answer, I guess not
Matt
Posted by Peter Cairns on March 29, 2009 at 5:40 AM
Interesting comments as always guys and personally, I think it's no bad thing these issues are discussed - whether there is a definitive answer or not. It gives us all grounding.
Snow: yes I agree but the hare was too bloody heavy to sit any higher in the soft snow - I did try!
Absolutely spot on Pete, and how nice to see one of the UK's top photographers highlighting the importance of integrity. With so many people aspiring to become wildlife photographers I think that it's vital for the established pro's to lead by example and I commend you for that.
As for the picture I think that the hind feet of the hare tell you all you need to know about the eagle's meal, the plucked fur on the snowline completes the image without the gore. Very slight cyan cast if I was trying to be picky, which I am always prepared to be!!
Posted by Fran French on March 29, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Absolutely Peter. At the end of the day you got the result that you wanted, captive or not. Very nice indeed.
Fran
Posted by Danny Green on March 29, 2009 at 1:14 PM
A fine image Peter and I am going to buck the trend here. I like many others photograph captive birds and animals but if I am honest I would sooner do the real thing any day of the week. I know an image is an image but for me this would mean so much more to me if I had done it in the wild and this was the result after six months of hard work. I have made big mistakes in the past not labeling captive images and it is something I am not proud of but I did it so no going back. Now you can't tell me that the adrenilin rush you get when something like a golden eagle lands in front of your lens is worth the effort of working with wild stuff which I know you have done as well.
Also Craig you can't criticise someone for going to Norway to do the Golden Eagles especially when you have been to these sort of places yourself that just doesn't make any sense
Danny
Posted by Peter Cairns on March 29, 2009 at 1:45 PM
Hi Danny
I'm not suggesting that an image is just simply an image - of course I prefer wild subjects. My point here however is two-fold:
1. If we're responsible for producing an effective image - wild or not - we should perhaps think more about putting it to good use.
2. If we do photograph captive subjects - and up to a point I have no problem with this as I do it myself - then we should all declare it as and when appropriate.
If any on this forum claim never to have been tempted to misrepresent an image, I take my hat off to you. But for those of us who have not yet been granted a green halo, the question is: Have we learned from our mistakes? Danny, in spite of being a pie-quaffing chain-smoker who can't walk more than 50 metres without sitting down, I do know for a fact that you've learnt from yours!
ps. Don't have a go at Craig - he's on your side!!
Just a comment Danny never a criticism,would love to do the Norway birds but other trips take priority,I've done many captive birds but I must admit they don't compare to the buzz you get from wild birds,the point raised was the satisfaction you get from preparing the shoot yourself seeing it through from start to finish!
Like I said Danny,an interesting Topic!!!!!!!!!!!
Craig
www.craigchurchill.co.uk
ps Thanks Pete I am!
This seems a fun topic, one i'm sure we have all had a goo at trying to lay to rest before. I have always seen wildlife photography more as conservation photography a means to bring the wildlife closer to peoples emotions and try to depict what's really going on in the wild.
Sometimes it it is not possible to shoot wild all the time, but I think as long as I as a photographer stay true to me personal goals then it is only right to be honest about the work we produce. At the same time as always the subjects wellbeing is of the highest priority.
Aside from that the image in general is pretty good. IMHO I would like to see the Eagle staring me down while being a little higher to get a better view of the carion. Apart from that, it is a nice image that twitchers would adore I would imagine?!?
Drew
Posted by Danny Green on March 29, 2009 at 4:25 PM
Hello Pete
You think I could have made the 50m walk to do this then without sitting down I surpose I am just at a turning point in my photography, whilst I was in Norway I was photographing a beautiful Arctic Fox and the pictures I have produced are lovely but there is this nagging doubt in my head. As you know I have done wild Arctic foxes in Sweden (Very rare) during the summer and I have always had this burning ambition to photograph them in the winter whilst in their white winter coat, I look at the images I have produced of the captive ones and I think I would be hard pressed to better them but the excitement and challenge of trying in this harsh environment is what will spur me on. You are spot on when you say people just look at the final image but I also think they are slightly dissappointed when they learn the truth. Maybe I am just turning into a grumpy old git especially now I am trying to give up smoking, my wife can't wait for my next trip
Danny
Posted by Ian Haskell on March 29, 2009 at 7:25 PM
Hi guys, when I first started reading wildlife magazine several moons ago I was impressed with the amazing photographs (the Jim Brandenburg shot of the fox touching the water standing on some ice causing a small ripple) but since starting Wildife photography a couple of years ago was less than impressed with the scenario where the birds/mammals are baited or falconed or in Zoos. I prefer to shoot wild and where I can, I will. I do however feel as with Landscapes the final image is the most important thing and I find this does transfer to some aspects of my wildlife photography. I take photos of wild and tame (whether captive or falconed or otherwise) but still feel that the final image with appropriate servings of light or mood is more important. I do feel that photographers should be open and honest about their shots though.
