According to Ullas Karanth, wild animals have dominated his consciousness ever since he can remember. His father, a well-known Kannada writer, was not only deeply interested in the natural world himself, but also lacked faith in formal education of any kind. So, until he joined high school directly at the age of 11, Karanth was free to wander the woods around their home in rural Karnataka to his heart’s content, picking up natural history skills that would prove vital years later.

Today, Karanth is a renowned wildlife scientist who has spent virtually his entire adult life actively involved in conservation. His training and single-minded dedication, combined with a gift for clear thinking, makes him a formidable voice of reason, and this collection of 13 essays an invaluable contribution to the growing body of literature on India’s wildlife and its conservation. 

Karanth’s metamorphosis from amateur naturalist to wildlife scientist is both unusual and fascinating and is well documented in the first few essays of the book.  After graduating from college he tried his hand at being an Engineer and, later, toiled for several years as a farmer on the outskirts of the Nagarahole forest. Wildlife was a hobby, albeit a serious one.  Then, well into his thirties, he took a radical decision to abandon both vocations and train himself as a wildlife biologist.  This decision was spurred by the conviction that for conservation to succeed it had to be “based on a solid foundation of modern wildlife biology”.  A meeting with a delegation from the Smithsonian at the Bombay Natural History Society’s international wildlife conference in 1983 paved the way for his journey to the United States to pursue a degree in Wildlife Biology.

Since then, it is the study of the tiger that has dominated his life, and he has come to be recognized around the world for his exemplary work on the severely endangered big cat. This fascination with the ultimate predator was probably fuelled in no small measure by the shikar tales that he read as a school student, in particular, the “feverishly gripping” accounts of Kenneth Anderson.  Anderson’s books of high adventure in the south Indian jungles have inspired many an Indian naturalist and Karanth too came under their spell.  He got to know Anderson quite well later, and writes with admiration, affection and humour about the irascible Scot, whose enthralling stories have lost none of their shine to this day.

The first six essays in the book are in the nature of personal reminisces, written in an easy conversational style.  These cover the period up to the beginning of Karanth’s study of predator-prey relationships in Nagarahole, Karnataka, in the mid-80s, and include a chapter on his close friend of nearly four decades, the courageous and steadfast Forest Range Officer, K.M.Chinnappa.  The two first met in Nagarahole in the late 60s and found common ground in their passion for watching animals rather than hunting them. 

Under Chinnappa’s diligent and tough stewardship, the Nagarahole that Karanth had come to know, with it’s large-scale logging and rampant poaching, gradually underwent a miraculous transformation, turning into one of Asia’s finest wildlife reserves.  It was undoubtedly this transformation that made Karanth’s pioneering research here so productive for over two decades.

While the book’s first five chapters are engaging and informative, its true worth lies in its latter eight. Karanth’s incisive intellect is at work here, and he provides us with rare insights into the world of tigers, helping to dispel the fog of confusion that seems to enshroud their conservation.  These essays do demand more from the reader, but they are, in my opinion, essential reading for every serious naturalist and conservationist. 

Almost throughout the book Karanth highlights the need for science in conservation and decries the ‘science deficiency’ that extends to almost every aspect of wildlife management in India including, importantly, the monitoring of tigers.  In the chapter ‘The many ways to count a cat’ he demolishes fundamentally faulty “home-grown” methods of monitoring wildlife populations, such as ‘waterhole census’, ‘block census’ and ‘pugmark census’, which have gained widespread acceptance because they have gone unchallenged for too long. This “pseudo-data”, according to him, then enters the public domain without going through the scientific process of peer review and publication.  The result of this, he says, is that reliable, scientifically proven methods are ignored.

Wildlife conservation, he asserts, is no different in many ways to running a large and complex business enterprise. In this enterprise it is imperative that wildlife scientists be the accountants and auditors.  While recognizing that “old-style natural history and field craft – the domain of traditional hunters, collectors and naturalists – still forms the backbone of modern wildlife biology” he points out that this is only valuable when brought under the framework of science.  He warns that without scientifically accurate methods to measure the effectiveness of our actions, our efforts are “ bound to flounder, much like a business enterprise that carries on without ever drawing up a balance sheet”.

