From the way nature movies are made to the pretty pictures of animals that adorn your walls, the question remains Are the animals really wild or shot at one of these animal factories. A intersting take on the most loved scenes of the most interesting shots that we saw and was in awe. Is it not shocking to find them as having been faked?
Been travelling across India and other parts of the world looking for wild life refuge, Have we seen something great or was it easy to spot an animal that is supposedly free ranging in that area? A trip to Sariska to look at the tigers and three days of toil and not a single one spotted. ( By then may be most of them might have been slaughtered), A few days at Nagerhole, Zilch, Looking for Nilgiri Tahr near Munnar - ended up with some of the domesticated ones - Well atleast they were free ranging, but just got used to humans that they hang around near them for their forage. Trying to check out Grizzlies in Yellowstone. Three days and none spotted and it is summer and lot of people move around these parks, may be the Grizzlies know the peaceful, non camera intrusive part of the Park to avoid us.
Well looks like Wild Life abhors people and move away and it may take many many years of toil to get some of the shots that we end up seeing in these movies. Easy way out... Just go to one of these animal farms and get the best shots. From now one, it is better to watch out for the backgrounds in some of the shots? May be there would be discrepancies, like the Asiatic Gir Lion among the forests in South India. And we need to know and asking for this information would serve the purpose.
Sprinling fish with Battery Acid to make them whither and jump around so that it makes a wonderful shot for us to look at in HD? Is it ethical, should there be not a warning like we see in many of the programs - "This is fictitious and any resemblance to people living or dead is coincidental" on similar lines they should have a disclaimer saying " The animals in the feature may be wild or may have been shot using trained animals for succor and continuity in story telling. Any actions that you think are too real to be true, most probably are shot using game animals in pet zoos"
The most shocking is the use of these props by institutions of repute. Those that you think have controls in place to ensure that what is represented is true. National Geographic, BBC, Walt Disney!!! Names that you thought were reliable sources of information.
A wonderful piece from Audubon. The above is a ramble based on this article.
http://www.audubonmagazine.org/incite/incite1003.html
Been travelling across India and other parts of the world looking for wild life refuge, Have we seen something great or was it easy to spot an animal that is supposedly free ranging in that area? A trip to Sariska to look at the tigers and three days of toil and not a single one spotted. ( By then may be most of them might have been slaughtered), A few days at Nagerhole, Zilch, Looking for Nilgiri Tahr near Munnar - ended up with some of the domesticated ones - Well atleast they were free ranging, but just got used to humans that they hang around near them for their forage. Trying to check out Grizzlies in Yellowstone. Three days and none spotted and it is summer and lot of people move around these parks, may be the Grizzlies know the peaceful, non camera intrusive part of the Park to avoid us.
Well looks like Wild Life abhors people and move away and it may take many many years of toil to get some of the shots that we end up seeing in these movies. Easy way out... Just go to one of these animal farms and get the best shots. From now one, it is better to watch out for the backgrounds in some of the shots? May be there would be discrepancies, like the Asiatic Gir Lion among the forests in South India. And we need to know and asking for this information would serve the purpose.
Sprinling fish with Battery Acid to make them whither and jump around so that it makes a wonderful shot for us to look at in HD? Is it ethical, should there be not a warning like we see in many of the programs - "This is fictitious and any resemblance to people living or dead is coincidental" on similar lines they should have a disclaimer saying " The animals in the feature may be wild or may have been shot using trained animals for succor and continuity in story telling. Any actions that you think are too real to be true, most probably are shot using game animals in pet zoos"
The most shocking is the use of these props by institutions of repute. Those that you think have controls in place to ensure that what is represented is true. National Geographic, BBC, Walt Disney!!! Names that you thought were reliable sources of information.
A wonderful piece from Audubon. The above is a ramble based on this article.
http://www.audubonmagazine.org/incite/incite1003.html
Comments