There is a great deal of discussion in the art world about how we use reference material for inspiration. For realists who are landscape, portrait, or still life painters, it is possible to paint en plein air or with a live subject or with a set of items. For wildlife artists, however, our subjects do not sit still, and they are hard to find in the wild.

A few very lucky wildlife artists are able to travel to locations where they can reliably get photos of animals, such as at wildlife refuges in Africa. Most of us only have access to zoos and sanctuaries, unless we are able to spend a great deal of time in the wild. Some professional photographers spend their lives seeking the perfect shot, and the results can be spectacular. But pursuing the life of an expert photographer vs. that of being a professional artist usually means having to make a choice. It is a rare artist who is also a photographer willing to trek to a remote location and wait in perfect stillness for hours or days for an animal to show itself, and hopefully get a perfect shot, and then still have time to spend in the art studio producing excellent paintings.

Some photographers set up trail cameras in remote areas, which are motion activated. Those can produce some wonderful shots. Trail cams must be checked regularly, so multiple repeated hikes are required. Trail cam photos, as with photos at zoos and such, usually require that an artist substitute a background other than the one taken; otherwise all the animals depicted would have the same background.

Many wildlife artists have favorite photographers with whom they develop a relationship whereby the photographer gives the artist permission to use their work. Even so, a good artist never copies a photo precisely – what would be the point, since the image already exists? Changes are almost always made by the artist – even if they are subtle – because great photography is not the same as great art. Some photos that are compelling are those of animals doing things that are unusual or unlikely, but would be unbelievable as a painting. Wildlife artists strive to depict animals doing interesting things, but not highly unusual ones.

Some wildlife artists conceive of a painting in their imagination and then set about recreating it on canvas (or paper or in whatever medium they use). This is a difficult but effective method because it produces some very interesting paintings. It requires an intimate knowledge of the details of the subject imagined or, at the very least, one must refer to a number of reference photos to ensure accuracy. These photos would not be copied but merely consulted.

Some popular venues for wildlife artists and photographers are “game farms”. These are businesses that keep animals that are bred for the trade, making them available for special photo shoots for which photographers and videographers pay top dollar. It is generally assumed that this practice is acceptable since the animals are ambassadors for their wild counterparts. Each year there are new babies – a big attraction – some are born on site and some are purchased. A grizzly bear cub, for instance, may cost the venue over $10,000. Multiply that by six or ten babies of various species, and that’s a lot of money. The fees paid by customers are unlikely to cover that kind of expense, let alone the feeding and care of numerous animals, which are often housed indoors and only brought out for photo sessions. Many photographers and artists never ask themselves the question, “What happens when the babies grow up – wouldn’t the game farm become overpopulated since there are new animals added every year?” Yes, in fact, they would. When asked, the proprietors of these establishments will often say they sell them to zoos. But zoos are overloaded, as are rescue centers. (There are now, for instance, some 40,000 tigers living in captivity around the world, while only about 5000 remain in the wild.) In actuality, most game farms are exactly what they say they are: they are farming game. Game is the term for animals that are hunted. Although some may be kept well into adulthood, the excess animals are too often used in a practice called canned hunting, in which they are put in a restricted area from which they cannot escape, to be shot by “hunters” who pay up to $75,000 (that is a verified amount, but some may be paying more) for a “guaranteed-kill” canned hunting experience.

Interestingly, in group photo shoots, usually at a game farm or a location to which game farm animals are taken, a number of people are taking pictures of the same animal at once. This results in several artists all having essentially the same reference photos. I was once at a show where I saw a painting that looked like an exact copy of one of my own photos. Had I not remembered that this particular artist had been standing beside me during a specific photo shoot, I would have thought she had stolen my photo. But in reality, she merely did her painting from her photo before I did my painting of my same photo – and now I can never do my painting because an artist’s work is automatically copyrighted (if it is dated).. The potential for misunderstanding in such situations is real. (Also, since I learned the above information about game farms, I will never support one again.)

Needless to say, reference material usage can be a controversial subject among artists. Ideally, an artist would work solely from photos they themselves had taken, or solely from their own imaginations. Some societies or shows require this, which makes sense for landscape, portrait, and still life artists. For wildlife artists, such requirements are essentially elitist, as they effectively limit entrants to those in very good health and possessing exceptional outdoor skills and photographic equipment. Disabled artists are therefore automatically excluded, as are the elderly and also those without the funds to travel or pay for exclusive photo shoots, even though among those three groups there are some very fine artists.

For my own art, I use the following reference methods:

1. My own photos taken at zoos and sanctuaries, with permission. Many sanctuaries are actually run by rescue organizations, and that is a very good thing. They should be supported.

2. My own photos taken when I had a chance encounter in a wild location. Places like Yellowstone National Park and Rocky Mountain National Park are great locations where animals can sometimes be seen reliably enough to get good photos. (Strict protocols for wildlife encounters are in place in most national parks.)

3. Occasionally I will visit a zoo. I do not like supporting zoos, however; as much as I enjoy seeing the creatures, I cannot condone imprisoning wild animals for profit. After all, my art is meant to promote the right of wildlife to roam free. Some zoos participate in breeding of endangered species to secure their survival, yet some are actually selling the babies to other for-profit zoos and organizations. One very good zoo, however, is the Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum, which houses many reasonably contented animals that are well cared for in comfortable habitats and are never trafficked. I like taking photos there.

4. Photos taken by other photographers who have given me permission to use them for reference. I do not, however, copy them in every detail, but rather add, delete, or change certain details.

5. My own imagination. I often have an image pop into my mind that is compelling, and I then seek out reference photos from numerous sources to see that I get certain details right, without actually copying the images.

As much as I would love to be able to trek to remote locations and lie in wait for hours or days for an animal to appear, my age no longer allows such activity. But I humbly offer my art to the world, and my hope is that those who enjoy my work will feel the heart within it.