Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/08/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Right. I think they are talking stuffed bird/dead bug. Which, in some ways, is really pretty funny when you think about it. Very Saturday Night Live. I have to say I have never understood the Nat Geo. Photo mystique. Yes, many outstanding photographers have worked for the magazine over the years. Yes, they expend tens of thousands of dollars on assignments and consume entire warehouses full of film. But to produce what? B. D. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Allen Graves Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 9:57 AM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: RE: [Leica] National Geographic scandal I got the feeling that these guys were accusing NG of essentially creating a still life shot -dead bug+stuffed bird + an aquarium (or its digital equivalent)- rather than just cutting a hole in a nest cavity and manipulating nature. This argument seems to be raging particularly fiercely in the "Nature Photo" camp right now, even more than in the "News Photo" world. I don't think that there's going to be any resolution of this any time soon- or any end to these "scandals". Allen >Am I not correct in thinking that many times over the years the Geo has >in fact shown in great detail how it is "set up" nature shots, closing >off a little area of a stream with Plexiglas, cutting a piece out of a >tree to create a window onto a nest, etc. etc. I've always assumed that >these kinds of things were done...realistically, how else would one get >allot of these kinds of shots? > >B. D. > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us >[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Douglas >Herr >Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 7:09 PM >To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us >Subject: Re: [Leica] National Geographic scandal > > >Phong <phong@doan-ltd.com> wrote: > >> >> If it's staged, it's staged. I don't have any problem >> with that. Just say it's so. Just say that you have better things >> to do than waiting for those silly birds, and I'd understand. > >This photo was not labeled as staged. If it's staged it misrepresents >the kingfisher and its behavior. No matter how careful a human is to >re-create actual animal behavior or habitat we're going to miss some >detail(s) that may be vital to understanding what makes the critter >'tick'. > > >Doug Herr >Birdman of Sacramento >http://www.wildlightphoto.com >-- >To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > >-- >To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html