BTW (Pete) I think the Golden Eagle shot is very kewl and if asked where it was taken I would have opted for Hungary!! and not Schotland!
I do believe we should all try to be honest about the circumstances, during my career I have had to use captive animals for one reason or another.. a prime example was a shot for a well known publisher of a fox leaping onto a bail of hay with a very specific bg... the only way was to use a captive and well behaved animal.... would I pass it of as wild... of course not.
Sometimes one has to do what is needed to get the image, as long as the welfare of your subject is not compromised and your intentions etc are honest.
BTW Danny... I have the monopoly on being grumpy. Good luck giving up smoking, if I did it when I did then I'm sure you will manage....
An interesting discussion on integrity on labelling! As long as the bird is completely free to come to the bait, it's wild to me. Doesn't compare to captive photography at all!
But I wonder about the headline! Isn't "wrong" or misleading to say "prey" when the eagle hasn't killed the hare itself. Wouldn't the correct term here be "carrion" ?
Helge
Posted by Mark Hamblin on March 30, 2009 at 6:11 PM
Personal satisfaction is a key component of why many of us take nature images so this comes down to the individual and whether or not they are comfortable with taking images of captive subjects. As concluded above the important aspect to all of this is integrity. For me there is nothing worse than those who claim captive subjects to be wild even when challenged. They are not only fooling themselves which is of little consequence to me but they are fooling the viewer, which does take away from the image in my opinion and also detracts from genuine wild images as people now regulalrly look at a picture and self declare it as captive. My view is that all captive images are labelled as such and credited accordingly when published, but few if any publications seem willing or aware enough to do this. By the way, I too take captive subjects and see nothing wrong with that per se. It's a means to an end and used wisely can have a very positive outcome.
Discussion
23 repliesI walked for three miles through 2 metre snow drifts to get in the hide for this. After 14hours at minus 20c, an eagle finally landed for just three seconds before leaving me for another six days in a godforsaken wooden box...at least that's the version I'd like to lay claim to!
In reality this image was taken around 50m from my house during a recent workshop weekend. Is it any better or worse an image now I've put it in context? I don't know.
What I did see recently however (in a well known photo-mag) was a very similar image taken on a workshop with a very elaborate description of how difficult the shot was to obtain.
For me it's more about what you do with your images than the difficulty with which they were obtained BUT (and it should be a big BUT), if asked, we should surely be honest about the circumstances?
Canon 1dIIn, 300mm, ISO200. Hare predated on by a motor vehicle.
Peter Cairns
www.northshots.com
Edwin Kats
A good shot is a good shot regardless of whether its captive or not, a lot of the bird of prey shots on here recently whilst being wild they are still controlled with bait and most of the hard work has been done by the owner of the hide prebaiting the spot so all the photographer has to do is wait for the bird to come in!
If this was in any good wildlife mag I don't think the majority of the general public would give it a second thought, I have a lot of respect for the individual that does all the above for himself,puts the time and effort in and gets the results he's had in mind,but it does'nt mean that his shot will sell over shots of a captive bird,always an interesting topic!
Like your first description more!!
Cheers
Craig
www.craigchurchill.co.uk
I couldn't agree more a fine image and as is. People that elaborate are only fooling themselves and for what? Self ego perhaps.
Barry
Kansas
True, but then again you can't expect people to fly to Norway every day and build a hide and lay out fresh prey, can you?
Believe me when I say that if there are any Golden Eagles here in Holland I will work on that every single day as long as it needs. I'm driving 20 kilometers every day for the the last 3 weeks to get the Bearded Tits where I want them. I have to walk 30 meters through 1 meter of water to get to the spot. I've spend more then €200 on meal worms and the only thing I have are Reed buntings. But I will not give up. I will get my Beardies. OK, it's not an Golden Eagle but it's the same thing.
