How about "like to observe" or just "observe". Or what term would you use Alan? Help me out.

Brendan,

If your video is as smooth as your prose, we've got to see some footage, because you could make a pit-bull fight look like a romp through a spring meadow.

patrick, undoubtedly there's a whole 'nother thread about the ethics of shooting people. or maybe there's not, because that's an always already ongoing discussion throughout the rest of dvinfo.net, inherent to many existing discussions. the wildlife forum is a relatively new addition and gives us a context to engage in more focused discussions about issues in shooting nature, wildlife, the outdoors. the wildlife forum was created because a bunch of people asked for it, wanted to talk about practices specific to shooting wildlife and nature. i started this thread because i was observing some wildlife shooting practices in current, popular films/videos were unsettling to me and thought this would be the logical place to find an interesting discussion about them, from other practitioners.

chris can obviously speak for himself, but i think his comment was an attempt to validate a discussion which was struggling to get off the ground. and the moment chris stamped it with his approval, the conversation took off. but i wouldn't take his comment too far out of context.

having said that, i am always disturbed by comments such as "animals come in a distant second to people." compassion is one of the highest expressions of our humanity, lack of compassion one of the lowest. indifference to the diverse species of this planet is only a marker pointing to the degradation of our own.

Brendan,

I'm not sure here. What worries me is the tendency to use words, "like" in this case, to confer a stamp of some kind of virtue, or the converse, based on what is essentially personal opinion - which inevitably comes with its own baggage.

The idea was put into my head during a winery tour in New Zealand. One of the party was rather full of himself (or wines from previous wineries!) and waxed enthusiastic about one rather expensive wine we were given to taste. The young winemaster leading the group put him down neatly by telling him that just because he liked the wine, it did not make it a good wine; swiftly following up with "just because I, with my certificates, like a wine,.....".

It made me realise that I was making just such judgements on the same flimsy evidence.

Meryem, you are quite right that I should not have hijacked the thread away from the focus of this forum - "Tools & Techniques for Nature, Outdoors, Wildlife & Underwater Videography."

I'll withdraw from this forum since I don't participate in this particular activity, but will not withdraw my comments even though you misunderstood them. I do not advocate a lack of compassion for animals, only that compassion for animals shouldn't be the 'most important topic' on this site. But ultimately, that is a value judgement each will have to make individually and I should not have railed against what that individual perceived of as 'the most important topic'. Enjoy! And celebrate that we have so little wrong in our worlds that we take the time to debate such things.

hm, once again i seem to have misinterpreted someone's words. i always appreciate it when people clarify their positions if i have mis-read them in any way. the only point i was trying to make was that i think you misunderstood chris' intention by taking his comments out of the context of trying to build a discussion for this forum, but i was probably out of line in speaking for what i perceived as his intention....it just adds more fuel to layer my own mis-interpretations upon others' mis-interpretations! so sorry about that...

but before you depart, patrick, i do have a question.

i looked at "the dancing outlaw" link which you posted, and i'm puzzled, because i read the supplied plot summary and all of the user comments for this video. there's no trace of the quote you cited: "This documentary exploits the happenings of a small town West Va. resident..." in the IMDB listing (or perhaps i'm missing it by not having access to IMDB pro...) and the user comments are unilaterally positive about how this film represents an under-represented member of an Appalachian community. there is one viewer-commentator calling this a "red-sploitation" film, but i interpreted this as a play on "blax-ploitation," which is sort of a self-lampooning term, isn't it? i haven't seen this film though i grew up in an Appalachian community in western Maryland, so i'm now curious to obtain a copy.

what is it about this film that seemed exploitative to you? i'm always interested in hearing viewpoints that run counter to the prevailing viewpoints, and this video seemed unilaterally acclaimed by the viewers who weighed in.....

many of the debates around anthropological film and video are quite parallel to the wildlife stuff we have been discussing, which relates to critical distancing between the shooter and the shooted. so it's not so far afield to hear what you have to say about the ethics of how this video was shot.

it seems like he was ultimately befriended by Roseanne Barr and taken on a trip to Hollywood in the sequel? how very strange.....

