Bear Personalities; Nature or Nurture?

[NorthernFocus]

Continuing to work over my files. These are probably two of the most beautiful bears I've ever seen. Under overcast skies the mother looked the color of a weimaraner dog. With WB "corrected" her fur looks more of a reddish blonde. The second year cub, comparable to a teenager in human terms, was very dark with a fading "collar". Both of them had absolutely flawless coats with no molting, rub marks, scars, etc. Unfortunately this pair only appeared at the creek this one time during our trip and then only for a little while.

The mom was very confident and not at all concerned with the presence of us three photographers. But the cub seemed very paranoid, never taking its eyes off of us and clinging tightly to the mother's side. Which brings to mind the classic nature vs nurture argument. Perhaps the father is paranoid

Nikon D810, 500mm f4 VR, tripod

As always best viewed in the light box.

1) Coming down the creek with the youngster hanging very close to it's mother's side. One of the few times the mother looked at the camera.


2) Cub rubbing lovingly against its mother's side. Bears cubs and mothers show a lot of affection towards one another. Particularly when there is a single cub the mother/child bond seems to be very strong.


3) The cub has noticed us and can't take its eyes off us. Mom is concentrating on fishing.


4) Too much of a good thing. Trying to concentrate on fishing, the mother finally gets annoyed by the needy cub and applies a bit of discipline. What I love about this shot is that the cub is looking at the camera as if it's embarrassed at being scolded in public.


Nos. 5-7 shot with Nikon D4, 80-400mm VR, handheld.

5) After being scolded the cub falls back in line but keeps watching the pesky humans.


6) A bit later after catching a fish and eating it on the creek bank, another bear was approaching and caught the pair's attention. Again note how clingy the cub is.


7) With other bears moving around, the mom decided to leave. But the teenage cub gave us one last accusatory look as if we were the ones who spoiled the party.

[Bobobird]

WOW! again. A lovely set of shots. I like them all but #6 more so - very classic if that is the right word to use.

[Mike Buckley]

Another stunning series! And your narrative continues to be so informative. As just one example, I would never have thought about what makes one bear more beautiful than another bear until you explained some characteristics that would make that so.

[IzzieK]

All of them needed a bit of "talkies", like in the #1, the mother seems to indicate to you photographers to keep your distance from them. And in the last one the cub seems saying goodbye to all of you..."I will miss you" sort of expression. All of them are nicely exposed. Another good job!

[Shadowman]

Great series.

[Dave Humphries]

Thanks Dan,

Another very educational narrative and excellent photos.

[LePetomane]

Dan, once again, very impressive photos and narrative. I like them all but # 2 is special.

[Donald]

Again, all I can do is express my admiration at such a standard of photography. A privilege to be amongst those able to view these images.

[Rebel]

Beautiful shots Dan, never get tired of your bears!

[NorthernFocus]

Thanks for the comments, folks. Glad you enjoyed the post.

One thing that was problematic when I was editing these shots is how much difference there was in the auto WB as determined by the camera. Since they were going to be presented together it seemed that the colors should match as well as possible. They were shot within just a few minutes of one another so I assumed consistent lighting and corrected 1-5 to the same WB and 6-7 to another setting. But when doing so there was significant color variation between shots. Presumably the thickness of the overcast sky was changing more that I realized (clouds filter red light). But none of the images have anything to use as a good neutral reference point. So on 1-5 I adjusted one image by eye until I was satisfied with the results. Then I used the sky reflected on the surface of the water as a reference and adjusted the other four shots to match. IOW the WB setting is different for each shot but the RGB histogram of the common reference match. It's not perfect but it did provide the more consistent results than trial/error and eyeballing it. I don't have that great an eye for color

[marlunn]

excellent series Dan, top class shots and great dialogue to go with them. The colours look good to me and in my mind i would expect variances as the lighting changes as they move around the environment and the angle of the light on the fur would impact the colour i saw if I was standing next to you. Looks to me that you have done very good job of matching them and still retaining a natural look to each.

[Brownbear]

+1 to Donald's comment... Truly a privilege to view. Inspirational wildlife photography!

[John 2]

Now come on Dan, too much of a good thing and it becomes common place. These are anything but. Yet another superb sequence and your description of the cubs paranoia brings it to life.

[madcrow]

I said it before and say it again, awesome, fabulous, fantastic, beautiful and thanks for sharing.

[Dave A]

Absolutely love this series. Well done.

Dave

[tbob]

I thought, he looks a bit big to be so shy. Then I remembered your images of the boars massive size and muscle mass relative to the sows. I would be a bit cautious as well.

[AlwaysOnAuto]

I don't know why, but every time I look at your bear photos Dan, I sit on the edge of my seat, ready to run, just in case the bears decide I'd make a better lunch than the fish in the river.
Great series as all of have said.
Thanks for sharing them with us.

[LePetomane]

Again, all I can do is express my admiration at such a standard of photography. A privilege to be amongst those able to view these images.

My thoughts exactly. What continues to impress me is that these magnificent animals are not phased by Dan's presence.

[FootLoose]

Great series, Dan. How close are you to these guys?

[Dave Humphries]

One thing that was problematic when I was editing these shots is how much difference there was in the Auto WB as determined by the camera. Since they were going to be presented together it seemed that the colors should match as well as possible.

I'm not at all surprised by the Auto WB differences, based on the (possibly cropped a bit in PP) compositions here, if you consider the differences between the ratio of browns (bears), greens (foliage backgrounds) and river (water and reflected sky) that the camera is seeing between these shots, it makes sense, doesn't it?

After all, it isn't looking up at the overcast, and I doubt any changes of actual colour temperature of the skylight is what is causing the problem in this series - granted it might be if:
a) the subject is sometimes/partly sunlit and sometimes/partly in shade, and/or
b) you are making large changes to the angle of shooting with respect to the sun's location in the sky.

Since they were going to be presented together it seemed that the colors should match as well as possible.

Absolutely.

It's at times like this; e.g. when editing a series of wildlife shots with backgrounds similar to yours (but not the subjects!), that I wish I had remembered to shoot an ambient Whi-Bal reference shot. Given that I rarely do that, the next best thing I can try is to select a 'representative' image in ACR and use one of the fixed temperature (daylight, cloudy, shade) and tweak temp and tint to taste, then apply those temp and tint figures across the series (which is pretty much what you did).

When I know I am shooting for a series of images, I am beginning to shoot more and more using an in camera selected fixed CT these days (even though I shoot RAW), so that I know that any CT changes I see in PP are due to the light, not the camera trying to second guess CT based on what it sees through the lens, which will very likely vary from shot to shot and introduce a randomness that serves useful no purpose.

Agreed, Auto-WB is useful for odd snaps and besides, if shooting RAW it can be overridden in PP without quality impact.

In awe of your shooting, Dave

PS re-reading your post, I may have slightly mis-understood what you meant, but most of what I say above is still valid (most of the time).