I agree it's a great shot. I can't really speak to whether it is fake or not. You make some good points about the perfect and complete lighting. I've been luck

I agree it's a great shot. I can't really speak to whether it is fake or not. You make some good points about the perfect and complete lighting. I've been lucky enough to spend time with wildlife photographers in the field. As far as I can tell they spend almost all their time creating and waiting for perfect opportunities. We spent time scouting out locations and doing test shoots to figure out what would work in that location. Looking at different angles so the background and lighting at that time of day was ideal. It also quickly became my understanding that professional wildlife photographers have a crazy knack for choosing appropriate settings (exposures lighting etc). Since opportunities are so rare and perfect moments fleeting... I guess that makes sense. All of that being said I don't remember any actual photos being taken at night. At dawn and sunset, almost always. I have also been in the field with a guy who took his own photographs for a national geographic article. It was a wildlife and nature article not human interest. For his one article he took 50000+ shots. Then national geographic would use approximately 10-20 shots. This was back when digital was still gimmicky and professionals were using slide film. So they were developing 1500 rolls of slide film... this all seems so crazy now-a-days. I'd be interested in how many photos people take now. Having to remove the film and put in new roll cold kill a wildlife shot. So you were often limited to 36 shots. The cameras used to create a horrid sound loading new film - the nicer the camera the louder and more obnoxious the sound. (not really but it seemed like it) EDIT: Grammar and rolls of slide film ~ Added a bit.