Meryem,

I'll have to agree that the quote isn't on the page I linked to, and I can't figure out why. I copied the quote off the IMDB page, pasted it into this thread and then returned to that browser window and copied the url from the "Address" window and inserted it in this thread as the link. Now when I select it, it returns me to a page other than the one displayed when I copied the url. Things that make you go "Hmmmm."

I just think filming this guy under the guise of cultural anthropology is the same as news crews always seeking out the one fellow with a dirty tee-shirt and no teeth after a tornado to capture him saying "...it sounded like a freight train...". It is finding the worst case example to perpetuate stereotypes so that the viewers can somehow feel superior. Had they recorded just the musical talent of this fellow as representative of the Appalacian culture that would have been good cultural reporting, but they found a guy so far out there that he certainly embarrassed all his neighbors and they pass it off as representative behavior of that sub-culture. Its as bad as trying to show any other cultural group in a bad light just for the viewing audience's merryment. But again, here you have me responding to this offshoot from your wildlife focus and I owe you and the other members here my apologies.

patrick, i don't have a problem with discussing off-topic, subject matter, especially if there's a loose relationship, as i believe there is in the ethics of shooting people, as you've just described it...after all, we're quite cheerfully enjoying rod and steve's interchange about weight-loss and aging, especially because both those two are capable of waxing so poetically about this n that! so there's no need to apologize. it happens in all the long threads. it is always nice to get back on-topic eventually. thanks for elaborating on "the dancing outlaw"--i'm still very curious to find a copy of the film, mostly the descriptions of jesco remind me of my neighbors. i spent much of my childhood in an area where the phone book had only three last names in it...

media studies
 

I believe I understand Meryem's point on this matter but before someone locks the thread I ask her forebearance to put a pet theory in print ... that perhaps the most important contribution to universal education since I left school 50 years ago is Media Studies; of course it's not invariably top quality or even available to all. But it facilitates you and me becoming aware of the myriad forms of deception that attempt to exploit our innocence, ignorance, vulnerability, prejudice, humanity, individuality etc Media Studies opens up to so many of us the possibility of heightened awareness starting with self-awareness. Self-awareness is around a long time I know but in my semi-educated youth it was studiously smothered by layers of hypocrisy, censorship, narrow-mindedness and religious intolerance. Insecurity was a thought-control industry in my younger days ... those who dared question authority or the word of authority were ostracised. There was simply no way out. The vast majority HAD TO BE controlled by the tiny minority and we were. I think that historical fact is being forgotten, which isn't necessarily vital to your generation ... UNLESS we are perhaps taking our good fortune and improved lot somewhat for granted e.g. like overlooking the role of media videography as a part of media studies.

What we are doing on this forum is exercising our freedoms to differ from each other and influence each other. I am among the least aware of media practitioners and an utter dummy with an XM2 but I raise my glass to DVInfo and thank you all for the privilege of your thoughts and opinions censored only by yourselves.

Pass on the news, you media practitioners ... that's the least we can do ... lucky us , bloody lucky. ... "rant over" as Meryem sez

Alan I agree that "like" is simply inadequate in the context I used it. I am trying to think of a more useful approach/contribution to the discussion.

Brendan,

It sounds as though an Irish education was pretty much like a Yorkshire education!

Part of the control I was subject to was a ban on using a lengthy list of words, of which nice, like and get, were just three. Even fifty years down the line I still feel a touch apprehensive when I cannot see a way around uding one of the proscribed words.

Media studies? we were supposed to be learning, not studying, for heavens sake!

That's my rant for the day.

When we are being prescriptive perhaps "approve" is what we often mean when we say "like"?

Brendan Marnell
 

Hi Brendan

I knew you would reveal your true identity.

My warmest regards

Rod C

For Meryem: What use eyes in a world with no vision.

