<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Award winning wildlife photo disqualified</title>
	<atom:link href="http://seekerphoto.co.uk/award-winning-wildlife-photo-disqualified/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://seekerphoto.co.uk/award-winning-wildlife-photo-disqualified/</link>
	<description>PR photography and commercial images in Dorset</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 13:48:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://seekerphoto.co.uk/award-winning-wildlife-photo-disqualified/comment-page-1/#comment-69</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Jan 2010 22:01:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://seekerphoto.co.uk/?p=206#comment-69</guid>
		<description>I know Richard, it&#039;s still a great photo but apparently they&#039;ve done a lot of research and as they said it seems likely.&lt;br&gt;

I think that might be legal toned down speech for &quot;we&#039;ve found the model wolf in question and checked it&#039;s booking diary&quot; or at least that&#039;s the impression I get from some other sources.&lt;br&gt;

I would, of course, have liked to have given the photographer the benefit of the doubt as well. It&#039;s not nice saying that someone cheated, but I guess that&#039;s why they&#039;re the judges and we&#039;re not.&lt;br&gt;

Definitely a Vietnamese Lady, by the way.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know Richard, it&#8217;s still a great photo but apparently they&#8217;ve done a lot of research and as they said it seems likely.</p>
<p>I think that might be legal toned down speech for &#8220;we&#8217;ve found the model wolf in question and checked it&#8217;s booking diary&#8221; or at least that&#8217;s the impression I get from some other sources.</p>
<p>I would, of course, have liked to have given the photographer the benefit of the doubt as well. It&#8217;s not nice saying that someone cheated, but I guess that&#8217;s why they&#8217;re the judges and we&#8217;re not.</p>
<p>Definitely a Vietnamese Lady, by the way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard</title>
		<link>http://seekerphoto.co.uk/award-winning-wildlife-photo-disqualified/comment-page-1/#comment-68</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Jan 2010 21:46:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://seekerphoto.co.uk/?p=206#comment-68</guid>
		<description>What a shame about the photo of the wolf..... not sure I like the phrase &quot;it was likely that the wolf featured in the image was an animal model&quot;.... seeing as how they are damning the photographer I&#039;d have liked them to be sure beyond all reasonable doubt!!!

Love your shot of the vietnamese lady.... or is it a man??</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What a shame about the photo of the wolf&#8230;.. not sure I like the phrase &#8220;it was likely that the wolf featured in the image was an animal model&#8221;&#8230;. seeing as how they are damning the photographer I&#8217;d have liked them to be sure beyond all reasonable doubt!!!</p>
<p>Love your shot of the vietnamese lady&#8230;. or is it a man??</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
