Experts Cry Wolf Over 'Faked' Wildlife Pic

[snopes]

An award winning wildlife photo which scooped the year's most prestigious award and a cheque for £10,000 is being reviewed by judges after claims it was faked.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-...00912415506480

[Jay Tea]

The debate over this has been rattling on for a while - I don't think it's fair to suggest it was manufactured because 'experts' suggest the wolf would have more likely slinked between the gate slats, they need more to go on, such as the wolf's collar and leash or something - it's a great picture, though I have to say I thought it looked staged when I first saw it as the competition winner, but if it's so good it's damned to look staged then that's just bad luck, not proof of breaching competition rules.

[One-Fang]

Seems pretty simple. They reckon it's from a zoo near Madrid - go take the photo there and ask the keepers. I suspect they know their own animals well enough to glance at and go "Yeah that's Peter" or not.

[Richard W]

Originally Posted by Jay Tea

I have to say I thought it looked staged when I first saw it as the competition winner, but if it's so good it's damned to look staged then that's just bad luck, not proof of breaching competition rules.

The point is that if it was a captive animal, the photographer should have declared it on entering the competition.

The headline's misleading, I don't think anybody says the photo is "faked", just that it might not be a wild wolf. The Guardian (in its print version) has a photo of the captive wolf that the photographer was accused of using, for comparison, but (as a non-expert) I couldn't say whether they were the same or not. I thought it was plausible, but my mum looked at the two pictures and said "that's obviously not the same wolf". There were plausible differences too. (The right ear being the main one, as mentioned in The Guardian's article, but unfortunately the online version hasn't the second photo, so we can't all chip in with our own uninformed opinions.)

Strangely enough I'm guessing that the people making the accusation are already familiar with the captive wolf in question, and the keepers have also seen the picture. But you'd have thought that the staff might be able to say whether or not Mr. Rodriguez had been hanging around taking photographs of their wolf jumping a gate. And who's meant to have trained it to jump gates anyway? If this captive wolf does so, why shouldn't a wild wolf do so?

[Jay Tea]

Originally Posted by Richard W

The point is that if it was a captive animal, the photographer should have declared it on entering the competition.

...and my point was to suggest that there's no proof it's a captive animal, and that the picture may just be damned to look improbable because it's such as good one.

The photographer has now been disqualified, but is still sticking to his statement that the wolf is not tame.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...section=justin

[llewtrah]

The experts compared the winning picture to pictures of Ossian, a tame wolf that lives at a zoological park near Madrid called Canada Real. "You can see several very distinctive markings and the experts all agreed that, yes, it's the same wolf," said Mr Carwardine.

"We disqualified [Mr Rodriguez] and banned him for life from entering the competition again, so I think that sends a strong message."

Rodruiguez continues to deny "hiring" Ossian for the photograph and maintains that his subject was a wild wolf. (Though a wild wolf isn't likely to boldly and visibly jump over a gate if it can quietly squeeze through)


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8470962.stm

[One-Fang]

Images of Ossian, with a direct comparison. Unfortunately, I don't recognise the language, so I don't know quite what they're comparing.

I find it difficult to tell two dogs of the same breed apart. I'm sure I could never distinctly say for certain any image of a wolf was the same wolf as any other image. But I'm no wolf expert. If recognised wolf experts say this is the same animal, it probably is.

[llewtrah]

I think the pics of the "stage set" in the wolf enclosure are more telling than a mark on the wolf's cheek and ear.

[Banrion]

Originally Posted by One-Fang

Images of Ossian, with a direct comparison. Unfortunately, I don't recognise the language, so I don't know quite what they're comparing.

I find it difficult to tell two dogs of the same breed apart. I'm sure I could never distinctly say for certain any image of a wolf was the same wolf as any other image. But I'm no wolf expert. If recognised wolf experts say this is the same animal, it probably is.

Here is the article in English.

[Richard W]

Originally Posted by One-Fang

Images of Ossian, with a direct comparison. Unfortunately, I don't recognise the language, so I don't know quite what they're comparing.

It's Finnish, oddly. (Well, not oddly, I suppose Finns talk about things on the internet too... the story's nothing to do with English either come to that.)

From memory and the previous article (rather than from reading the Finnish) one distinguishing characteristic is supposed to be a dark smudge under the right eye, but there are disagreements as to whether the right ear is the same. I don't know enough about wolves to comment either.

(eta) D'oh! Spanked again. By "previous article" I meant the Guardian article linked earlier, not the translation Banrion posted - although that's much clearer.

[Eddylizard]

The drystone wall in the questionable picture is higher and a lot better maintained than the one in the Spanish nature park. There's no indication of how far apart the comparison photos were taken though.

[llewtrah]

Originally Posted by Eddylizard

The drystone wall in the questionable picture is higher and a lot better maintained than the one in the Spanish nature park. There's no indication of how far apart the comparison photos were taken though.

Which is why I called it a stage set. It could have been built as a set or a feature that has been removed from the enclosure.

[One-Fang]

Is it just the angle, or does the image wolf have a longer, narrower, snout than Ossian?

[Squishy0405]

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010...photo-fake.php

[going slightly mad]

Is it just me or does the white mark on Ossian's face look different than the one on the jumping wolfs face ? To me it looks like Ossian's white spot has more of a point whereas the other one is more flat. Otherwise they really do look strikingly similar though Ossian looks a bit 'chubbier', though that could simply be the angle and/or position (relaxed versus tense).
I have too bad a sense of space to comment much on the location comparison, except to say that the clearly visibly curved tree stumps really do look amazingly similar. However, with the two crossed trees in the back (clearly visible in the dark picture) the corresponding crossed trees seem at the wrong angle to me to fit. Oh I don't know, he probably cheated but I can't help but entertain the slight suspicion that he might not have.

[DevilBunny]

Originally Posted by going slightly mad

Is it just me or does the white mark on Ossian's face look different than the one on the jumping wolfs face ? To me it looks like Ossian's white spot has more of a point whereas the other one is more flat. Otherwise they really do look strikingly similar though Ossian looks a bit 'chubbier', though that could simply be the angle and/or position (relaxed versus tense).

Also, summer vs winter coat.

I have too bad a sense of space to comment much on the location comparison, except to say that the clearly visibly curved tree stumps really do look amazingly similar. However, with the two crossed trees in the back (clearly visible in the dark picture) the corresponding crossed trees seem at the wrong angle to me to fit. Oh I don't know, he probably cheated but I can't help but entertain the slight suspicion that he might not have.

The two pictures aren't taken at quite the same angle, or with quite the same type of lens. That makes a lot of difference to exactly where features appear in the picture.

Fundamentally... a wolf that looks surprisingly like the one in the picture, that lives in a pen with an unusual curved stump that looks like the one in the picture, and which is in exactly the same relation to a couple of fallen walls as the stump in the picture is to the drystone walls? That's stretching coincidence way too far. I'm mostly curious as to how he got the photo set up, now; he must have had help from someone who worked at the place.

[going slightly mad]

Originally Posted by DevilBunny

Also, summer vs winter coat.

Good point, didn't think of that.

Originally Posted by DevilBunny

Fundamentally... a wolf that looks surprisingly like the one in the picture, that lives in a pen with an unusual curved stump that looks like the one in the picture, and which is in exactly the same relation to a couple of fallen walls as the stump in the picture is to the drystone walls? That's stretching coincidence way too far.

True, and matter of fact is, if the photograph was really not faked and not taken inside the Wolf enclosure, the photographer could prove it rather easily by disclosing the REAL location where the photograph was taken.