Do you guys shoot insects dead or alive?

canonloader wrote in post #11873617
Is that a tear drop I see?

Yeah, he feels bad

Actually, it's "juice" from the spider.

I thought it might be juice, but it's so clear. Maybe poison from the gland?

canonloader wrote in post #11873678
I thought it might be juice, but it's so clear. Maybe poison from the gland?

The mantis chewed off a couple of legs before going to town on the body. The liquid came from the stumps.

canonloader wrote in post #11873316
As one with a well developed sense of empathy, I don't like to kill bugs, even the microscopic ones I shoot these days.

Well I don't think anyone here would say he enjoys killing bugs but as I see it we all kill bugs regardless of whether we shoot live or dead subjects. It could probably be even argued that someone who spends a few hours shooting live insects in nature has unknowingly killed more insects than someone who quickly collects a few insects to be killed by freezing or by laurel leaves and spends the rest of the day shooting in the studio. It seems that killing insects is acceptable as long as it's not 'too obvious'. After considering this a bit I now find the whole "I would NEVER kill an insect just so I can get a better shot!" philosophy a bit hypocritical. There is no rational reason why deliberately killing one specific insect would be morally worse than killing hundreds of random insects beneath our feet (fully aware of this fact) while trying not to interfere with our one chosen subject.

Every time you drive a car, you kill dozens of bugs. Just get out and lift the hood if you don't believe. Look at your radiator. LOL

dsvilko wrote in post #11872435
.......
Then not long ago I discovered the fascinating world of high-magnification stacked macro photography. Unfortunately this is not something you can do with live subject so I have started freezing a few insects every now and then so I could photograph them. This killing part is not something I am indifferent about and certainly do not enjoy it but the final photos almost always turn up great! I understand that I have basically killed the insect that otherwise didn't have to die simply to make a nice photo. It sounds terrible. Paradoxically it sounds worse then when we have to exterminate millions of insects for some reason. Apparently the same irrational reasoning applies to people. It has been repeatably shown that we have a much stronger emotional reaction to the suffering of one individual than to the suffering of a larger group of people. The larger the group becomes the less ....

Whilst I can't dispute that every day human activity kills many insects I don't think it is necessery to chill or kill to focus stack, many here focus stack live insects in their natural environment handheld.

Dead or chilled insects generally don't look convincing IMHO.

Additionaly too much stacking does not look realistic photographically, my feeling is there should be some parts oof to look like a photograph, so I often find that 3 or 4 frames is plenty for what I want, don't think I have ever used more than 7 or 8 frames in a stack.

LordV wrote in post #7853292
Overall I think most macroshooters are much kinder to bugs than the average person - we reach for a camera instead of a fly swat or can of insectacide and often trap bugs in the house and release them outside rather than kill them.

Brian V.

Exactly my sentiments.

agiaco wrote in post #11883338
Exactly my sentiments.

I don't want the appear overly cynical but I would say that the typical macro photographer enjoys thinking of himself as kind to insects. In reality the kindest thing you can do for the insects is to never set foot in anything that can even remotely be called nature. This would, of course, be completely opposite of how we who love the nature behave. I don't want anyone to feel bad and I am certainly not advocating walking only on pavement, I'm just trying to explore the morality of sacrificing insects for our hobby, when considered rationally and without hypocrisy. I want to have somewhere to link to if someone gets appalled that I froze a mosquito to photograph it. I also try 'rescuing' trapped insects in my house but on a rational level I understand that it's more about me feeling good about it because at the same time I also kill a lot of insects without giving it a second thought, as we all do (and it often could have been avoided).

I grew up on a farm in the 40's and 50's, and I scoff and give the one finger salute to scientists in general, and those in particular that tried to tell us that everything non human were just dumb animals, did not think and had no feelings. From cows and zoo animals down to the microbes on our skin and in our water. It was OK to kill them because they have no feelings.

