Posting pictures from Zoo's...Isn't that like posing with fish from the supermarket?

I've noticed several photographers post their pictures from their trip to the zoo. Am I the only one that thinks this is strange? I recognize it would be a good place to practice taking pictures, but then to show them off later? I can only imagine how the photogs that went into the African bush and fought off monster mosquitoes and malaria to get their giraffe pictures, and then this other guy snaps pics while drinking his big gulp and eating his cotton candy. Am I the only one that feels this way?? Maybe I'm missing something? But don't even get me started on an aquarium.

You are missing something. For certain people the only access they are going to get to shoot animals is in a zoo. It certainly doesnt compare to going on safari, and nobody but a fool would equate the too experiences. If someone were trying to pass their zoo shots off as field shots you might have a point, but thats rarely the case.

If you are not alone I would bet there are very few in there with you.

I don't find anything wrong with people going to the zoo, shooting photos, then sharing.

Aren't photographs ways to tell stories? Isn't a trip to a zoo a story? I know I'm taking my nephews (5 and 8) to Disney World in a few months and they are really looking forward to the completely manufactured "safari" experience (a glorified zoo) there and the hike as well they offer through that part of the park. There will be a lot of pictures from there because they are enchanted by the animals. taking Them to Africa is impractical for our family.

I have no idea if I'll post any of those pictures here but I have no doubt they and my family and friends will get enjoyment from the pictures. If a critique of the pictures would help me from the good people here, I would certainly have felt comfortable posting them here. If I thought there was a particularly good shot I would I have felt comfortable posting it in the appropriate lens/body thread as well; until now?

I find the entire attitude of the OP strange. One person's experience should not diminish another's. Even if someone was trying to say a zoo picture was from a true wilds experience, that says something about that person; not about someone who is actually goes into the wild.

We shoot for the fun of it and as long as no one is trying to say the shots were done in the wild, "no worries". Saying that only photos of animals in the wild jungle should be taken because of the difficulty, is the same as saying we shouldn't go to the zoo to see wild animals because it is too easy (easy you never been to the LA Zoo on a Holiday weekend).

Posting pictures with a store bought camera:

I've noticed many photographers are posting photos with a camera they bought in a store. Am I the only one who thinks this is at all strange? Now I accept that using a store bought camera is likely a good place to start, so you can learn the ways other people solved various problems, and you might even want to get a few different cameras so you have a greater pool of ideas to pull from, but to then show off photos you made with them later? I can only image how some of the early photographers spent years designing their cameras, grinding their lenses by hand, and figuring out suitable chemical solutions with which to capture light on a sensitive medium, and then compare this to someone sipping their double soy milk frappochino with sprinkles wanders into some store to toss down a few dollars for a disposable camera...

A great image is, frankly, a great image. Having a great back story doesn't replace having a great image. Sure, it can make an okay image more interesting, but the image comes first in my mind. Just don't lie about the back story. If you get an amazing and perfect shot in a zoo, then you got an amazing and perfect shot in a zoo.

I have known a few people who spent thousands of dollars on trips to Africa, and came back with grainy, low contrast, and completely uninteresting photos of animals. And on the other hand I know a friend who has taken some really cool photos at a zoo in Toronto this week. The fact that she took them in a zoo doesn't make them uninteresting or bad, and in fact where they were taken barely enters into it. It didn't matter that she didn't spend weeks of back breaking travel to get them, they were cool shots anyway. Some of her coolest artwork was shot by her when she didn't even get out of bed!

(No, really, she woke up one morning in winter, with light streaming through a hole in the clouds just after dawn, and there was simply amazing lighting on some frost on her window. Grabbed her camera off the desk beside her bed and snapped away.)

Oh wow! I didn't realize what it sounded like. I'm soo sorry, Of course I'm not at all saying not to take pictures at the zoo! That's crazy. Of course we would take pictures of our family and animals at the zoo! And aquarium.

What I meant, is in a way I guess taking "wild" looking shots, and having people believe its from the wild. I know one could take amazing pictures of animals at a zoo, and certainly of animals that probably none of us will ever see in the wild. And that's something I would do too.