Edwin Kats
Now if this shot had been described as being completely wild, only Peter would have known the truth and to me, that would be like playing a round of golf on your own, and then lying about your score
Lovely image by the way Peter
Nice picture
I like when you say
"I walked for three miles through 2 metre snow drifts to get in the hide for this. After 14hours at minus 20c, an eagle finally landed for just three seconds before leaving me for another six days in a godforsaken wooden box...at least that's the version I'd like to lay claim to! "
They are a several photographer who are specialist in these kind of descriptions......
Best wishes
Frederic
Only nit for me is as Ray mentioned - that snow-line isn't quite working for me Pete, but that's just me.
I have known smaller common birds take two days in a hide to get decent stuff (no bull, had to do it many times ) bit the pics do'n't get the comments or interest the biggies do, which is a shame.
JR
Another good question posed here with lots of views. I would echo the thoughts that if photographed under controlled conditions then it should be stated in any info supplied with the image. There are people who would claim this to be wild and as Graham's 'golfing' comparison suggests, they are only fooling themselves.
I think the baited sites with wild birds / animals is different again to captive birds. Wild birds still have their fear and tollerance zone of humans whereas most captive ones have overcome this.
It also touches on whether 'wild' in wildlife means exactly that, although using captive birds for tutorials or workshops is a great way to achieve shots which would require hiking through 6ft snow drifts and shivering at -16!
Is there a definitive answer, I guess not
Matt
Snow: yes I agree but the hare was too bloody heavy to sit any higher in the soft snow - I did try!
Pete
As for the picture I think that the hind feet of the hare tell you all you need to know about the eagle's meal, the plucked fur on the snowline completes the image without the gore. Very slight cyan cast if I was trying to be picky, which I am always prepared to be!!
Fran
Also Craig you can't criticise someone for going to Norway to do the Golden Eagles especially when you have been to these sort of places yourself that just doesn't make any sense
Danny
I'm not suggesting that an image is just simply an image - of course I prefer wild subjects. My point here however is two-fold:
1. If we're responsible for producing an effective image - wild or not - we should perhaps think more about putting it to good use.
2. If we do photograph captive subjects - and up to a point I have no problem with this as I do it myself - then we should all declare it as and when appropriate.
If any on this forum claim never to have been tempted to misrepresent an image, I take my hat off to you. But for those of us who have not yet been granted a green halo, the question is: Have we learned from our mistakes? Danny, in spite of being a pie-quaffing chain-smoker who can't walk more than 50 metres without sitting down, I do know for a fact that you've learnt from yours!
ps. Don't have a go at Craig - he's on your side!!
Like I said Danny,an interesting Topic!!!!!!!!!!!
Craig
www.craigchurchill.co.uk
ps Thanks Pete I am!
Sometimes it it is not possible to shoot wild all the time, but I think as long as I as a photographer stay true to me personal goals then it is only right to be honest about the work we produce. At the same time as always the subjects wellbeing is of the highest priority.
Aside from that the image in general is pretty good. IMHO I would like to see the Eagle staring me down while being a little higher to get a better view of the carion. Apart from that, it is a nice image that twitchers would adore I would imagine?!?
Drew
You think I could have made the 50m walk to do this then without sitting down
Danny
BTW (Pete) I think the Golden Eagle shot is very kewl and if asked where it was taken I would have opted for Hungary!! and not Schotland!
Ian
I do believe we should all try to be honest about the circumstances, during my career I have had to use captive animals for one reason or another.. a prime example was a shot for a well known publisher of a fox leaping onto a bail of hay with a very specific bg... the only way was to use a captive and well behaved animal.... would I pass it of as wild... of course not.
Sometimes one has to do what is needed to get the image, as long as the welfare of your subject is not compromised and your intentions etc are honest.
BTW Danny... I have the monopoly on being grumpy. Good luck giving up smoking, if I did it when I did then I'm sure you will manage....
But I wonder about the headline! Isn't "wrong" or misleading to say "prey" when the eagle hasn't killed the hare itself. Wouldn't the correct term here be "carrion" ?
Helge