Is it ethical ? How far can one go?
 

Hi there folks, please answer if you have a comment or opinion to this question. I was very kindly bought a couple of books for christmas, both on the subject of macrophotography. Having a quick glance through the one, by Ross Hoddinott, a passage caught my eye and I immediately thought it un-ethical, if not completely wrong. The passage is as follows:-
"I carefully placed this moth in a plastic container and left it in the fridge for a few minutes. I then gently placed the insect on a stone and photographed it, before returning it to where it had been discovered."

I dont care how carefull a person is, surely any risk to a living creature is an un-necessary risk, and other top photographers I've read discourage this kind of practise.

What I want to know is, what do other people who have an interest in photography think. Am I too sentimental, or should we get the picture no matter what?

Needles to say the book has got off to a bad start.
Regards, Dean.

That is something I would never do.

I have placed insects in an open container with bits from their envornment. Photographed with flash so no stress from heat generated by lamps and then released. Only applies to things from the garden. I would not do that from another environment.

Don

I understand that this sort of thing goes on alot Dean.

I tend to go for the in situ shot. The only things I am guilty of is a spot of gardening (removing twigs etc) or a slight nudge ( if the insect will allow me ) for a better pose.

It's absolutely unacceptable to stress an animal in any way for private or commercial photography (I'm not getting into debate about scientific study). A simple rule is: if there's a chance of causing stress then back off.

I suppose a lot depends on your circumstances. If you are a hobbyist, then I understand the morals and would regard chilling insects purely for the photo as perhaps a step too far. If you are a professional, who's living depends on getting the images you have been commissioned to produce, then the boundaries are somewhat different. Do you put an insect at minimal risk by chilling it, or do you risk not feeding yourself and your family that month?

Many insects get killed every time you drive (or are driven) down a road, or use any form of public transport. Whilst such deaths are not deliberate, they are avoidable by walking everywhere. There is a balance between achieving your goals, whether it's getting from A to B or getting that photo, and the risk to other forms of life. All activities pose risks to other creatures and the creature performing the activity, it is up to each individual to decide where the trade-off lies.

Duncan

Yelvertoft, good arguments - you've now got me in a mental turmoil! For me, it would be difficult to know where to draw the line in causing deliberate stress, so I'll keep to my simplistic approach, but perhaps I'll have more sympathy with others.

Putting an insect in the fridge for a few minutes shouldn't cause any physical harm It's really much the same as the insect goes through when temps dip at night. The same thing is done for snakes. I understand that a lot of the wildlife film/pictures we see in the media are staged in artificial conditons. It's really the same principle and has the same ethical question.
I've never done it but I wouldn't be too concerned about cooling an insect for a few minutes in order to get a picture.

Hi I photograph insects all the time, especially when running a moth trap. It is a given standard that no insect or animal is put under any stress and the practise of "chilling" insects is a real no no!

Whilst Duncans arguments are sound re daily dangers it should be born in mind that many of the larger Moths or Macros have declined in numbers and many are down by some 30-40%.

Chilling an insect puts it under stress. The animal will beat its wings rapidly in order to maintain body temparature and flight muscles. Chilling them weakens them and leaves them vulnerable to attack.

Whilst I am sure many photographers using this method would place the insect in undergrowth to protect it afterward they are still very vulnerable to predation.

Any insect caught for the purpose of photography should be placed in a roomy box with some egg cartons to hide in and released at night.

Butterflys should never be chilled and realeased as they are more vulnerable to predation. They should be photographed at source. That is Study the insect, get to know its habits and more than anything be "PATIENT".

OK off my soap box!!
Regards
Nogbad

Now you know to what lengths some of the semi / pro photographers will go to to get the shot they want, especially if it's to be used commercially. You should see what some of the so-called pro bird photographers get up to when they think nobody is watching them, (sometimes even when they are being watched), if it's a rarity then there are no holds barred.

nirofo.

Thank you all folks for taking the time to respond.

Nirofo, i dread to think what some "pro's" may do.

I think that it is another topic that is open to the individual, and what they deem to be acceptable. It concerns me though, when a "professional" such as Mr. Hoddinott, can print this and any novice photographer/ wildlife enthusiast can then assume it is perfectly acceptable to do likewise.

I may kill insects whilst driving my car but this does not open the door for me to stress, injure or worse, kill any creature just so I have a good image.

It really is frustrating to try and get a good image of an insect, they're small and move quick. (well far faster than I can move.)

BUT!!! When we do get a good shot, a good image that is acceptably sharp throughout, with the insect in it's natural habitat, is that not where the enjoyment really lies?

Cheers folks, Dean.