Weird Backlash from a Tiger Pic from Pug-Mark? Long and Rant-ish

[laurielblack]

I've had the good fortune to be able to shoot at Pug-Mark Park twice now, and have come away with several images that I'm very proud of (for me, anyway). I put a couple on a different website that I visit occasionally, mostly to get feedback and for the picture to compete in their daily photo contests. One of the pictures I posted was this one:

which I've titled (both here and at the other site) "Mmmm...Photographer...My Favorite!" I titled it that purely as a humor attempt because of him licking his chops.

Imagine my surprise when I find this comment on my picture this morning:

"Good clarity and color in this image. A bit too center-middle. But, overall a good image. Unfortunately, the image is wrecked by the accompanying text. You may have already figured out my dislike for zoo animal images presented as if they were captured in the wild. Makes it ten times worse when the photographer claims imminent danger and risk from capturing the shot. Truth be told, the animal in danger and fear here is the tiger. Since you have not told us this image was captured in an accredited facility, we don't know if the level of care offered to this confined animal met humane veterinary standards."

I replied to him so he could know exactly where the image was taken...this is my reply, verbatim:

"This image (as well as my other tiger images) was captured at a rescue facility in McKinney TX (Pug-Mark Park; http://jazzdiver.com/pugmarkpark/index.htm and the animals there are treated with the utmost care. I can assure you that he is not in danger (nor are the other two tigers in care at the facility) and my choice of title was simply a humorous choice, being that I was really close to the tiger and he was licking his chops after just waking up and getting a drink of water. I am not aware of your dislike of zoo animal images presented as if they were captured in the wild, and I did not intend for this image offend anyone. I, unfortunately, do not have the opportunity to photograph animals like this in the wild so I do the best I can with what I have."

He replied again with:

"First of all, I love wildlife photos from zoos and aquariums, if the hosting facility is given credit for providing the opportunity to the photographer. It is not too cool to present an image as if it was captured in the wild... denying the hosting facility the credit it is due. There are a lot of very fine zoos and aquariums in this country and there are some horrible menageries. Here is a list of accredited facilities in TX. http://www.aza.org/FindZooAquarium/i...zoostate&st=TX

I don't see McKinney,TX listed as having a zoo with accreditation. Please let me know if you have information indicating this is a good place for animals."

So...I can't understand what the problem is, but I've obviously offended his delicate sensibilities. I don't know this guy from Adam, though linking to his website I see that he's a landscape and wildlife photographer (of the real kind, not zoos, obviously). I guess he feels I should know who he is and more about the protocol and etiquette of posting wildlife shots.

My question is this... did I do something wrong? Are we breaking some weird unwritten photographer's code by trying to capture images of these cats in a facility that might not be accredited, and by capturing images of them appearing to be in the wild instead of in a cage? Am I being overly sensitive? I just don't understand what the problem could be...or maybe it's just PMS and I'm overly emotional right now. ;)

[boomerd35]

The only thing you did wrong is waste any of your time worrying about his reply. That is a beautiful image no matter where you took it.

Troy T.

[NathanJK]

You've restrained yourself more than I probably would have, my response would have been more along the lines of "if you dont have anything nice to say...well nevermind, I dont care about your opinion anyway." I dont think its you who is being overly sensitive, I think its whoever that yahoo is.

[Daniel Bates]

I don't know what the [insert appropriate word here] he's talking about, and frankly, I'd advise you to pay him no mind. What's the point of a zoo if not to present animals in a wild-like environment? And if you don't happen to [sarcasm] capture the fence and the administration building and the code of ethics in every single image [/sarcasm] , that doesn't make you an inhumane or unethical photographer.

And by the way, I think your picture is one of the five or six best tiger pictures I've seen from this forum yet. Great job!

--Daniel

[Mandy]

I kind of agree on his point of being too centered, but it's still an amazing image. It sounds to me like he's got his panties in a wad b/c zoo's and other facilities are allowing photographers to capture images that appear to be in the wild and making his photography (in his mind) less valuable or something. He seems defensive about it and IMO that usually means they feel threatened over something. I wouldn't worry about it and I don't think you did anything wrong. I didn't see anything in the info provided from Pug Mark that says you have to say they were taken there, but I accidentally washed the sheet in my jeans from that day before I got to read it carefully. This is a great shot and I think your title is MORE than appropriate!

[Daniel Bates]

Maybe he's just annoyed that you didn't have to spend a few thousand dollars on a safari to the other side of the world, just to get a tiger picture...

[iCe]

Send him a link to an African safari site... Maybe he can get an image there... without getting eaten...

I wouldn't waste your time on him/her. Just another keyboard commando...

Tack sharp image... I like it...

[boxofrocks]

His posts smack of an air of pomposity usually reserved for SEC football fans (usually Gators). He's trying to make you sound like a poser, since he's rich/cool/insecure enough to be able to go on safari.

Ignore him.

Now, you may find some PETA extremists that have a problem with places like PugMark in general. They would like to see every one of them shut down, whether or not it's a good environment for the animals. To them, any animal not in the wild is being degraded.

Maybe he's a little of both.

[richardsfault]

Most likely an animal rights extremist.

Photography is all about illusion, so unless you claimed the image was taken in the wild or presented it as a news report, no harm done.

[LoungeLizard]

Some people are meant to be ignored - this one sounds like one of them.

[Hogleg 44]

Sounds like a spoiled 12 year old who has been looking through too many of his daddy's photography books, and thinks he knows it all! Some people are adults in body only.
As has been said; All you did wrong was reply.
As for the centering. Not too much else you could do with that one since he is looking straight at you, and it being basically a head shot only. It ain't exactly like you could rearrange some props while he held that pose for you.

[AlexMorse]

He's a complete idiot, ignore him completely :) You've done nothing wrong and everything right. There's just a lot of flaming assholes on the internet.

Keep up the great work, love the image!

[suzyjazz]

The guy is a jerk. If you had entered this image in a contest called "Photo Contest for Photos of Animals Taken in the Wild" then he has a point, but to just attack you like that is ridiculous. You didn't claim the photo and animal are something they are not. You don't have to justify yourself to anyone.

I wish all wildlife could make it in the wild and weren't endangered and so on and so forth, but I think most of us agree that the Pug Mark tigers are lucky to be alive in Pug Mark Park, the only place where anyone would care for them.

I wonder what this person does to try to improve on the situation he expresses concern about, rather than rant and rave.

Oh, and the image IS fantastic.

[laurielblack]

OK, I feel better now I think. I didn't enjoy being called out like that but I guess there's always "one" in every online forum. ;)

Except for here, of course! ROFL!

Thanks for the support. I just wanted to know I wasn't crazy.

[steve817]

My reply would have been two words long. Anyone want to guess what those two words would have been?