Express your nature.

Upload, Share, and Be Recognized.

Join with Facebook
or join manually
X
Comments:

Old Comments:

2010-09-01 14:27:06
This photo hasn't gotten many votes because it's been on every photo and wallpaper website this side of the Asteroid Belt and everybody has seen it about umpteen times except maybe your Aunt Milie who still has a dial up, and even she's seen it half a dozen times.
2010-09-01 14:02:49
It has as Baloch1's tags, 'animal wolf', but with no comma in between the 2 words, but still goes to one page of wolf photos including Baloch1's post in there as well when you click on that tag. When I was talking about the results coming up properly, that was for Tineye's results. Sometimes it will give you a result to go to, but when you click on the link, at times it will not be the same post that you are looking for. I never did a search of 'wolf' in Pixdaus... :)
2010-09-01 13:47:06
That caption would not have helped Baloch or anyone else to determine if it was posted before. Her tag says 'wolt' or 'woll' - I'm not sure about the last alphabet. You say of the 3 results one came up properly. By keying 'wolf', I found mine, eibar and jchip8, but not BALOCH1.
2010-09-01 13:42:13
I forgot to add that I did not indicate the photographer's name because I did not have it at the time. When I originally did my search, that photo had not popped up. Reposts don't get a lot of votes, particularly if reposted multiple times...even if it's a great photo. Also, a lot of folks on Pixdaus would know by now that the photo was a 'fake' and that there was some controversy involved. By accepting the award, it would have been seen as 'fraud' in the world of photography. If you look for the photographer's work, you will find very few photos. I found about 1/2 dozen on flickr. His reputation as a photographer is pretty well ruined...not because he 'set up' the scene with a tamed wolf, but because he tried to mislead, and accepted the award under false pretense.
2010-09-01 13:23:46
I posted it with the caption 'Grey wolf', tag 'grey wolf' (104 votes). Eibar posted with no caption, tag 'wolf' (192 votes). JChip8 with caption 'El Lobo Mexican Gray Wolf, no tag. (69 votes). JChip8 put 'Gray' instead of 'Grey'. I mentioned that it was posted at least three times before. I remembered Eibar and JChip8 but remembered others had posted it since then, but perhaps they used the wrong caption/wrong tag, because no others came up.
2010-09-01 13:13:26
This photo has also been posted by BALOCH1 according to Tineye. There was 242 results on Tineye, 3 results for Pixdaus but one of these results came up properly, the other 2 did not. BALOCH1 gave this caption to the post.... :) 'Veoila Enviroment wildlife photographer of the year 2009 By jose luis'
2010-09-01 12:33:31
I am sorry about the repost Connie, I did a quick search on Pixdaus for previous posts but nothing turned up at all. I searched under "wolf" + "jumping" and/or "fence", and also searched the photographers name "Jose Luis Rodriguez" and also just "Rodriguez". How did you tag your post? I know that jchip8 is prone not to provide any tags at all. And what kind of a score did the previous posts get? The current score of +12 is, in my opinion, rather poor for this photo. It was, afterall, rated by the British Natural History Museum as THE best wildlife photo of the year for last year. The fact that Rodriguez was disqualified from his award, as wildlife photographer of the year, was no reflection on the photo at all. If it was a good photo before, it is just as good now. It is quite questionable for me to see this photo rated at +12 and then to see photos of "cups of tea" to get ratings of +30 or better.
2010-09-01 11:05:27
This is at least the fourth time this photo gets posted - Connie, eibar, jchip8, now Just Me. But, your background story to it makes it more interesting and well worth seeing it again.
2010-08-31 21:37:59
'Nature Faking' is a very common practice. There are wildlife 'ranches' in the US western states where a photographer can rent a cougar . The animal , already half-tame and frequently sedated, is released in a place where it can be easily run up a tree or up on some rocks by a couple of hounds. The photographer gets his shots and the cougar is coaxed back into its trailer and taken home to await the next client. It's a safe bet that many, if not most, of the cougar/mountain lion shots on this site are either the result of this sort of thing , or are taken in zoos or wildlife parks.
2010-08-31 16:08:56
We shouldn't be too hard on the hired wolf photographer Is José Luis Rodriguez's use of a tame animal for his award-winning wildlife shot really so criminal? At least he didn't use Photoshop Loan wolf? ... Winning shot of the Wildlife Photographer of the Year. Photograph: José Luis Rodriguez Wildlife photography is arguably the world's most popular art form, especially if you count BBC nature feasts like Planet Earth as essentially vast photo essays. No wonder the Wildlife Photographer of the Year competition at the Natural History Museum has become an ever-more established event. Now, however, it faces a crisis of the judges' own making, as they have admitted giving first prize to a photograph that – at least in their terms – is a fake. Their terms, of course, are rather distinctive. No one, it seems, is saying José Luis Rodriguez, who has now been stripped of his £10,000 award, used digital tricks to concoct his picture of a wolf leaping over a gate. The duplicity is more basic: the judges no longer believe that this wolf is a wild animal. They believe that he hired a tame animal – something Rodriguez denies – thus making the picture ineligible for the award. But maybe they should have looked more carefully in the first place, and maybe they need to examine all their entrants more closely in future. The least acquaintance with animal photography – and I have the least acquaintance with it – tells you it is very hard to take a shot like this. So hard that fakery of some kind should be the first, not the last, thing you think of. The talented Russian photographer Yevgeny Khaldei took a striking photograph of a shell-shocked reindeer at the siege of Murmansk during the second world war; it's another image that makes you think, wow, how did he take that? But the answer, which Khaldei revealed late in his life, is that he fraudulently spliced more than one picture together. There really was a shell-shocked reindeer, it just didn't pose against such a background. And why would it? Wild animals do not cooperate, and if they do, they are not wild. Haven't these judges ever watched the making-of featurettes after Planet Earth, about how the cameramen got their shots? These documentaries tell of dedicated camaramen spending years in a bivouac in the foothills of the Himalayas waiting to catch one brief appearance by a rare animal, or week after week watching sharks eating seals before they get the right shot. How rare, how marvellous is such dedication – and how tempting to fake it. Maybe this contest needs to demand that entrants provide proper diaries or video evidence to back up their work. Or it could just go downmarket and call itself Don't Wolves Do the Cutest Things.