The last two chapters of the book are devoted to a discussion of the larger questions confronting conservation in India today.  How do we define wildlife conservation? Why should we try to conserve wildlife?  In these chapters Karanth argues against the “newly fashioned paradigm of ‘sustainable use’” whose proponents advocate “wise use’ of nature reserves by ‘local people”.  He cites a world-wide study of wildlife hunting that concluded that most local hunting in tropical forest areas, either for the pot or for markets, is unsustainable because it is occurring at intensities way above the productivity of the targeted animal populations.  

Karanth is one of the most lucid and pragmatic voices in wildlife conservation today and, in this deceptively small book, he articulates a strong case for more science in conservation. The book’s discrete chapters are extremely useful because I can see readers wanting to delve into some of the essays again and again. This is an important book that has come at a time when the tiger’s domain is besieged by numerous problems, and needs to be read by everyone who is concerned about the conservation of this “fragile predator”. 

Shekar Dattatri
(The reviewer is a wildlife and conservation filmmaker)

`A film seen by 50 empowered people is far more effective than a film seen by 50 million passive television viewers’

By Lalitha Sridhar

In a wide-ranging interview, award-winning wildlife filmmaker and conservationist Shekar Dattatri talks about filmmaking and conservation, and how filmmakers can be a bridge between the two. Dattatri is also founder of the Chennai-based Trust for Environmental Education and co-founder of Nature Quest, a forum that promotes conservation through creative collaboration and interactive events that aim to increase awareness and appreciation for nature

Do you feel that enough is being done for wildlife preservation in our country by the authorities and by private organisations?

I’ll put it this way -- the magnitude of the problems facing our wildlife is so enormous that if we were to double our efforts overnight, it still would not be enough. Unless we the people of this nation become far more proactive and demand stronger measures to protect and preserve what’s left, the government is not going to do very much more.

There are a few extremely vociferous and effective private organisations that are crusading tirelessly to preserve our forests and wildlife, but you can count them on the fingers of one hand. We need many more small effective groups around each national park and wildlife sanctuary focusing on the problems of that area. And, most importantly, NGOs and wildlife authorities must work together to solve the complex problems that beset conservation.

What do you feel is lacking?

At the government level what’s lacking is political will. For the great majority of our bureaucrats and politicians, wildlife conservation is a non-issue, not even worth lip service. What is worse, many of them are involved in aiding and abetting the continued destruction of our forests.

On the one hand, we have dedicated forest officers and forest guards putting their lives and careers on the line to protect what’s left. On the other hand, we have their political bosses signing death warrants for our forests by de-notifying protected areas and giving out mining licences. It’s a highly demoralising situation. But why blame the establishment alone? Unless we the people wake up to the fact that this is our precious heritage that is being pillaged and plundered, nothing will change. Forests and wildlife are national treasures that belong to all of us and the responsibility for the preservation of this irreplaceable heritage rests equally on our shoulders.

Most of us buy into the myth that overpopulation and poverty, two intractable problems of this country, are mainly responsible for the destruction of forests and wildlife. And, that the process of destruction is inexorable. In actual fact, a great many conservation problems are not caused by the poverty or needs of many, but the greed of a few. Analyse most conservation problems carefully and you’ll discover a small number of people or a cartel or industry plundering common resources for self-enrichment. Very often, eliminating these selfish interests is enough to solve a major problem. While poverty and overpopulation have to be tackled urgently for the long-term good of our environment and forests, simply blaming these factors for all our problems is not correct.

When did you get interested in wildlife, why filmmaking, and how did you hone your skills?

Even as a child I was fascinated by nature. Unfortunately, between the ages of five and nine, this interest manifested itself in a rather destructive way, and I’m afraid I used the catapult rather freely as a means to bring down small birds and animals for closer investigation. Luckily, it was at this time that my sister introduced me to books by Gerald Durrell. These, and other books on wildlife, gave my interest focus and direction and by the age of 10 I had discarded my catapult. At the age of 13, I visited the snake park in Chennai, fell in love with snakes and began working there as a volunteer. One thing led to another and I’ve ended up hunting wildlife with a camera!

What helped immensely was having a supportive family and older colleagues who reposed enormous faith in me. I never planned this as a career, but grabbed all the opportunities that came my way with both hands. In 1984, an American filmmaking couple, John and Louise Riber, came to Chennai to make a film on snakebites and I was deputed to help them. They knew very little about snakes, and I knew nothing about filmmaking, and we sort of learnt from each other.