I rarely issue a spoken sentence that doesn't include at least one of those words. But yet, when I do, I feel a faint awareness of a violation of the same ingrained prohibitions, which most people raised in our time knew too well. Just like the social and sexual revolution that spread through the youth of the world in the 1960s, there was a common sort of restriction and repression levied on most of us, who came earlier. It was fundamentally the same, regardless of our nationality and the specific things involved. And how grateful I am for those unbending rules and deprivation! Ordinary activities that young people today take for granted and which may even bore them, are to me supreme and joyful indulgences. Our lives have a unique element, which those from before or after don't share: We have one foot in the old world and one in the new. We knew the scarcity of personal freedoms as children and teenagers, but when things changed, we were still young enough to dive right in and enjoy a bit of them. But even now, it doesn't take much to please me and the cost of my entertainments is small. That's why I can spend so much on my video toys, while many half my age waste their assets on non-productive status symbols. We did without so many things, both material and otherwise, that a little bit goes a long way with us.

I just brought things back on topic, giving the background on why it's so much better to spend the afternoon hiking through a wildlife area with a camcorder, than stuffing yourself in an expensive restaurant. Which is just what I'll be doing immediately after hitting the Submit button.

just found this:

http://www.planetinfocus.org/2005_film_bird_people.php

it's a link to a film, called "Birdpeople," currently in film festival circulation, about the ethics of the imprinting technique used in "Winged Migration"--see, our discussion is on the cutting edge.....

oh, and how about this...this same toronto film festival is hosting a panel discussion on, get this, "the ethics of wildlife filmmaking":

http://www.planetinfocus.org/2005_film_panel_ethics.php

field trip, anyone?

I was sad to see that you've already been tripping around snowfields Meryem and I am not sure I'd be up to a field trip with you, but what the heck ... this could be my last chance ... count me in; Jez, we can work out the ethics afterwards; doing this trip in 2005 will be our first hurdle, but that's a mere aside ... I'm having flashbacks all the time. Then there's location .. did you have any particular glacier in mind ... stop this marnell and get back to your
ourmedia tapping ... but be warned, young lady, I'll be back for details ...

not that kind of field trip, you nut, this is the kind that involves lots of unique films, libations, and brain candy. the only possibilities for injury are to ego....

It's obvious that the organizers of these things are lurkers in our forum and not likely giving us any attributions, either.

By the way, it's 63 degrees in Eugene today, all the trees are in full blossom, hummingbirds are swarming around my camelias, a thousand geese and some cranes just circled my yard and I extend these tidings to those still encrusted in ice, as a beacon of hope.

And the road takes a strange turn to a town David Lynch might want to visit...

"I've a suggestion to keep you all occupied - learn to swim"
Tool

I fall back to a bumper sticker I saw a few years back which pokes fun at the situation. "If God didn't want us to eat animals, he wouuldn't have made them out of meat." Yeah yeah, I feel the flames. Now step away from the keyboard and nobody gets hurt.

But seriously folks. Humans aren't perfect. If we were we wouldn't have reality TV, Montel and Geraldo, MTV would actually play music videos and politicians would actually be on our side, etc., etc. We screw up pretty much everything and it will only be a matter of time before we kill of some microbe or tiny fish in some unknown river that starts a huge chain reaction that dooms the entire planet. I doubt it will happen in the my future, but I think it will happen, if we don't get stuck in a Nuclear Winter, or release some form of Ebola (accidentally?) or the whole Prion thing flares up (look that up, it's scary).

Small boys by nature crash toy cars, stomp on toys and want to generally break things. It's built in to at least half the species. Why should we think that we can make this planet work? Greed will eventually do us in. That and the quest for absolute power.

All personal opinion and I'll refrain from making further comment on all that, not germain to the topic really. I still like that bumper sticker however.

Sean McHenry

I'll take mine medium rare
 

Some of us (myself included) are extremely comfortable with our position at the top of the food chain. Bringing this back to videography, most of our projects to date have involved shooting sportfishing and big game hunting. You can see a few small examples at our website

http://www.redhawk-development.com/

It is hard to beat fresh caught Mahi Mahi cooked on the boat after a full day of fishing (or Halibut or Salmon or whatever, depending on whether we are fishing in Prince William Sound or the Sea of Cortez). Some would argue (not I) that those who have not lived off the land have lost touch with nature and their humanity.

