A Brazilian wildlife photographer who won a prestigious wildlife photography award has been stripped of the award. His photo contained a posed stuffed giant anteater instead of the wild living anteater he claimed. http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-43912583
It must really take some guts to enter a picture of a taxidermy specimen and claim it's a living wild animal!
This is the first time I’ve heard anyone cheat in wildlife photography! I wonder why it took so long to find out?
It's not the first time a faked photo has won an award at Wildlife Photographer of the Year - I still remember the furore that surrounded the 2010 competition when the overall winner was disqualified for entering a photograph that contained what was almost certainly a tame wolf from a nearby zoological park. BBC News - Jumping wolf photographer loses wildlife prize
It's becoming increasingly common. The one DesertRhino mentioned, with the wolf, was a huge thing in the photography world and took months to come out. It's a big problem for every major (and minor) photo contest, at this point. Fake animals, staged situations, claiming a situation is something that it isn't, even entering photos that aren't theirs. I remember seeing this photo when it won and really liked it. The dedication and photographic skill it would have taken if the animal was alive were breathtaking. It's really disappointing to find out it was staged.
In this case (anteater) I am not convinced it is a fake. The photographer says it is not and as a photographer myself I tend to side with him. The markings are NOT the same, in spite of what the experts claim. The light spots on the tail are different and the large black stripe on the torso has a straight bottom on the night shot and a wavy bottom on the taxidermy shot. Furthermore, it would be extremely difficult to make the taxidermy appear as if it was taken under the same flash that lit up the night scene (which illuminates the nearby grass as well). There are some very adept Photoshop artists, so it is not impossible, nor is it impossible for him to alter the fur pattern. I am just saying I am not convinced and I think their only real evidence is that the pose is similar.
The photographers always say they didn't do it, unfortunately, even when shown absolute proof. I tend to trust the experts in cases like this; the people running the contest went above and beyond in hiring people who would be able to best identify what was going on. The flash was brief, to light up the animal. The sky, etc are from an additional long exposure done in the same frame, after the flash. He didn't take two separate photos, he moved the taxidermy to the site of the photo. That part is real.
You must get scammed a lot if you think a conman saying "I'm not lying" means they aren't lying. The animal in the photo is very clearly the same as the stuffed anteater. The reason the markings are slightly "different" is because the second photo in the article which is used to illustrate the taxidermy specimen is not taken from exactly the same angle as in the competition photo.
Interesting that the photographer says he is going back to the location to prove his innocence. I wonder how he could do that? I also wonder if he had help from someone who works at the visitor center, in which case that person may reveal their story in due time? This is what happened in the case of Lance Armstrong referenced in the title. He got away with it for years until a former teammate (Floyd Landis) finally revealed the inside story.
