Home
RSS: 
Recognition
Equipment
| Camera | Sony DSC-F828 |
| Exposure Mode | auto |
| Focal Length | 50.4mm |
| Aperture | f/4.0 |
| Exposure | 1/80 sec. |
| ISO Speed | 64 |
| Flash | off |
As you can see from this photo the owl was actually on display at a falconry centre and so was easy to photograph. For those who are interested I took the photo when on honeymoon at Dalhousie Castle and the Little Owl is called Puck.If we are honest about how we took a photo then people don't feel misled. I'd say that most of us are open and honest about how we take photos, unfortunately the actions of a small minority mean that you can never be too sure if the photo you are looking at is of real wildlife or if it is staged.
I guess the moral of the story is that a good photo is a good photo; be open and honest about how it was taken and people will then choose how impressed to be!
5 comments:
I agree entirely!
SS, Nice to see you back reading and commenting!
That's an interesting one. It's never ocurred to me that there may be a financial reason (outside journamism of course) for falsifying photographs. I certainly agree that if it's a good photo it's a good photo and if that 'goodness' is as a result of the subject not being what it purports to be then it is worthless. But is this not an ethical issue rather than a photographic one. There's a lot of discussion in that one I'm sure.
I love photo manipulation but agree that one should be honest about it.
Hi Adrian, I used to be totally against digital photo manipulation but as you can see from some of the photos on here (The Angel's Bottom is probably the best example) I've recently changed my mind somewhat, and I certainly enjoy many of your highly processed images.
Post a Comment