Bear facing Wolf by Lasse Niskala

[Martti Kujansuu]

Finnish photographer Lasse Niskala took this photograph two years ago but just recently posted it to his Facebook account. The photograph was taking from a hidden booth with meat offered to the animals. Remember to check his other wildlife photographs at http://www.lasseniskala.com/.

[Dreadhead]

wow stunning! couldnt imagine him trying to get that close with a disposable camera

[woof]

Fantastic photo, thanks for posting it.

Rob

[blacktimberwolf]

Nice one though I think the bear is a few meters further away from the camera than the wolf.so they arn't in fact nose to nose..& the bear is looking slightly to his left.& the wolf is staring straight ahead..
Had a look at his other photos & he has some great wolf pics there.

[Urban X]

Mmmm looks like a double exposure or shopped image to me lol, good pic though.


Si

[spoony]

Mmmm looks like a double exposure or shopped image to me lol, good pic though.


Si

check the link to the website and you will see more of bears and wolves together

[Urban X]

Well they're either extremely tame with each other or they're photo manipulations of some kind.



2 bears fighting in the background and the wolf just casually jogs on without even looking, umm, it isn't natural and I don't care how many pics have bears and wolves in them lol.

I'd like to see the originals or video before I'll believe that, famous photographer or not.


Si

[Martti Kujansuu]

Well they're either extremely tame with each other or they're photo manipulations of some kind.

As I stated on my opening post, carcases are offered to the animals in order to get them into photographer's view. With unlimited nutrition available to bears, wolves and wolverines alike they tend to tolerate each other's present.

[Urban X]

Still looks wrong to me... but hey, I'm merely an amateur photographer (although I have been paid for a few).


Si

[southey]

And these are wild life pics, is that your area?

Still looks wrong to me... but hey, I'm merely an amateur photographer (although I have been paid for a few).


Si

[Urban X]

It doesn't matter what 'area' my pics are in, I tend not to get pigeon holed, I take anything from my UrbEx, industrial to, landscape, to portrait and wildlife, a staged pic is a staged pic whether manipulated by camera, software or otherwise.

I said it's a good pic but it 'looks like' a double exp or PS image to me and still does, especially the 2nd one, in which I also said they must be tame with each other if not!


Si

[southey]

My question about it being your area is to wheather you have spent a long time studdying the behaviour of Wolves and bears in various enviroments. Enough to comment In a knowledgeable manner deriding the validity of the pictures?

[Urban X]

No have you?

I'm really not fussed whether you think my perception of the pictures is derisive or not, they look staged/altered to ME ok and IMHO good pics, not great pics.

Just been having a look at another of his albums

http://www.janimage.com/kojukory/ind...tavaloilla-212

Looks to ME like the eagle has been masked and the background pushed, IMHO of course.


Si

[southey]

No I haven't, but then I'm not stating that I think the these pics are faked or not. If I were, I would have done my research beforehand. Have a nice day

[Urban X]

Yeah you too


Si

[shaggystu]

absolutely fantastic photo's, especially the first one. as to whether or not they've been "photo-shopped" in some way, well yeah, i tend to assume that every image i see these days has been manipulated to some extent, every "good" photographer i've spoken to plays around with their digital images at least a little bit.

My question about it being your area is to wheather you have spent a long time studdying the behaviour of Wolves and bears in various enviroments. Enough to comment In a knowledgeable manner deriding the validity of the pictures?

it would be nice to hear from someone who has studied bear/wolf behaviour to give us some insight wouldn't it

cheers

stuart

[Urban X]

it would be nice to hear from someone who has studied bear/wolf behaviour to give us some insight wouldn't it

Indeed it would but it wouldn't make much difference to the amount of manipulation in those pics

I couldn't borrow your sig Stuart?


Si

[Martti Kujansuu]

I'd like to see the originals or video before I'll believe that, famous photographer or not.

A similar scene from Viking Wilderness. Notice that the wolves and bear get quite close before the even start to nibble each other.

[twisted firestarter]

This clip of a Grizzly and an arctic wolf was taken in 2005 when two brothers paddled a canoe across Canada, shame the quality isn't better...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I49K_9pcIn8

Their whole canoe adventure is worth a watch too imo...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjTQsGxHyRc

[Wayland]

I'm not an expert in Wildlife photography but I am pretty handy at Landscape and Photoshop.

In my experience the powers of Photoshop are often greatly exaggerated, particularly by those that do not know much about photography.

Pictures can be manipulated it is true but nearly always leave some tell tale signs.

I don't see such signs in the images under discussion.

I do see rim lighting on the eagle feathers consistent with the light direction and I do see a difference in distance compressed by the perspective of a long focal length lens on the wolf and bear picture.

It is also possible that the background of the eagle shot has been blurred slightly to concentrate the attention on the leading bird but that would be considered perfectly acceptable in Wildlife photography circles.

There is certainly no evidence or need to call the honour or the integrity of this photographer into question.

[Urban X]

The quality of those pictures is no where near good enough to tell. I know well what photoshop of capable of I've used it since it's first inception, anyone even half decent with it could produce changes in images that could not be seen at that resolution

Indeed Wayland, NO evidence either way as we don't have the original images to look at, no exif data, just some poor quality images from a gallery.


Si

[RonW]

Lovely pics!

There is quit some footage of bear and wolf being very close to one another, without signs of hostility when there is no food involved. The series of wild Scandinavia show that in the Finland-episode for instance. And even when food is involved the violence is a lot less than one would expect.

@ Urban X; first you say that to you it looks as if the pics are altered (post 5 and 13), but a little later you state that as a fact (post 17). Unless you are an expert on wildlifefotography and/or an expert on picturealteration and/or an expert in bear/wofbehaviour, I suggest you should be a little more carefull with accusations like that, unless offcourse you were present at the moment the pictures were taken....
In any other case you sig suits you very well.......

[Urban X]

Sig wasn't for me Ron.

I'm about as much of an expert on the above as the rest of you expressing opinions on validity I reckon, 'experts' often disagree wouldn't you say.

I'll stick with my opinion and you can stick with yours, I believe we have freedom of speech on this forum do we not?

Perhaps you'd be familiar with this Ron?

http://www.petapixel.com/2011/09/05/...faking-photos/


Si

[Wayland]

The quality of those pictures is no where near good enough to tell. I know well what photoshop of capable of I've used it since it's first inception, anyone even half decent with it could produce changes in images that could not be seen at that resolution

Indeed Wayland, NO evidence either way as we don't have the original images to look at, no exif data, just some poor quality images from a gallery.


Si

Precisely...

Yet the example that you point at, the eagle shot, shows a rim that if it were a composite would have been a certain give away.

If this photographer is a competent user of PS, as you suggest, he could easily have removed that rim and yet you suppose he has left it in place just so that you can spot it's a fake?

The exif is missing due to the gallery software so no real subterfuge there either.

I have been accused of faking pictures myself on several occasions, usually by people that are jealous that they have no such pictures in their own portfolios.

I do make small alterations in some shots, I am very open about that, but if I was capable of making the sort of alterations they suggest I do, I could earn myself a good living in the special effects industry.

To doubt a persons integrity upon a highly dubious supposition is tantamount to calling them a liar with no evidence and that is an accusation I would be very wary of setting down in writing on a public forum.

[Urban X]

Like I said you have your opinions and I have mine Wayland, we'll have to agree to disagree, or not. I didn't say he was hiding the exif data, I'm well aware why it isn't there :roll: I said there is no exif data so we can't use it to help verify anything can we.....

IMO the pics have been manipulated in yours they're pukka, nothing tantamount to anything.


Si