p.2 #2 · Has anyone done hummingbird multiflash photography with Olympus?
Wow, I have been away and hadn't seen the last few responses. The comment by "BidinTime" is a smug, shrill, and condescending without offering a whole lot to back up its insulting tone.
"Whataboutism" is only a valid charge if the practice from which attention is allegedly being diverted is actually harmful, and hence being justified unreasonably. In my previous comment I did not just point to actual threats to birds, I cited sources that I do think offered information contradicting the argument that all flash photography is harmful to birds. I don't think I even came close to tying myself up in knots. That was hardly necessary.
Meanwhile, the commenter offers absolutely no support for the assertion that the judicious use of daylight fill-flash in bird photography is harmful to birds. By saying that there is no way that "science can determine that flash is safe to use on any birds," one put in the position of having to prove a negative.
The commenter discounts any source that suggests flash might not be harmful by invoking the rhetorical "poisoning the well" technique. A photographic site posts a story discussing the flash issue. After all, it's an ethical issue that, as in this forum, photographers are interested. The particulars of the story (which is laden to references to scientific sources) are not refuted, but instead, the entire piece is discounted because after all, it's a site for photographers. Then the Audubon Society position is cast aside because after all, Audubon has been bought off. Really? Shame on you.
The bottom line conclusion from the type of logic used here is that just about ANYTHING we do as bird photographers should be off limits, as our mere physical presence within photographic recording distance of a bird might possibly be perceived by the bird and might possibly alter its behavior and this might possibly endanger its life. I can't prove that my pointing my camera at a bird from forty feet away I am not possibly harming the bird. As soon as a bird becomes aware of my presence its behavior is being altered, and I cannot prove it's not being altered for the worse. I think I can justifiably claim that there is not a photographer out there who has not inadventently caused a bird to fly away. Even if it is not intentional, it's all but unavoidable. It does possible "damage," so perhaps the only solution is to not be out there taking bird photos at all.
Apr 25, 2022 at 10:07 AM
BidinTime Offline • • [X]
p.2 #3 · Has anyone done hummingbird multiflash photography with Olympus?
Sure, go ahead and do what you're going to do anyway. I can't stop you. We all see that sort of jerk behavior daily.
Yes, human behavior (including photography) affects birds and contributes to declining numbers. That's indisputable.
The topic was about using artificial lights on birds. Warning about the risks of doing so is very germaine.
For advice on birds, consulting the Audubon Society is a good suggestion.
QUICK: What is my motive for wanting to protect birds and the environment in general? Do you think I sell birdhouses? That I hate worms? No. I simply care about the planet and care to protect the subjects that I enjoy photographing.
Your motive is selfish. It is for your enjoyment and possibly greed. You don't think beyond your nose, and you hate that I've called out your behavior. And you don't seem to care about your subjects.
You seem to feel guilty that I've called out behavior that I, and many others, find irresponsible.
When there are fewer birds to photograph and we wonder why, we can reflect on this thread. Because some people put their wants ahead of the needs of others, then make excuses.
p.2 #6 · Has anyone done hummingbird multiflash photography with Olympus?
Being a responsible FM member means confining your comments and opinions to the subject of the forum and thread on which you are posting.
This is a forum for discussions about Micro Four Thirds gear, and this thread is specifically about using multiflash photography with Olympus gear. Talking about environmental issues, religion, politics, hunting, etc. on this forum is irresponsible behavior.
What part of that do you not understand
May 02, 2022 at 03:56 PM
BidinTime Offline • • [X]
p.2 #7 · Has anyone done hummingbird multiflash photography with Olympus?
"Has anyone done hummingbird multiflash photography with Olympus?"
You're absolutely right.
The topic asks about using flash on birds.
p.2 #9 · Has anyone done hummingbird multiflash photography with Olympus?