I have spent enough time outdoors to be completely cured of any romantic view of some idyllic nature. Part of the beauty of nature is the brutal competition and often outright cruelty. Have you ever seen a pod of Orca's in Ressurection Bay (aptly named) playing catch with a seal pup until they are bored, and then just leave the corpse (or tossing sea otters sky high just for fun)? I have. Or cleaned the parasites off fresh-killed game? Or on a different time scale (decades and centuries) watched Black Oak trees entwined with Douglas Fir trying to grow fast enough to compete for sunlight, but unable to keep up with the faster growing conifers. It is the lion's claw that shapes the gazelle's leg. Man is part of nature, and I at least am very comfortable with our role. I worry more that the city dwellers grow soft and afraid to eat meat...

I better not say anything more or Chris will revoke all my posting priveleges. I apologize in advance Chris, since I told you I would try not to respond to this kind of thing (I tried...).

I agree with Mike that we should (read: MUST) let this aspect of the conversation go. There's an entire spectrum of innumerable strongly held opinions on animal rights. We all have our opinions on the issue and none of us is going to change anyone else's mind. And it is a political topic that does not belong on DVinfo.

The title topic is close enough to the edge here and was cause for the moderators to be especially watchful of the thread from the get-go. If the thread stays political, it'll be shot dead and eaten raw.

PS: My wife double-dog dared me to actually post that last sentence. So there it is.

agh. hey guys, don't let this conversation devolve into exactly what it is NOT supposed to be...if anyone has anything to contribute about the technical and creative aspects of wildlife VIDEOGRAPHY, let's hear from that camp. quick, so we can get this thread back on track.

quick, look at the birdie!

http://www.ourmedia.org/node/153752

muuuuuuch better....

Believe it or not, I'm actually NOT stepping in here to close this thread, but rather to thank Meryem and everyone involved for keeping such a spirited debate on a relatively even and mostly well-behaved keel. I have critics out there who like to say that I'm afraid of hosting a "real" debate on DV Info Net; here's an instance where I can certainly indicate one and, even better, point out that it really didn't go to hell in a handbag. Well done. Slowly backing away... well done. Move along. Good job. Run along now.

As Michael, Chris (who owns this site), Meryem, and myself have all clearly indicated, this is not a place for political views to be expressed. Although it isn't strictly true that nobody on the forum shoots wildlife with weapons, that is NOT what this thread is about. It is about videographic "shooting."

Now, enough said.

Political grand-standing has been hunted down, shot with a bow, cleaned and eaten raw. We now return this thread back to Meryem's capable hands.

admire beauty & then
 

Thank you Meryem for the pleasure of enjoying your kestrel picture.

In full size the detail is beautifully revealed and then the light in his eye discloses serious intention ... what do we say? yeah what do we say? and why do we say those things? why do we pretend to be gods and to airbrush the fact that we too are (among other things) part of nature's food chain ... Your kestrel shows me how basic instinct (unlike instincts to self-indulge, self-abuse, self-aggrandise etc) can bring out the best in natural design and nudge me too however slowly towards self-awareness ... The quality of the shot is another matter ... I have yardage of griffon vultures gliding by even at eye level but hardly a glimpse of an eye-ball anywhere ... what a difference it makes!

