boviscopophobic
Member
I was photographing puffins last summer. Sometimes they would pull up a few blades of grass and walk around holding it in their beaks for a while -- this did not appear to be for nesting purposes, as they would eventually drop the grass when they got bored with it or forgot about it.
My ethical quandary arose when another photographer set out a few flower blossoms on the ground. I am not sure where they came from -- they may have been picked only a few miles away, but they definitely did not come from the area right by the puffin colony. The puffins immediately investigated the unfamiliar objects, picking them up and running around with them much like they would do with grass. The resulting photos, judged solely as images, were some of my favorites of the trip. But I worry whether they are suitable to be called wildlife photos. On the one hand, these were wild birds, they were not coerced in any way, and they were demonstrating natural behavior. On the other hand, the natural behavior was taking place with unnaturally placed flower blossoms.
What are your thoughts on this situation? Would you have any reservations about these photos?
My ethical quandary arose when another photographer set out a few flower blossoms on the ground. I am not sure where they came from -- they may have been picked only a few miles away, but they definitely did not come from the area right by the puffin colony. The puffins immediately investigated the unfamiliar objects, picking them up and running around with them much like they would do with grass. The resulting photos, judged solely as images, were some of my favorites of the trip. But I worry whether they are suitable to be called wildlife photos. On the one hand, these were wild birds, they were not coerced in any way, and they were demonstrating natural behavior. On the other hand, the natural behavior was taking place with unnaturally placed flower blossoms.
What are your thoughts on this situation? Would you have any reservations about these photos?