I’ve mentioned a number of times, it can be a challenge trying to look for awesome pictures for you all every day due to unlabeled, uncited, or just falsely presented pictures.

This one was pretty egregious today. Nothing says woodland camouflage like an owl looking like a toddler sized piece of candy corn!

Now, while there are no challenges for me here determining if this is real, I’m sure countless other people just scrolling will have no clue. To make it worse, I checked out the page’s feed, and they have some really good photos that I have shared with you guys, watermarks and/or credit to the photographer removed of course, as well as some things that look cool, but even have me stumped if they’re real.

Is this a nice, albeit highly processed photo of a Bare Shanked Screech, or is it fake? Colors are close but exaggerated, no photographer credit for me to follow up on, so I would pass on sharing this with you guys.

I get recommended dozens of these image groups every time I look on social media for pictures and stories. I’m only subbed to real rescues and wildlife photography groups, but I keep getting recommended anything with an owl shaped image.

Let me know your thoughts on this. Should there be some type of disclaimer on AI images? Do we let people figure it out on their own? How do we keep aggregaters from passing off the images as real? I feel these are questions we should be asking right now.

Would you guys want to have maybe one monthly post of bizarre images I’ve found during the previous month, or do you get enough of this stuff already on your own you don’t want to see any more? I’m forced to look at them, so if you’re interested in a Best of the Worst kind of thing, let me know.

  • aasatru
    24•8 months ago

    I appreciate your efforts!

    In an ideal world it would always be possible to credit the photographer, but I guess that’s sadly unrealistic.

    If there’s an interest for fakes I guess the could be a “Fowl Friday” or something like that every month, where fake owls are allowed/encouraged if properly tagged. I guess the value would be educational, showing people how to tell that impressive-looking wildlife photography is fake. You’re an expert of this, and it’s very much appreciated that you share your insights. :)

    • anon6789OP
      15•8 months ago

      I do give it my best, since I want to remain a trusted source for all your owl related things. I don’t know much about photography or image editing so when people talk about shadows not matching, image artifacts and the like, I’m not so good with noticing that.

      I just try to apply what I do know and use my critical thinking, and if there’s any doubt, I’ll just move on rather than end up accidentally misleading you all. I’ve spent months now building up your respect, but I know it can quickly be undone if I’m not vigilant. I respect you syo and your time, so I wouldn’t like it if I let you down.