After that, it was many years of trial and error and learning on the job while making small documentaries. In 1989, a few colleagues and I began a two-year film project on Silent Valley, which I shot and coordinated. The film won several prestigious international awards and proved to be an important stepping-stone. In 1991, an Inlaks scholarship gave me an opportunity to spend eight months working with Oxford Scientific Films in the UK -- an experience that gave me much-needed exposure to the latest techniques in wildlife filmmaking, and, equally importantly, helped me make useful contacts in the profession. I returned to India with an assignment to shoot footage for a Channel 4 wildlife documentary series called Wild India. Since then I’ve been busy with various projects and continue to hone my skills.

What is the role of wildlife and nature films? What is your personal approach to this medium?

The level of wildlife and conservation awareness in this country is abysmal. Take the school and college curricula, for instance. Even zoology courses in colleges don’t deal seriously enough with these vital issues. Thank god for television! By bringing wildlife into peoples’ drawing rooms, documentaries are helping sensitise people to the beauty of nature and the problems faced by wildlife around the world. It’s incredible how many people, even in remote villages, are now watching nature programmes on Discovery Channel and National Geographic.

My personal approach to wildlife filmmaking vis-à-vis television programmes has been to try and strike a balance between showing the beauty and wonder of nature, and the problems. There is a very fine line. Let’s face it, most people watch television to be entertained. If you can make an entertaining wildlife programme and slip in a few poignant messages there is a greater chance of acceptance by the audience. Depress them too much and they’ll just change channels. Also, I think it is important to leave people, particularly the younger generation, with a sense of hope. Wildlife conservation is an uphill battle, but it is not a hopeless one. There is so much in this country that is still worth preserving, still worth fighting for.

How do you zero in on a subject, and what about funding?

I usually choose subjects that I feel passionately about. It could be a place, a species or an issue. The greatest attraction has always been the opportunity to learn about a particular subject in great depth and the challenge of bringing the story to the screen to the best of my ability. Making wildlife films involves months of filming in remote locations and that is a real joy.

As for funding, there never was any money available in India for making high quality wildlife films. The accomplished Indian wildlife filmmaker has always had to look for funds from overseas channels like National Geographic, Discovery and BBC. Unfortunately, even these sources are gradually drying up.

The `old fashioned’ way of making natural history films, where crews spend months, even years, getting to know a place and its wildlife and painstakingly documenting never-before-seen behaviour has, quite literally, gone out of fashion. Ever since the new kind of ‘interactive’ programming, which features ‘macho’ presenters prodding snakes out of their holes and jumping on crocodiles, became hugely popular broadcasters have discovered that these programmes are much cheaper and far quicker to produce and get higher ratings than conventional wildlife programmes. For the cost and time taken to produce one `classic’ natural history film you could make an entire series of these presenter-driven programmes. By and large, the Golden Era of natural history filmmaking appears to be over.

Are there any other specific challenges in making wildlife films in India?

Increasingly, the most challenging part of making wildlife films in India is the cost of filming in the wild. Many states have hiked filming fees to a level where wildlife filmmaking is no longer viable. I think this is incredibly shortsighted and self-defeating. Nature films are a tremendous advertisement, not only for the state but also for the nation. By out-pricing our sanctuaries and national parks, and thus effectively preventing people from making films on our country’s wildlife, we are missing tremendous opportunities to show the world what an amazing country this still is.

More importantly, we are depriving our own people from learning more about their natural heritage. Wildlife filmmakers `take nothing but pictures and leave nothing but footprints’ and should be encouraged, not penalised.

What are the rewards for a wildlife filmmaker?

If what drives you is a passion for the wild, the work is its own reward and everything else -- money, awards, recognition -- is a bonus. If you’re commissioned to make a film by one of the big international broadcasters, you can make a decent living doing what you love and have the satisfaction of seeing your films aired worldwide. That’s a good situation to be in.

A filmmaker can also occasionally be a catalyst for change and that can be enormously satisfying. During the last couple of years I have been making shorter films on specific issues threatening wildlife and wild habitats, often in collaboration with conservationists in different parts of the country. These films are not meant for broadcast but for target audiences, particularly comprising decision-makers.

