Thread by @tjalamont

Thread - Ethical Nature Photography:

If you take images of nature, or share images of nature, chances are… you like nature. And if you like nature, chances are… you don’t like nature being harmed. So doesn’t it make sense to want to take photos in a responsible way? And as--

--an image consumer, don’t you want to know if the gorgeous/gross/amazing shot you just shared was created ethically? Most photographers I know have already thought a lot about this. But photography is not just a niche hobby requiring specialty equipment any more. We are all--

--photographers now. Images are generated in huge numbers today, a popcorning infinity of pixels most of us both create and consume. So we have a responsibility to create and consume ethically. It’s a complex topic, and--

--not all situations are alike; there are different standards when it comes to scientific study and collection, for instance.

And face it, we’re big mammals, not dainty hummingbirds. Being in nature, no matter how careful we try to be, means we’re going to stomp on a daisy now and then.

I am not one of those people who thinks humans should stay out of wild places. We are inherently connected to the natural world. We are animals. We belong here just as much as the bears and butterflies. That said, we have a responsibility to take care how we make our connections.

No photo is worth hurting or killing your subject or damaging the environment you're trying to portray. You like nature, remember? So do no harm. And – do some reading. Here are two outstanding articles--

--about ethical (and unethical) practices in nature photography. They are both eye-opening, thoughtful reads, whether you’re behind the camera or simply looking and liking. The first is by pro bird/wildlife photographer Melissa Groo:

nationalgeographic.com/animals/2019/0…

Second is a thorough post by @singaporemacro, a tremendous photographer I’m lucky to know and to have learned from. He covers the subject as it relates to macro photography. It’s an important perspective: Everyone knows we should be nice to puppies and pandas, but Nicky--

--advocates respect for spiders and skinks, too:

nickybay.com/p/macro-photog…

He covers a broad range of topics, from etiquette when shooting in the field alongside other photographers, to a discussion of--

--unethical practices, like creatures being tied up or glued together for “cute animal friend” images, staged cruelty meant for garnering likes. As a photo consumer, the upshot is this:

If a picture looks impossible – look closer. If it depicts suspiciously unusual behavior, or looks as if the photographer was too close to a large wild animal, or maybe just seems too cute to be true - pause before you like and share.

Can you tell how the photo was taken? What does the photographer say about it? What do other photographers think? Most of the time, it’s the real deal – after all, there are lots of amazing photographers out there taking amazing images of amazing things. But--

--if you learn a photo claims to be something it’s not, or discover that it has been created in ways that seem wrong to you… don’t share it. You can’t repair the harm already done, but you can prevent yourself from giving it more attention.

I don't want anyone to be a cynic. Cynicism is intellectually lazy; worse, it destroys our sense of wonder. But it’s good to have a little knowledge-based skepticism now and then.

Look, none of us is perfect. We all draw our own lines, and we all step over them sometimes. But before you put your foot back down again… at least try not to step on the flowers.