I knew what crap that was from pre kindergarten and now at the other end of my life, I see that the whole scientific community that tries to explain what intelligence, feelings and awareness is, is nothing but a mud fence put up by stupid mud people. Just put your eye to the microscope and look at the life in a drop of water and tell me those little things are not aware of their own lives, don't feel pain and approaching death, just like we do. I guarantee you, you just can't do it, you will even begin to question everything you thought you knew.

I shoot them either way. Dead or alive.
And here's a shocking fact: I do not loose any sleep over having placed a bug in my freezer.

Actually, dying of hypothermia, at least for people, is supposed to be one of the easier ways to check out.

Still, I would like to go in my sleep and wake up on a cloud hanging just over the beach in Miami.

canonloader wrote in post #11883451
I grew up on a farm in the 40's and 50's, and I scoff and give the one finger salute to scientists in general,

I apologize for potentially starting an off-topic flame war but as a physics teacher I simply can't let this slide. I really feel depressed where we are going, as a civilisation, when people like you can show open contempt for scientists on a internet forum about digital cameras. People give thanks to gods for their health and all the wonderful things they have and are able to do in their lives while portraying the true heroes who made it all possible as heartless, emotionless killers. No hypocrisy there.

Who needs reason and rationality when we all know that human intuition and 'feelings' are the most perfect things in the whole wide universe. You don't need to do any research - just listen to your hearth!
I wonder how many people are really loosing sleep over killing millions each time they wash their hands. The same people that will tell you that all life is sacred and equally valuable.
Our intuition tells us that killing one specifically chosen insect is horrible while killing thousands just walking about is simply unfortunate - so it must be true. Only someone whithout empathy could reason otherwise. I apologize if I misunderstood what you were trying to say but this is how it came across.

I shoot all of my insects alive.. I have captured them, moved them to a better location for a quick shoot, then later returned them to where I found them.. But I prefer to shoot them doing what they do naturally and I can't do that when they're dead.

I guess you do, if you can take what I said that wrong. Don't talk to an unbeliever about god either, it's a waste of time. I totally believe in science and natural selection. I just don't believe, because people like you tell me to, that all scientists know what the truth really is, or speak the truth, even if they do know it. The act of putting yourself above anyone else is proof of my claim.

The truth is, scientists can be complete idiots, traitors to their own species, country or tribe, good or evil, and, they put their pants on one leg at a time, just like everyone else. Education doesn't make everybody smarter, better or a more capable person. In fact, given the state of world affairs, and the fact that only the "smart" people have been running it since forever, I'd say just the opposite is true.

canonloader wrote in post #11885212
I guess you do, if you can take what I said that wrong. Don't talk to an unbeliever about god either, it's a waste of time. I totally believe in science and natural selection. I just don't believe, because people like you tell me to, that all sientists know what the truth really is, or speak the truth, even if they do know it. The act of putting yourself above anyone else is proof of my claim.

Ok then I have misunderstood what you were trying to say but from my perspective it seemed very clear. I don't think you could find a scientist that would tell you that what we know is absolutely true with no possibility of a mistake. Finding mistakes and overturning their own theories is what scientists do. Just because nothing is absolutely certain, that doesn't mean that all ways of finding the truth are equally valid. Science is simply by far the best method we have. And I do believe that as a group, even if there are a few outliers, scientists value, respect and share the truth more than any other group of people.

What you are saying is that they are human. Have you are reason or proof that they are worse that the average because from the scientists I know or have met they certainly seem better. What would you say if I tried to argue that I despise all soldiers because they probably include above average percentage of people who enjoy violence and even licensed killing of other people (which is in all probability true). How would that make the honest and peaceful majority of solders who put their lives on the line to protest other feel?

Education doesn't make everybody smarter, better or a more capable person. In fact, given the state of world affairs, and the fact that only the "smart" people have been running it since forever, I'd say just the opposite is true.

Considering that a scientist is about equally likely to get elected as an open atheist (is US, at least), which smart people were you thinking of?