I have come to believe that films on local conservation issues have greater impact, leading to action, when they are carefully targeted at specific captive audiences. A film seen by 50, even five people who are empowered and willing to act is far more effective than a film that’s seen by 50 million passive television viewers. I have seen how films made by others and by me have had a direct impact on conservation and I hope to do more work of this kind.

Honey Trails in the Blue Mountains:
Keystone Foundation
Post Box 35, Groves Hill Road
Kotagiri – 643217. Rs.395.

Having evolved over millions of years, the Western Ghats are a treasure trove of biodiversity, and have been recognized as an ecological ‘hot spot’ of global significance.  The altitudinal gradient of the mountains, combined with their orientation to the monsoons, has led to the evolution of a wide variety of interconnected ecosystems that range from scrub jungle in the rain shadow regions to moist evergreen forests on the rain drenched slopes and, at the very top, montane shola forests nestled in the folds of undulating grasslands.   This varied habitat mosaic is home to over 4000 plant species, and an extraordinary variety of creatures great and small, including elephant, tiger, Nilgiri tahr and lion tailed macaque. It is also home to many indigenous adivasi communities, who lived in traditional equilibrium with the land until the influx of hundreds of thousands of people from the plains during the last few decades. 

The adivasis now eke out a living as daily labour on estates and plantations, and by collecting Non Timber Forest Produce (NTFP) for supply to markets.  One of the most important NTFPs from the hill forests is honey, with which virtually all the indigenous communities here have deep-rooted cultural connections.  ‘Honey Trails in the Blue Mountains’ chronicles these connections, whilst providing us with a larger picture of the region.

A labour of love

Since 1995, Keystone Foundation, a Non Governmental Organization, has been working with the adivasi communities in the Nilgiris to document their traditional knowledge, particularly, of bees and honey.  The book under review is, according to the authors, the result of three years of work on their ‘Honey Hunters of the Western Ghats’ Programme, which was supported by the IUCN – Netherlands Committee.  The data collected, and insights gathered, during this period have been compiled into a valuable reference book for all those who are interested in the ecology, anthropology and land use of this region.  The book focuses its attention on the 5520 sq. km. block of landscape known as the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve (NBR), which straddles the three south India states of Tamilnadu, Kerala and Karnataka.

The book is divided into two sections and is illustrated with colour and black and white photographs, maps and line drawings.  The first section gives a broad overview of the Biosphere Reserve, including its ecology, people, NTFPs and livelihood issues.  The second section delves into each of the nine eco-regions that make up the NBR, and provides an analysis of their ecology, economy and land use patterns.  The chapters contain interesting and useful nuggets of information in the form of many tables that provide details of NTFPs collected, major honey zones in the Nilgiris and major nesting trees for bees.  There are also numerous boxes that recount adivasi lore and go into a bit of extra detail about the honey collection practices of particular tribes.  Six annexures at the end provide information on a range of subjects, including geology and soils, endemic species and forest classification.  However, an index would have been useful, as also, captions for all the photographs. The legends and place names on some of the maps are so tiny as to be unreadable and this needs fixing.  Hopefully, these minor problems will be rectified in the next edition.

Fresh impetus needed

Designated as a Biosphere Reserve in 1986 under the UNESCO Man and Biosphere Programme, the goal of the NBR is to conserve genetic diversity of species, restore degraded ecosystems to their natural conditions, provide baseline data for ecological and environmental research and education, and function as an alternative model for sustainable development.  Sadly, lacking collective vision on the part of the three states, little has happened in the last two decades to further these objectives.  This book will hopefully provide a fresh impetus to meet these objectives, as it brings together varied streams of information into one handy volume, and could serve as a launch pad for further investigation and action. ‘Honey Trails in the Blue Mountains’ is an important work that deserves to be read widely, particularly, by decision makers, and all those who have a role to play in the NBR.

When you watch a good film, you get so drawn into it that you don’t usually pause to think of all the steps that would have gone into the making of it.  But the truth is, filmmaking is a complex undertaking that involves a number of steps from start to finish.  A good film is a perfect blend of creative ability and technical know- how.  Making a wildlife or natural history film adds another layer of complexity, since the filmmaker rarely has any control over the subject.  Unlike an advertisement film or a feature film, where one starts off with an extremely detailed script and storyboard, the wildlife film has to contend with the unpredictability of nature.  Animals in the jungle cannot be made to perform for the camera according to one’s wishes.  This does not mean that you cannot plan a wildlife film, only that the process of planning and making a wildlife film is quite different from what is involved in the making of a film involving people.  

