Ethics of picking fungi for photos

Ukwildlifeo · #1 (**permalink**) 19-11-2009, 01:42 PM

I recently came a across a set of photos on flickr of some nice fungi but I noticed (quite quickly) that they had been picked and arranged.
Now I understand that some folks like to pick fungi for food or in somecases to get a tricky ID confirmed but this photographer had picked lots (30+ in one) and arranged them how he wanted.
Do others think this is ethically dodgy both in the photographic sense, there not in a natural arrangment and could be regarded as fake, and more importantly ecologically, having unnecessarily removed the fruiting body of some fungi, perhaps in numbers that could affect the population? Or am I overreacting?

solus · #2 (**permalink**) 19-11-2009, 02:14 PM

You might get more detailed responses if you posted this on the fungi forum but basically picking a mushroom/toadstool is the same as picking an apple from a tree. In order to make a correct identification it is usually necessary to pick one specimen to ascertain whether it has pores or gills, to photograph the underside to show such things as the gills, the way they are connected to the stipe, shape, colour etc. Some will also take the specimen home to make a spore print and for microscopic analysis which in many cases is the only way to determine the identity of the fungus.

Having said that, I do not see the point of picking more than at most a few (young, mature etc.) to photograph as a collection to illustrate the different appearance of the fruiting body at various stages in its lifecycle.

I'm not certain, but I believe many will still release their spores (which is their sole reason for being) as they dry out and rot away. Most of the life of a fungus carries on unseen underground (or beneath the bark of a tree).

Sadly, I think far more than are picked by photographers are kicked over by people with the "Ooh, a toadstool = bad!!" mentality.

Ukwildlifeo · #3 (**permalink**) 19-11-2009, 09:48 PM

I wasn't saying the act of picking is always wrong but picking lots and just so you can arrange them for a photo is.

I couldn't decide which forum to post in and its photography issue about fungi

The photos im on about are here: Funghi - a set on Flickr

solus · #4 (**permalink**) 19-11-2009, 10:19 PM

Very artistic, very colourful BUT they look a bit - no, a lot

- unnatural. I'm wondering if they were all or at least nearly all taken in a studio setting with cleverly and carefully arranged flowers, ferns, twigs, leaves and berries and with some photographs of forests as backdrops. Call me cynical, but....

Until I looked at the pictures I hadn't realised that the fungi had in all probability been completely removed from their habitat rather than just being picked and left. I suppose I expected "in the field" photographs.

Personally, I would rather see some of the photos taken in situ in the UK by some of our own WAB fungi-folk and displayed in the Gallery here!

squishy · #5 (**permalink**) 20-11-2009, 09:17 AM

I think those photos are pretty, and a nice illustration of the fungi, but I'd much rather see something where it's grown.

having said that, i don't really see any moral problems on the photographic side, as long as the photographer doesn't try to sell it as in situ.

charlieb · #6 (**permalink**) 20-11-2009, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by squishy

I think those photos are pretty, and a nice illustration of the fungi, but I'd much rather see something where it's grown.

Indeed, they are great for displaying the changes of the fungi over time.

acherontia · #7 (**permalink**) 20-11-2009, 01:17 PM

I'm afraid I'll have to make a stand here - I find this unacceptable.
Those images are pretty awful - over saturated, over manipulated and positively hurt the eyes. What a waste of good fungi. I don't know why he didn't just use something that 'zinged' without twisting natural beauty. Like plastic clips/beads etc.
All for the sake of what he may try to justify as 'conceptualism'. Yuk.

IMHO of course.

Acher

JennyS · #8 (**permalink**) 20-11-2009, 10:41 PM

No reason why art shouldn't come into the representation of fungi, or any other life form!
That's a stunning image that would make an eye-catching book cover and there are some beautiful photos showing various named fungi in their natural settings if you take a look through the rest of the images......

Wish I could get some fungi shots that good

Afterthought - Roger Phillip's much acclaimed book 'Mushrooms and other fungi of Great Britain and Europe' is completely illustrated with studio shots of species.

acherontia · #9 (**permalink**) 21-11-2009, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JennyS

No reason why art shouldn't come into the representation of fungi, or any other life form!
That's a stunning image that would make an eye-catching book cover and there are some beautiful photos showing various named fungi in their natural settings if you take a look through the rest of the images......

Wish I could get some fungi shots that good

Afterthought - Roger Phillip's much acclaimed book 'Mushrooms and other fungi of Great Britain and Europe' is completely illustrated with studio shots of species.

Art is always subjective and that was only my opinion - as is your statement about it being 'stunning'.
I also recognise that this sort of treatment is far removed from informative/scientific shots but as far as 'art' is concerned (photographic 'art' that is) I feel these images are a bit of a cheap cheat rather than an effort to achieve an artistic effect with the mushrooms in their natural environment which is always a plus as far as I'm concerned.
I'm not sure how rare any of the 'shrooms are and if they were taken away from their natural area where their spores would be wasted but if they were then I suspect that a golden rule of taking images of wild stuff may have been broken here and as a wildlife appreciator I really object to this. And all for the sake of 'art' eh?

I'm sure the lack of care and unthinking exploitation of the image taker is impacting on my opinion when I look at the images. I just find it all completely tasteless.
OK - the colours are pretty but a lot of shortcuts have been made to get this shot and it has no gravitas whatsoever as far as I'm concerned.

If you want to produce images like that - pick a few mushrooms, take them to the studio and learn photoshop!

These images of mine have no post processing manipulation and the leaves were already dead and on the ground when I found them.
The effect is achieved with various photographic set ups prior to actually taking the image and a fair bit of photographic knowledge - not through post image manipulation. Nothing amazing or groundbreaking, I'm afraid, but quite pretty colours and patterns without cheating!

Acher

loripo · #10 (**permalink**) 21-11-2009, 03:46 PM

Those Flickr photos do rather jump out of the screen. Posed settings and cartoon-like effects I thought. I much prefer the natural colours of the leaves above. You takes yer choice I suppose... And it does depend what they are meant for. I have Roger Phillips' book of Wild Flowers and they are mostly studio samples, very good for IDs but the rarer ones are taken in situ.