Actually it's good that people like BidenTime make themselves known. Their self-righteous arrogance, completely unsupported by facts, takes on the tone of mania and can actually be persuasive to the uninformed just because of its passionate tone and pseudo-authoritarian pretentions. Just like above--"its not good for the subjects." Really? How many birds have you seen harmed or killed by photographers? How do you know the hummers are not actually thriving? Put simply, you know nothing and have pointed to nothing.
It's good to know what we are up against. There is a philosophy that nature is "pure" and human presence is "dirty" and sullies the pristine holiness of nature. This manifests itself, at its most absurd, against photographers, but also against others who want to interact with nature in a way other than watching a TV screen, website, or magazine (of course, how do the preachers think those images were made?). It is a common accusation without evidence ploy that is raised against bird feeders, swimming in the ocean where marine mammals are present, flash photography and the like. It is based on an entirely false premise, which is that any human presence in nature that an animal might be aware of is somehow a "wrong" against the natural order.
Simple fact, there is no evidence that photographers are killing anything, or "bothering animals to death" by going out into the wild and photographing them.
When human activities actually hurt animals it is known pretty quickly and usually regulated accordingly. So, when some accurate, verifiable, scientific observation shows the harm, please feel free to post it.
May 09, 2022 at 12:36 PM
BidinTime Offline • • [X]
p.2 #10 · Has anyone done hummingbird multiflash photography with Olympus?
So you don't think any human activity had harmed wildlife?
Quite interesting. Bird (and other wildlife) populations are declining in many species and locations for reasons that have been repeatedly and scientistifically linked to human behavior. Climate change is one example.
I've likely been a birder longer than you've been a photographer. That's why I rely upon guidance from bird experts, not photography "experts" (and certainly not some stranger quoting a spouse).
Tell me, please, what you think my motive is for this guidance that I share?
It's not hard to find people doing things that are harmful to others or displaying ignorance. Just because they consider themselves a photographer is no exception.
Your statements condone behavior that puts animals at risk solely for your pleasure.
That, my friend, is arrogant and selfish.
p.2 #11 · Has anyone done hummingbird multiflash photography with Olympus?
guyharrison wrote:
Actually it's good that people like BidenTime make themselves known. Their self-righteous arrogance, completely unsupported by facts, takes on the tone of mania and can actually be persuasive to the uninformed just because of its passionate tone and pseudo-authoritarian pretentions. ............
That is what Preacher Trolls do. They can't understand that a Photography Gear Forum is for discussing photo gear, not for preaching about other subjects.
These kinds of Trolls rarely post any photos on a photo site. Too busy preaching I guess.
May 09, 2022 at 01:19 PM
BidinTime Offline • • [X]
p.2 #12 · Has anyone done hummingbird multiflash photography with Olympus?
Here's a fairly recent report on changes in hummingbird health.
Some species are declining in some areas, and others are the opposite.
Human behavior is typically a culprit.
The bottom line is that if your behavior bothers birds they will go someplace else, reducing photographic opportunities for yourself and others. And if that place bothers birds they won't stay (or they may fail to thrive). That is how humans degrade species.
I am a bird watcher and a bird photographer. I know that you don't improve your skills by buying things or being unethical. I'm trying to help all of you (who like bird photography) to protect the species and your enjoyment of them.
If you drive away birds what will you do? Drive further and spend more time? Others have mentioned that having a positive environment helps birds and your craft. I'm pointing out that an unfriendly environment has a detrimental effect on what you're trying to do.
Again, what is my motive for warning against using flash on birds in a thread about, let's see, how to use flash on birds?
Your personal attacks show that you're experiencing cognitive dissonance. You know the truth but don't want to change your behavior.
May 09, 2022 at 01:24 PM
BidinTime Offline • • [X]
p.2 #13 · Has anyone done hummingbird multiflash photography with Olympus?
Imagemaster wrote:
That is what Preacher Trolls do. They can't understand that a Photography Gear Forum is for discussing photo gear, not for preaching about other subjects.
These kinds of Trolls rarely post any photos on a photo site. Too busy preaching I guess.
How are personal attacks considering mature or on topic?