May I indulge myself in the details of the shot please? Did you take it? Where? What equipment? Handheld? If not, did you know the location to be a favourite perch?

brendan, you have the most lovely way with words. chris hurd oughta name you dvinfo's poet laureate.

the shot of the kestrel was a bit off topic, too, i just tossed it up to short-circuit the growing foment. i've really enjoyed this conversation.

the kestrel shot has the privileges of a still photo. no interlacing, higher resolution. i shot it with a digital rebel and my big boomer sigma 300-500mm lens on the day the lens arrived in the mail, resting it on a beanbag on my car window. it was the first thing i ever shot with this lens. it arrived in the mail, and i was so excited, i threw it in the car and drove out to my friend's farm, and i could see some sort of bird of prey sitting in a tree. it was so far away, i couldn't tell what it was without the lens. it's another case in which an interesting subject showed up just when i was wishing for exactly such a subject. i drive by the farm periodically, hoping for more such drive-by/fly-by opportunities but haven't had any since. i love this lens. it's super sharp. it's difficult to manage at a whopping 12 pounds.

but it's great for maintaining long distances from your subject and still appearing right up close (back on topic!). even though the lens is enormous, you can be so far away that you don't spook the wildlife with it. i took this shot from about 70 yards while sitting in a truck.

They call it the blarney, Meryem - you get it by kissing a stone in the SW of Ireland.

I just christened my new mini Canon camera on an English kestrel, but seconds later the camera went completely dead - no elecroonics, no transport; I cannot even extract my tape with the kestrel footage. The camera is back with Canon. I just hope they return the tape with the camera.

Problem is, how can I ever trust this camera again?

that's rotten luck. what model camera?

usually, when bad things happen, (and oh how they do!) lightening usually doesn't strike twice. whole new awful problems arise to replace them!

It is an MVX350i, you may know it as the Elura 90(?) - nothing like the quality of my XM2, but it is very small and light. I am hoping that it will enable me to get some footage in places where I simply cannot lug the proper outfit. I have often seen eagles, peregrines, etc when climbing in Scotland, and regretted not having a camera. The likelihood of damage to the expensive XM2 is just too great in these conditions.

I hope you are right about the lightning! At least the dealer is loaning me another camera for my trip to Scotland over the next three weeks.

All of us Gaels are inflicted with the disorder and we canna help oursels but to run off at the mouth. Give us a keyboard and you get inundated with it!

I have a very good camcorder-----one of the best I've used. Except that I can't use it----unless it's for insignificant stuff. It works just great, most of the time, but at its whim, it takes French leave from its duties and shuts down tight. If I took it on any important shoot and it stopped dead, I'd have only myself to blame, as I know well how bad its work-ethic is. Try to get Canon to give you another new camera, so you'll have some peace of mind.

kissing 'n all that
 

As the poet laureate (in-waiting & blushing madly) I must attend to my public image by disassociating myself from the practice (common among our tourists) of kissing inanimate objects. In fact I swear that I'm very fussy about what I kiss, especially in SW of Ireland. Who I'm prepared to kiss is becoming an increasingly rare question ... but nearby, also in SW of I, Limerick springs to mind (&my true literary form, plagiarism):

In Eden, one evening, young Adam
Was fondling the loins of his madam
And tickled to death
He surmised, on this earth
There were only 2 balls 'n he had 'em

I'm sorry I don't know whether he was wearing his lenses or sitting on a shooting stick at the time (go on say that again quickly, go on ..

How interesting this post ended up! Great read. Reminds me of a family reunion I attended during the end of the fall of timber cutting in Oregon. The most interesting question was "What are you going to do now the trees have all been cut down".... I instantly understood the power of the media!!!!!!

When compiling my last thread to include a limerick disproving my poetic prowess I forgot that this Forum has a range of readers some of whom might find my limerick inappropriate. If you think likewise, Chris perhaps you\'d be so kind as to delete/edit my thread.

Sorry, to anyone offended.

Onward!

It has been my experience that if you\'re Irish, people expect that you might say almost anything and so you can say almost anything.

Well if that\'s not unacceptable within company policy then I might as well test out mythology, even gossip, about ..

The cameraman from Pitlochery
Whose morals were nought but a mockery
Who, under his bed
Kept a lady instead
Of the homely & functional crockery

.. this can only lead to trouble, I know. However if asked to provide study notes to accompany this quaint language I shall have to decline. Tomorrow my granddaughter aged 1.5 will remind me that there are some things we can usefully work out for ourselves. I must ask her to be more specific ..

