http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... d-stripped Apparently he "rented" a wolf (from wolfrentals.com? ; ;D ) and staged the shot. ;
Just for clarification that award winning picture of mine of a wolf jumping over a turnstile in Animal Kingdom was a STUFFED wolf- I would NEVER EVER rent a wolf- sheesh- some people.
I love the headlines they mention in the article - "Loan Wolf." Had the guy stated clearly that it was a staged shot, I'd still be marveling at it. It's a beautiful shot that was probably very difficult to stage, frame, light, and capture. But claiming that it was a spontaneous shot of a wild animal was completely unethical, and he deserves to lose his award and prize.
Agreed. ; That seems to be the key - at the time, captive animals were allowed, as long as they were disclosed as such. ; Extra weighting would be given to wild animals in the judging, but a captive animal still had a shot at a win (it's happened in the past). ; The problem was, he didn't disclose it as captive, then further buried himself by digging the hole deeper, continuing to claim it was wild even after the location had been clearly identified by numerous photographers as a wolf rehabilitation center and park...and the wolf identified as one of the famous residents. ; Oh well, justice came in the end!
I wonder who judged the contest. ; I think he should be stripped of the title but keep any winnings for pulling the wool (or is that a wolf in sheep's clothing?) over their eyes. ; ;D