In addition to technical prowess and creative ability, the making of a good wildlife film also requires an in-depth understanding of nature.  Such knowledge does not come from simply reading books or earning a degree in biology, but through years of watching and studying wildlife in its natural habitats. Indeed, the best wildlife filmmakers are invariably dedicated naturalists who have developed filmmaking skills rather than film makers who’ve decided to make films on nature. 

How do wildlife films get made?  What are the stages a film must go through from concept to completion?  What does a team consist of and who does what?  While it is not possible to describe all the processes in great detail in this article I have tried to give a fair idea of what wildlife filmmaking involves.

The process of filmmaking can be divided into three stages. Pre-production, Production and Post-Production. 

I. Pre-production:

This stage precedes the commencement of filming, and includes the following activities, though not necessarily in the order mentioned:

1. Researching the subject thoroughly, through personal observation, reading relevant research papers and books, and interacting with knowledgeable individuals. 

2. Contacting resource persons such as scientists, technicians and potential crew members.

3. Doing a recce to get a feel for the locations, meet people such as Forest Officers and local naturalists, check out logistical details such as availability of transport and accomodation, and gather other information vital to the success of the shoot. 

4. Writing up a proposal and preparing a detailed budget.

5. Obtaining the funds necessary to make the film.

Obtaining the necessary permits.  To work in a Wildlife Sanctuary or National Park in India it is necessary to get a permit from the Chief Wildlife Warden of the respective State).

II. Production:

This is the stage when the actual filming takes place.  In the case of a one-hour natural history film the production stage can last up to two years or more depending on the degree of difficulty the subject poses.  Ideally, by the time this stage commences, the filmmaker should have a rough shooting script in hand that will indicate all the different sequences that need to be obtained. For example, if you are making a film about the life history of the cobra, some of the sequences is your list would be: feeding sequence, mating sequence, egg laying sequence, hatching sequence, and so on. Under each sequence it is useful to make a detailed shot list of all the things that you would like to film to make it complete. The shot breakdown should include natural history details that will help the cinematographer make the most of it. For example:

Feeding sequence: set inside a village hut at night.  Rats scurrying around inside, feeding on grain out of hole in a sack, fighting with one another; cobra enters hut through hole in the wall, crawls around house; close-ups of head and tongue flicking; different angles of cobra’s progress in search of rats; cobra and rat come face to face, cobra strikes, rat slinks away after being bitten; rat dies, cobra follows scent trail and swallows rat; different angles of the swallowing; cobra exits hut after meal.  Other shots: people sleeping on the floor, oblivious to the drama; cobra crawling past sleeping people.  Rat looking down from rafter at crawling snake.  Point of View (POV) shots of snake and rat.

Apart from being an important mental exercise, the shooting script will also help you to schedule your shoots so that the crew can be at the right place at the right time. Even so, since luck has a major role to play in one’s success, it must be understood that many shots or sequences on the wish list or shooting script may not happen despite one’s best efforts.  On the other hand, one sometimes gets to film something totally unexpected.  This is fine and, depending on what you eventually get, changes in the storyline can be made during the third stage. 

III. Post Production:

The post-production of a film begins once the shooting is over, and encompasses all the stages that go into the making of a finished film.  Editing, scripting, graphics, music, narration, sound effects and incorporation of credits are all part of the post production process.  Post-production needs the most meticulous care since this is when the raw material (the footage) gets turned into a finished product.  Just like the best quality teakwood can turn into a crude piece of furniture in the hands of a sloppy carpenter, so can good footage be turned into a mediocre film through bad post-production.  The post-production of an hour-long natural history film could take as long as 3 - 4 months of full time work.

The Crew:

Good films are the result of teamwork on the part of several professionals.  A typical wildlife film crew would consist of the following key people.

THE PRODUCER:  In the context of a wildlife film the Producer is the key person.  While other members of the team may have a particular part to play at a particular stage of production or post-production it is the producer who is responsible for taking the film from concept to completion.  Among the many duties of the producer are the following (these may vary from film to film): 

- conceiving the idea for the film and writing the shooting script

- finding funds

- obtaining permits

- choosing the team

- doing the recces

- drawing up the production and post-production schedules and ensuring that everything  

   goes according to plan

- being answerable to the investors in the project at every stage of the film

Sometimes the producer could also be the cinematographer and/or editor, scriptwriter or sound recordist of the film.

