So long as they haven't been tortured, I don't really see anything wrong with posting pictures of dead animals. Death is just as much a part of the world as life is.
Plus, dead animals can provide good references. Getting a well done photo of a hawk's wings to be able to see the patterns is extremely difficult, since they are in motion in flight, and don't like to be touched and made to spread their wings. I'd prefer them alive, yes, but if I wanted a reference for a hawk wing and someone had a picture of a dead one (that they didn't kill or harm) the way I wanted to see it, why not have it up to be used?
There was some stupid kid on here (and I think he still is, unfortunately) who took pictures of a dead rat he had killed by dumping boiling water on it... Then there was some other kid who took a picture of a deer his dad had killed and was dressing (gutting) and was acting like it was somehow funny and that he wished it would have been alive when it happened.... Neither of those should be allowed on here, ever, and I don't think this policy allows them to be. That's perfectly ok with me.
A person I watch (*brandozim) has been posting pictures of a natural museum he works in, pictures that are going to be included in a book. Some of them have included dead people, so I've been worried that they be removed.
Also, as it is, posting pictures of eg. meat (you mostly see it in stock photos) has been allowed, but posting people of dead animals that are not in edible format hasn't been. I think that's a bit strange, and I'm glad it was changed.
And I can see that someone might want to post a picture of, say, them holding their beloved cat that just has passed away as a tribute to the memory of their pet. I don't see anything wrong with that, but according to the old rules it was technically a violation of the policy.
Not a matter of encouraging it but there has been photography done in museums of natural science that we have, in the past removed. Also if you are not familiar with Joel Peter Witkin you should refer to his work as well.
I'm well aware of Witkin's work, it's brilliant, albeit disturbing. I haven't seen ANY of the the natural science work, I would be interested to see it! I saw an exhibit down in Minnesota showcasing donated bodies to science and anatomy; it was just remarkably neat.
I don't think this change in policy will really affect the site, although the first thing that came to mind was people working at morgues taking pictures of dead people and passing it as art. I don't have to worry with that, we've got a great policy enforcement at this site!
Yup and we of course will be asking for proof for anything like that, not too mention taking photos from morgues, funeral homes etc is highly illegal and would get reported in a split second
I take it you also have never been to any natural science museums, nor ever seen photos and video of mummified corpses, or ever seen photojournalism in war torn areas?
Devious Comments
Plus, dead animals can provide good references. Getting a well done photo of a hawk's wings to be able to see the patterns is extremely difficult, since they are in motion in flight, and don't like to be touched and made to spread their wings. I'd prefer them alive, yes, but if I wanted a reference for a hawk wing and someone had a picture of a dead one (that they didn't kill or harm) the way I wanted to see it, why not have it up to be used?
There was some stupid kid on here (and I think he still is, unfortunately) who took pictures of a dead rat he had killed by dumping boiling water on it... Then there was some other kid who took a picture of a deer his dad had killed and was dressing (gutting) and was acting like it was somehow funny and that he wished it would have been alive when it happened.... Neither of those should be allowed on here, ever, and I don't think this policy allows them to be. That's perfectly ok with me.
Also, as it is, posting pictures of eg. meat (you mostly see it in stock photos) has been allowed, but posting people of dead animals that are not in edible format hasn't been. I think that's a bit strange, and I'm glad it was changed.
And I can see that someone might want to post a picture of, say, them holding their beloved cat that just has passed away as a tribute to the memory of their pet. I don't see anything wrong with that, but according to the old rules it was technically a violation of the policy.
I don't think this change in policy will really affect the site, although the first thing that came to mind was people working at morgues taking pictures of dead people and passing it as art. I don't have to worry with that, we've got a great policy enforcement at this site!