You said my recommendation to avoid flash on birds was not relevant in a thread about using flash on birds ... then you launch personal attacks that don't come within a mile of the topic?
I'd expect better from someone who is a self-proclaimed master of something.
p.2 #14 · Has anyone done hummingbird multiflash photography with Olympus?
And the article confirms your triumphant claim how, exactly?
Did I miss the section about photographers killing off the birds? Uh, no, it wasn't there.
Did I miss the section about photographers causing the birds to "go someplace else?" Uh no, it wasn't there.
Talk about cognitive dissonance . . . .
And by the way, thanks for proving, with absolute precision, my entire discussion above. You start with a general proposition (birds are in trouble) and them morph to photographers are harming the birds (not anywhere in the article), that photographers are causing the birds to move (same), that photographers are then causing the birds to move from the "new" areas (same); that photographers are causing the "failing to thrive" (same--but wait, they actually are thriving in other areas? how do you know they are not thriving where the photographers are), and then, of course, the religious mania conclusion - "that is how humans degrade species." Oh, I am so ashamed of my dirty self out in nature where I do not belong! But wait--YOU do it, so you must be a divine exception.
What a triumph of reasoning. I am laughing, even though it is so sad.
And, I know what your motive is-- obtaining power through guilt-tripping others. Not so easy against those who won't be cowed and actually require some proof.
p.2 #15 · Has anyone done hummingbird multiflash photography with Olympus?
Did not click to read the article, but does it tell the story of how many birds (and other animals) are killed by wind and solar farms - cooked by the heat or blasted from the sky?
p.2 #16 · Has anyone done hummingbird multiflash photography with Olympus?
Guy, you are wasting your time. He makes personal attacks against all photographers that use flash with wildlife, yet at the same time considers any rebuttals as personal attacks against him. What a joke.
He is much more tolerable with the HIDE ME button engaged. Unfortunately that does not work when someone quotes him.
May 09, 2022 at 02:05 PM
BidinTime Offline • • [X]
p.2 #17 · Has anyone done hummingbird multiflash photography with Olympus?
guyharrison wrote:
And the article confirms your triumphant claim how, exactly?
Did I miss the section about photographers killing off the birds? Uh, no, it wasn't there.
Did I miss the section about photographers causing the birds to "go someplace else?" Uh no, it wasn't there.
Talk about cognitive dissonance . . . .
And by the way, thanks for proving, with absolute precision, my entire discussion above. You start with a general proposition (birds are in trouble) and them morph to photographers are harming the birds (not anywhere in the article), that photographers are causing the birds to move (same), that photographers are then causing the birds to move from the "new" areas (same); that photographers are causing the "failing to thrive" (same--but wait, they actually are thriving in other areas? how do you know they are not thriving where the photographers are), and then, of course, the religious mania conclusion - "that is how humans degrade species." Oh, I am so ashamed of my dirty self out in nature where I do not belong! But wait--YOU do it, so you must be a divine exception.
What a triumph of reasoning. I am laughing, even though it is so sad.
And, I know what your motive is-- obtaining power through guilt-tripping others. Not so easy against those who won't be cowed and actually require some proof....Show more →
My friend, why do you dismiss the Audubon Society's guidance to use flash sparingly? Do you know what that word means and why it's suggested? Because it's not good for birds.
You just want to prove you are superior to wildlife. Congratulations on your thumbs.
May 09, 2022 at 07:44 PM
BidinTime Offline • • [X]
p.2 #18 · Has anyone done hummingbird multiflash photography with Olympus?
say_doyster wrote:
Did not click to read the article, but does it tell the story of how many birds (and other animals) are killed by wind and solar farms - cooked by the heat or blasted from the sky?
You should read the Audubon Society's guidance, which you said you didn't read.
Then, if you have questions, you can contact the Audubon Society yourself.
This thread is not about renewable energy, hunting, space lasers, or anything else that you think mitigates selfish behavior that affects other photographers.
