Images containing both animals and humans (two-shot images) are popular across social media and zoo advertising. However, these images, even when taken in ethical and conservation settings, have the potential for misinterpretation and may inadvertently promote the illegal wildlife trade, exotic pet trade or photo-prop industries. We examined whether zoo visitors' (n = 531) attitudes and stated Willingness to Donate (WTD) altered depending on whether they viewed a two-shot image set in a photo-prop setting (typically associated with negative welfare) or in a zoo or wild setting. All images, including photo-prop, were generally viewed positively regardless of context. Zoo-based images received a greater number of comments relating to concern for the animal's environment or welfare compared to other images, although numbers were still relatively low. This indicates a lack of awareness about the photo-prop industry and misconceptions about modern welfare practices in zoos, thus reflecting a need for improved education in these areas. Two-shot images in zoo settings elicited significantly higher stated WTD than images in wild or photo-prop settings or when an animal was pictured alone.Suggesting zoo-based images may be more effective for conservation campaigns than traditional images of an animal in its environment. Furthermore, images featuring a uniformed keeper plus an animal do not appear to increasing desire for pet ownership, indicating that they can be used in zoo advertising with minimal negative consequences.

No abstract