THE PRODUCTION MANAGER: The production manager ‘manages’ the production by taking care of the hundred and one administrative details of a project.  Keeping track of the expenditure, organizing air tickets and transport for the crew, coordinating between the various personnel on a project and organizing studio bookings for the post production are just some of the duties of this person who is, quite literally, the producer’s right arm. 

THE WILDLIFE CINEMATOGRAPHER: This is the person who is responsible for turning the producer’s concept into reality; the person who will spend days, weeks, months or, even, years filming the sequences that the producer has envisioned.  For projects that are vast in scope, or when time is limited, the producer may employ more than one cinematographer. Sometimes three to four cinematographers could contribute to a single film.  This does not matter so long as the producer has a clear idea of the story to be told.  On particularly demanding projects sometimes a producer might want specialist cinematographers to shoot certain segments of a film.  For instance the film might call for ultra close-up shots of the breeding behaviour of spiders and this may require the services of a macro cinematographer.  There may be other shots to be taken underwater for which the services of an experienced underwater cinematographer may be requisitioned, and so on.

Wildlife cinematographers are a special breed, and they need to be!  To excel at this job you must be passionate about wildlife and love nothing more than to spend time in wild places.  Without this almost fanatical love or fascination for nature, it would be impossible to do a job that requires great endurance and a capacity to bear all kinds of physical hardship cheerfully day after day. It goes without saying that filming wildlife requires enormous patience and perseverance as well – many species are notoriously difficult to film. But equally, the wildlife cinematographer must feel at one with the environment and with wild animals of every shape and size – from king cobras to elephants, from gold fish to great white sharks.

Hunting with a camera is considerably more difficult than hunting with a gun. Frightened or disturbed animals can be shot quickly with a gun, but do not make for good footage. To film wild animals behaving naturally in their environment calls for a thorough understanding of their behaviour, and the ability to approach them without causing distress. Along with this, it is important to be well versed in field craft.  Animals have senses that are often superior to ours, and to outwit them requires considerable skill. Whether it is filming from a small, precarious platform high up in the forest canopy or from a well-concealed hide on the forest floor, the wildlife cinematographer must learn to become invisible when the situation requires it.

Of course, combined with all this, one must also have an artistic eye and be technically skilled.  Split-second reflexes and the ability to consistently shoot beautifully composed images that are perfectly exposed, and in sharp focus, are the hallmarks of a successful wildlife cinematographer.  Versatility – some wildlife cinematographers are equally proficient whether they are shooting in the rainforest or deep under the ocean – and an innovative bent of mind are other qualities that further enhance a wildlife cinematographer’s capabilities.

Wildlife cinematographers generally work by themselves most of the time since the producer may not always have the time to be in the field.  Once the cinematographer is established in the location and logistical arrangements have been made the producer might leave him or her to get on with the job after a thorough briefing.  Thus a producer can even work on more than one film at a time, juggling his or her time between different projects. 

THE LOCATION SOUND RECORDIST:  Sound for wildlife films is rarely recorded simultaneously while the scenes are being shot. Instead the sound is usually recorded separately and then edited into the film during post-production.  It is rarely practical, affordable, or even, necessary, for a sound recordist on a wildlife film project to accompany the cinematographer every time.  Usually, if a shoot goes on for a whole year, the sound recordist will visit the location just two or three times, for, say, 10 – 15 days each time.  During these visits he or she will attempt to get good ambient sound recordings at different times of the day, and also attempt to record the calls of any animals or birds that the cinematographer has filmed, or hopes to film in the future.  The producer will give the sound recordist a list of all specific sounds to record.  As with photography, here too, luck has a role to play, and the recordist may not be able to capture every sound on the list.  These missing sounds will then have to be recorded by other crew members, possibly even by the producer or cinematographer, in their spare time. In fact, with budgets for wildlife films shrinking, many cinematographers or producers also double up as sound recordists. Sometimes specific sounds can also be bought from a sound library.  

The equipment of wildlife film making:  There is a mind boggling variety of equipment available to cater to every professional filmmaking need. To start with, here are the basic requirements.