I guess to try to be more specific, does anyone else feel that a photo taken of a wild animal at a zoo, have less weight than one taken in the wild?

Reading of the birders on here that spend hours waiting for that one bird to fly into the morning sun, and the wildlife photogs that are experts in mosquito repellents really gave me a lot of respect for those guys. I just wondered if they would feel that its "not fair" that someone can go to the zoo and get the "same" pictures.

Diableri, please post your pictures on here, and please know I will not think negatively of you or your pictures at all. I will still admire your pictures and the story they tell.

The offense would be mitigated if the zoo photographer got malaria and the safari photographer ate cotton candy.

I'm not sure, but I think that maybe a Big Gulp is permissible in either situation.

Why worry about what other people are shooting or how they are shooting it? The only time one should really care is if that shooter is reaping benefits while misrepresenting. Using your logic, then people should have a problem with most photography in general because genres like portrait, food/product photography is all staged. Hell, shooting a tiger at the local zoo is more natural, yet it's somewhat fake due to the environment.

Spend less time about worrying about the vision of other photographers and spend more bringing your photography into view. Makes life easier and less stressful.............​..

I'm truly sorry if I offended anyones vision or anything like that. This is my first time "communicating" in a forum like this, and I realize now, that when so many people are plain mean and offensive, I realize its easy and basically automatic for everyone to think that I'm being the same way.

It was honestly an attempt at a light hearted discussion from different photogs and their views. Maybe a birder saying "I just spent $3000 for a super tele, and I took the same picture in the forest my cousin did with a wide angle in the zoo. But its all good." Then a zoo photographer saying "I respect the wildlife photogs out there, but I'm simply not able to do it, so I enjoy my zoo photography."

I'm going to wait a while to start a thread again, and when I do, ill be very careful with my wording since I realize now you guys can't know with what tone I'm saying these things, or at all who I am.

Lesson learned, and I gotta say I love potn

No offense here really Stephan. I'm sure all of us at one point or another has been misunderstood with the written word. I misunderstood you and you clarified, no harm done.

I have a lot of respect for anyone able to go to extremes in any profession or hobby. I did a lot of backpacking when I was younger that wasn't exactly extreme but was by no means casual and met a lot of people in that rarefied air that looked down on packers and hikers that were casual and I just reacted to your post in that way and I should not have. My mistake as well.

Personally, I wouldn't trade a zoo shot for a wilds shot for anything because I also would have had the experience of being there; but I would never fault someone that couldn't or wouldn't want to go through the rigors of getting there. It's just not for or possible for everyone. It takes all of us to make a world; even when we sometimes would wish it otherwise.

Stephan, I did the same thing about a week back. I made an attempt at humor that was not acknowledged by everyone. I like your quote about they don't know who we are, or how we meant what we wrote. When I read what you wrote, I felt the same way a lot of other people did about what you wrote. Then you came back and said you didn't realize what it sounded like. I understand how you feel. I guess it is hard to say some things with the written word. It is a learning curve to me. I feel like you, lessons learned. No one here takes offence when we make honest mistakes. Don't quit posting. Take a look at my thread" Thoughts Please." Maybe it will put a grin on your face, take care. Les

S.Johnsen wrote in post #14930993
I've noticed several photographers post their pictures from their trip to the zoo. Am I the only one that thinks this is strange? I recognize it would be a good place to practice taking pictures, but then to show them off later? I can only imagine how the photogs that went into the African bush and fought off monster mosquitoes and malaria to get their giraffe pictures, and then this other guy snaps pics while drinking his big gulp and eating his cotton candy. Am I the only one that feels this way?? Maybe I'm missing something? But don't even get me started on an aquarium.

If the images are good, what does it matter where they were taken?

S.Johnsen wrote in post #14931285
I guess to try to be more specific, does anyone else feel that a photo taken of a wild animal at a zoo, have less weight than one taken in the wild?

Funny you should specifically mention giraffes in the OP. Go here, look at the giraffe photo, and tell me if you think it has less weight because it was taken in a zoo:

http://www.naturesbest​photography.com/galler​y_wsr_2011.php/