Brendan, if your creative expressions become a bit too ripe for the general population here, post them in Gaelige and no one will protest.

4 letter words
 

Ripe. Good word Steve. First felt the meaning of it when I was 5 or 6, couldn\'t climb the fence to get to a pear tree and my big brother refused to pick any until they were ripe. Oh the pain of it ..

.. is this thread reincarnating itself as The Ethics of Wildfruit Picking .. I don\'t think so; granddaughter said nothing about it before she rolled her buggy up \'n down the lane and i rolled her in a buggy up \'n down the lane \'n she fell asleep.

But if we start thinking in Gaeilge it could splutter along for a while about The Ethics of Wild Irish Shooting or Wild Scots Evicting .. better not perhaps; \'twould only bring us back to Q.E 1 and her motto "Off with their heads". Now there\'s a title for a thread .. God, the times have changed alright

i\'m resurrecting this thread because i saw something quite interesting recently on cousteau\'s ocean adventures. it was this footage of cousteau the younger and a colleague hopping into the ocean with great white sharks and no cage. not only were they freely floating with the great whites, both divers actually hitchhiked on the great white dorsal fin. yes, they rode the great white sharks. it was pretty amazing footage but pretty disturbing, too, to see them inches away from the big scary mouth of a great white.

so, what is the difference between what they did and timothy treadwell. one difference that leaps to mind is that there are no issues with the great white acclimating to humans to the point that they are killed to protect the human space. that\'s for sure a consideration.

but i want to pose the question again, with the great white, rather than the bear as the backdrop. is the main difference that treadwell got munched and cousteau survived? or are there other unnamed ethical considerations to collapsing the distance between the shooter and the object?

Meryem,

People do dangerous things everyday. The greatest problem is the media and giving any credence to what they portray. I have been involved in wildlife biology sense being part of a raptor survey back in 1970.
It bogels my mind that such a vast majority of people do not relaize it is not disneyland out there. The jackals do not talk to the lions!! my experience with most wildlife is that hunting them with lens or weapon makes the game more leary, not tamer. Does it effect their overal behavior? of course it does. Just like no scientist can study anything without an effect upon it.
the greatest effect on any species is loss of environment through encrochment of one form or another. animals in these altered environments act differently than those in pristine environments.

If you are in the pristine environment you will have less worry than in a marginal environment.

the coastal regions of British Columbia now have cougar problems where they are effecting people and other creatures in the mariginal environments.

you could hike into the back country of the northern rockies and never have a cougar come for you. any predator that becomes handicapped in the smallest manner will turn to easier and unnatural quarries, be it cats, dogs children or foolish photographers.

Where I grew up there was a fenced resavoir and and as youngsters we used to sneak in there and hunt cougars with our bows. It was a non firearm area and you could spot 3 to 7 cougars any day just laying out in the grass. They never bothered people as there was an abundance of deer. They were still amazingly difficult to get close to even though they saw people daily.

So when it comes to ethics of field ettiquitte I think that just common sense should prevail. Yes, I know sometimes common sense is not so common. Anyone stupid enough to get close to film a bear and its cubs gets what they deserve and there is one less idiot out there.

Back to the whiteshark thing. If you are in the wrong environment, or at the wrong place at the wrong time because you do not know the animals biology you will get only what you deserve.

Reminds me of an inuit kid at school in churchill. the polar bears were held up waiting for the ice pack. the principal of the school reminded the kids to stay on grounds and look out for each other. One of the kids, not schooled in the country strayed a couple hundred yards away. Kind of hard on the principal to pick up his had and reamining pieces!! Harder to tell the parents.

Meryem,

I see your point but, one big difference is that the Cousteaus do a great many other things other than ride Great White dorsals. Treadwell tried to stake his claim exclusively by tempting fate with grizzlies.

I found Treadwells story to be disturbing, and I didn\'t find too many redeeming qualities in him... but maybe it\'s just me. As the story unfolded it seemed as if he had somewhat of a deathwish. And now he has been immortalized on film - albeit perhaps as more of a tragic figure than he had hoped.