THE CAMERA: Wildlife filmmaking usually requires specialized equipment.  Until recently most high quality wildlife documentaries were shot on 16mm film, particularly on a format called Super 16mm.  The advantages of shooting on film are many.  Colour negative film, which is what is used most of the time, has a very long shelf life.  If properly preserved a roll of negative film can be stored for up to 200 years! Many historical documentaries include clips from film shot many decades ago. And in the future, footage of many rare animals could only be available from a film library.  Film also has the advantage of being able to handle a wide variety of lighting conditions, and produce images that are extremely rich and true to life. Film cameras are very rugged and can withstand the extreme climatic conditions that many wildlife documentaries are shot in.

But shooting on film also has its disadvantages, and many people are switching over to video.  For instance, with film, you cannot view your results immediately. The film has to be sent for processing and transfer to video tape, usually at a distant lab.  By the time the cinematographer gets to see the ‘rushes’, many days, weeks or even months may have elapsed.  Thus any problems with a lens or other equipment may go undetected for a while.  There are other problems inherent in sending the film off for processing to a distant laboratory. Film rolls could get lost in transit, or they may be subject to heavy-duty x-rays at various airports along the way.  Even a single pass through a new generation x-ray machine can cause irreversible fogging of unprocessed film.  

Because of these and other reasons, Producers of high quality wildlife documentaries are now switching to hi-definition video. The image quality of these new generation cameras rivals that of 35mm film, with the added advantage that you can view what you’ve shot immediately.  Since the capture medium is video tape, there is no processing involved.  However hi-definition video cameras are still prohibitively expensive and it will be a few years before they come into widespread use.  There are currently other, less expensive, video formats to shoot on.  Digi-Beta, DV Cam, DVC Pro and Mini DV are some of the popular formats (DV stands for ‘Digital Video’).  Of these, Digi-Beta is the most expensive and the Mini-DV the least expensive.  For the beginner there is no better format to choose than Mini DV. Camcorders of this format are compact and relatively inexpensive.  They also provide remarkably good quality picture and sound.  Many travel shows and documentaries that you see on TV are shot on Mini DV.  Of the many brands of Mini DV camcorders on the market, the Canon XL series (XL1, XL1s and XL2) is the most suitable for wildlife filming since it can accept interchangeable lenses.  Still-camera lenses from a SLR camera can be mounted onto this camcorder through the use of special adapters.

LENSES:  A natural history cinematographer needs an array of lenses to be able to capture different images in nature.  Telephoto and long zoom lenses bring distant subjects closer, ‘macro’ lenses are a must for close-up filming of insects or other tiny subjects, and wide-angle lenses are useful for filming landscapes.  Apart from these, there are also specialised lenses such as the Periscope, Borescope and Endoscope for specialised applications.

TRIPOD:  A good tripod is one of the most important requirements for filming wildlife.  All professional wildlife cinematographers use a rock-solid, heavy-duty tripod virtually at all times.  The best film or video tripods provide smooth panning (side to side) and tilting (up and down) movements.  These are called ‘fluid head’ tripods and are very expensive. 

SOUND RECORDING EQUIPMENT:  When using a film camera sound has to be recorded separately on an audio recorder.  Nowadays the format of choice for field sound recording is DAT or Digital Audio Tape.  A sound recordist uses a variety of different microphones to suit different situations just as a cinematographer uses different lenses.  Shotgun microphones and parabolic microphones are used to home in on specific sounds, such as, for example, to isolate the song of a bird from other ambient sounds.  Stereo mics are used to record general ambience, lapel mics are used for interviews with people and so on.  When shooting on video, sound gets recorded simultaneously with the picture directly onto the video tape.  Some camcorders have a provision to attach an external mic in place of the standard stereo mic that is provided with the camera.

WHEN THE SHOOTING STOPS:  When all the filming is over, post-production begins.  In this phase a whole new range of professionals get involved.  

THE LOGGER: Typically, for an hour-long natural history film, about 25 hours of material would have been shot.  Sifting through this enormous amount of footage to pick out the best shots would be extremely difficult without a detailed list of each and every shot.  It is the logger’s job to catalogue the raw footage and categorise each shot.  A log would look somewhat like this:

NAGARAHOLE LOG - ROLL NO.1:

00:00:00:00 – 00:03:05:10:  WIDE SHOT OF SLOTH BEAR WALKING THROUGH FOREST

00:03:05:11 – 00:05:43:00:  CLOSE-UP OF SLOTH BEAR DIGGING INTO TERMITE MOUND

00:05:43:01 – 00:08:32:05:  BIG CLOSE-UP OF CLAWS DEMOLISHING MOUND

Special computer software is available for logging, using which it is easy to incorporate the logged files into the editing program.

