Posted by Brad Hill on January 13, 2011 at 8:40 AM
Hello all WILDLIFE PHOTOGRAPHERS!
Just a quick note to update you on two VERY recent events:
1. We have our OWN discussion forum! And you're in it right now! So now you have a place to raise or announce any issues related to wildlife photography, like...ethical considerations or thoughts, wildlife sightings, technical issues related to capturing wildlife images, interesting anecdotes about wildlife behaviour, and pretty much anything else you can think of related to wildlife photography!
2. While we are all familiar with the phrase "Flora & Fauna" to refer to the biota of an area or habitat, we really don't think of ourselves as "Fauna Photographers" - right? Well, our image critique gallery (formerly known as the Fauna Gallery) has been renamed to reflect this fact - it's now the "Wildlife Photography Gallery" (or a shortened derivative thereof to fit the pull-down menus).
Cheers...
Brad
Posted by Jim Erhardt on January 13, 2011 at 10:03 AM
Brad, thanks for taking on the new forum!
Posted by Luke Ormand on January 13, 2011 at 10:58 AM
Shouldn't it be called "Wildlife Photography Gallery (sans birds)" ?
Wildlife, as most of us understand, includes all non-domesticated plant and animal life forms. So now does it mean that the Wildlife Critique Gallery and this forum will cater to all of wildlife or a subset of it -- which is wild animals minus birds. It is quite confusing.
Posted by Jim Erhardt on January 13, 2011 at 6:44 PM
Oh, Anil....
While the definition of "wildlife" technically includes flora, "wildlife photography" in the realm of nature photography is understood as pertaining to wild animals.
I sort of liked the animal (fauna), vegetable (flora) or mineral (earth, sea and sky) format. That way I knew I had 19 questions left.
Pete D.
Posted by David Bostedo on January 19, 2011 at 8:26 AM
Wildlife, as most of us understand, includes all non-domesticated plant and animal life forms. So now does it mean that the Wildlife Critique Gallery and this forum will cater to all of wildlife or a subset of it -- which is wild animals minus birds. It is quite confusing.
I don't know about that Anil. I've never heard the word "wildlife" and thought that it included plants. (I understand that it could - I just don't think I've ever heard anyone use it to mean anything other than animals.) I wonder if I'm in the minority?
Posted by Brad Hill on January 19, 2011 at 8:39 AM
Hi David,
I'm in agreement with you - I never think "plants" when I hear the word wildlife. I actually don't agree at all with Anil's statement that "Wildlife, as most of us understand, includes all non-domesticated plant and animal life forms." It's my opinion that when the term wildlife is used it is commonly understood to refer to non-domesticated animal species that currently occur in a wild state (at least somewhere).
Discussion
11 repliesJust a quick note to update you on two VERY recent events:
1. We have our OWN discussion forum! And you're in it right now! So now you have a place to raise or announce any issues related to wildlife photography, like...ethical considerations or thoughts, wildlife sightings, technical issues related to capturing wildlife images, interesting anecdotes about wildlife behaviour, and pretty much anything else you can think of related to wildlife photography!
2. While we are all familiar with the phrase "Flora & Fauna" to refer to the biota of an area or habitat, we really don't think of ourselves as "Fauna Photographers" - right? Well, our image critique gallery (formerly known as the Fauna Gallery) has been renamed to reflect this fact - it's now the "Wildlife Photography Gallery" (or a shortened derivative thereof to fit the pull-down menus).
Cheers...
Brad
While the definition of "wildlife" technically includes flora, "wildlife photography" in the realm of nature photography is understood as pertaining to wild animals.
Linky
Yes - still OK. Nothing has changed in that regard. Just a change in the gallery name.
Cheers...
Brad
Pete D.
I don't know about that Anil. I've never heard the word "wildlife" and thought that it included plants. (I understand that it could - I just don't think I've ever heard anyone use it to mean anything other than animals.) I wonder if I'm in the minority?
I'm in agreement with you - I never think "plants" when I hear the word wildlife. I actually don't agree at all with Anil's statement that "Wildlife, as most of us understand, includes all non-domesticated plant and animal life forms." It's my opinion that when the term wildlife is used it is commonly understood to refer to non-domesticated animal species that currently occur in a wild state (at least somewhere).
Brad