THE EDITOR: Selecting the right shots and putting them together to form the story requires specialized skill.  This is what an editor does.  The editor will first view the rushes (the raw footage) several times and, directed by the producer, whittle down the material to about two hours of sequences strung together in the correct order.  This is known as an assembly.  Over many days or weeks, the assembly will be further shortened until it is close to the length of the finished film.  This stage is known as the Rough Cut.  In the final stage, the film will be cut down to the exact number of minutes and seconds required for television.  This is known as the Fine Cut.  When all the last-minute changes have been made on the Fine Cut, the ‘picture’ is said to be ‘locked’.  This stage is known as ‘picture lock’ and no more changes are allowed to the fine cut after this stage.  To reach the picture lock stage may require 10 weeks or more of editing for an hour-long natural history film.

THE SCRIPT WRITER:  The scriptwriter comes into the Project at the Rough Cut stage. The producer will brief the scriptwriter on the kind of script required, and provide all the research materials, background information and list of references relevant to the subject.  The writer will then take a copy of the Rough Cut and start crafting the sentences to go with the images. There is always quite a bit of interaction between the producer, the writer and the editor until the pictures and words come together in harmony, complementing each other.  Writing the script for an hour long natural history film could take 4-5 weeks.

THE MUSIC COMPOSER: If the film requires music the producer will engage a composer to write the score and record the music. The composer will usually be brought in at the Rough Cut stage.  Along with the producer and editor, he or she will view the rough cut to discuss where music is required in the film and what the mood should be for each musical piece. One sequence might require humorous music to make the audience laugh, another might require a melancholic tune.  Over the next few days the composer will come up with rough musical ‘sketches’.  The producer will listen to these rough pieces of music and suggest changes.  The composer will keep fine-tuning the musical pieces but will turn the sketches into finished pieces only after the editing reaches the Picture Lock stage.

THE SOUND DESIGNER:  The sound track of a natural history film is extremely important and has to be rich and multi-layered.  Only when good images are combined with a dynamic sound track does the audience feel involved with the film.  There is art and craft involved in designing the sound track for a film.  The natural sounds gathered assiduously in the field cannot just be affixed at random onto the film. For instance it would be factually incorrect to put a recording of winter ambience on a scene depicting summer or vice versa.  But there is more to it than just factual accuracy.  To create a dynamic sound track each scene of the film needs many layers of sound.  For example, to bring alive a scene depicting a herd of deer grazing in the forest at dawn, the sound designer may put a general early morning ambience on Track 1, add sound of jungle fowl crowing on Track 2, the sounds of a song bird recorded with a shotgun microphone on Track 3, close-up sounds of deer chomping grass on Track 4, and so on. 

The sound design for a film involves not only cutting and layering the natural sounds (known as the “effects” track), but also accurate placement of the music and the recorded commentary.  So you see, it’s not a simple job!

THE NARRATOR: After the picture has been fine cut, the writer will finalise the script.  Once the producer is satisfied with the written words, a professional narrator will be engaged to narrate the script in sync with the picture.  Choosing the right narrator and directing him or her is the producer’s job.  Does the film need a man’s voice or a woman’s?  Should the narration be dramatic or understated?  Should it be fast-paced or languid?  These are some of the creative decisions that the producer will need to make.

The artful mixing of natural effects, musical score and commentary results in a sound track that considerably enhances the impact of the images.

THE EQUIPMENT OF FILM EDITING: These days, virtually all picture and sound editing is done on computers incorporating special software developed by companies such as Avid and Adobe. These ‘non-linear’ editing systems make the process of editing as easy as word processing. With the click of a mouse, you can cut and paste and make changes to the picture or sound track, and move images or pieces of sound effortlessly. You can even get editing software that will work on your PC.  In fact, armed with a Mini DV camcorder and a PC or an Apple Mac computer you can now produce professional quality films even with limited resources.  But of course, having the right equipment is only useful if you’ve learnt the abc’s of filmmaking well.