Flying Octopuses - comments on the proliferation of these images

[Drew 0]

Photo pros, after all, are not obligated to police others any more than anyone else. We will all do what's in our best interest.

Absolutely. Furthermore, I personally get along with quite a few pros and pro-am types but I won't dive with them or go on a trip if they are reef wreckers, no matter how much I like them. They are not going to change, I can't stand their behavior, but I'm not going to lose a friend over this. So the best defence is to not dive with the person. What I don't see (but often hear) doesn't hurt. They know exactly how I feel about it and they try their best, but if on a trip I just dive AWAY from all of them because I'd get all worked up. I learnt long ago that shoving doctrine on others is never as effective as just leading by example and stating your case. If they want to change, they will. A lot of these people are actually very nice people, they just have poor diving manners. (please note I'm not an angel either)

 

Boat operators and dive guides also have motivations to look the other way. Many pros run trips and offer exposure to dive operations. Those operations don't want to jeopardize that. Group leaders and photo pros benefit from significant favoritism for this reason. As an individual diver, you may choose to keep your mouth shut so as to not lose preferential treatment. It's human nature. I've been on the good side of that and the bad side. I wish things were fairer but they are not.

For sure, that's the way of the world. I avoid operations that do this (unless they give me preferential treatmen ) because I pay good money and like equal treatment. I remember going to a resort in Fiji where the US rep came through. The food and quality of service was up 30% when they were there and went back down when they left. I'd be ok with that if I paid less than what the US rep clients paid but I don't (unlike around asia where you can get local rates which are 40-50% lower than gringo rates, but you get crappier food and service, which is fine by me if I pay the local rate). That said, there are the rare operators who will defend their pristine reefs against most anyone, even the pros.

 

While I love that resort, I'm aware that I've always gotten superior treatment from them. Why they can't offer superior treatment to everyone I don't understand but it's clear that people will always bend rules and do favors for friends.

One word... MONEY.

[AllisonFinch 7]

The only thing I have to say is that alot of of the guides in Thailand have these sticks and they are refered to as "Lembeh sticks", even here, and everyone knows what they are used for.

 

Personally I think they should be banned, a finger is good enough to point out stuff, as for manipulation , don't get me started on what devastation I see here.

 

Spen

 

I will heartily disagree with you on the use of "Lembeh Sticks". I call them sand spikes and they are a wonderful tool for photographers. Not for manipulating or harassing wildlife, but for stabilizing your position when your whole world is being focused through a tiny viewfinder. I have excellent bouyancy skills, but I am able to slowly push it into the sand (yes, I check for burrows first). I can then use it to slowly reposition myself, pulling on it to creep up on a subject. It keeps you from having to fin to keep your position. I can also use it as a monopod to steady my ungainly rig. It is especially helpful in surges or currents. One little tip is much better that grabbing what you think might be dead coral.

 

Yes, dumb people can use it incorrectly....just as they can use ANY piece of gear incorrectly. Banning it from the responsible people will, ultimately, cause more damage to reef structures. Just yank them off the hands of the stupid.

 

 

As for the octos in the water column. I have been diving over 35 years and have only seen an octo up in the water column of its own accord a couple of times. Even the mimics I have seen have mostly stayed along the bottom contour. Do they ever go up? Certainly (mostly when they are under great stress). Does it account for all the photos we are suddenly seeing? I hardly think so.

Edited March 15, 2008 by AllisonFinch

[Paul Kay 51]

AS for being cruel to octopus: Go on a fishing trawler if you want to see some cruelty. Or watch an octopus being beaten on the rocks to tenderise it.

 

I'd actually have a lot less problem with people interfering with creatures if they were honest about it! As John says do go on a trawler, which does more damage (and is thoroughly cruel to boot) in one day than we could probably manage in our diving careers.

 

And Drew, your reply to John ("Sorry John, only when taking a photograph becomes as vital as eating, I'll accept that argument") is really only viable if there were not alternatives to eat which did not involve unsustainable destruction and the fish caught were absolutely essential food for survival. Problem is we don't NEED to take underwater photographs, nor MUST we eat fish caught damagingly and cruelly.

 

But my take on all this is that taking an image which is not true (ie someone has forced something to happen in some way) is the visual equivalent of lying, and I don't like being lied to! Sadly I KNOW that images which have involved far worse practices than those described here have been passed off as 'natural history photographs' and have been published as such. As a result there are photographers that I have zero time for - no matter how good their images.

[Drew 0]

And Drew, your reply to John ("Sorry John, only when taking a photograph becomes as vital as eating, I'll accept that argument") is really only viable if there were not alternatives to eat which did not involve unsustainable destruction and the fish caught were absolutely essential food for survival. Problem is we don't NEED to take underwater photographs, nor MUST we eat fish caught damagingly and cruelly.

Paul, approx 1 billion people in the world rely on protein from the sea. When they can start eating a jpg of an octopus, I'll start worrying. As for cruel, I personally don't believe there is cruelty in killing for food. Nothing in the natural world isn't 'cruel'. However, photography is a strictly, AFAIK, human affair and thus can be judged with more scrutiny on cruelty.

And I absolutely agree that there are far more destructive methods used for taking photos. Would negative publicity change their ways, say posting a video of the perpertrator playing pingpong with a mimic? Or would that be too cruel?

[John Bantin 101]

But my take on all this is that taking an image which is not true (ie someone has forced something to happen in some way) is the visual equivalent of lying, and I don't like being lied to! Sadly I KNOW that images which have involved far worse practices than those described here have been passed off as 'natural history photographs' and have been published as such. As a result there are photographers that I have zero time for - no matter how good their images.

 

I confess that I have spent around 25 years making things happen for a particular photograph in order to satisfy the preconceptions of advertising agency art-directors!

 

Today, I try to tell the truth - well almost!

 

(I do clone out the grollies in the water and make underwater scenes look generally more attractive than they are. I blame that on Alex. I call it "mustardization" in his honour!!!)

[Paul Kay 51]

The RPS define unacceptable manipulation as that which alters the fundamental truth of the image. Clearly this can be taken further by altering the fundamental truth of the subject - ie causing it to do something which may not be what it would normally or often do. Don't think cloning out grollies qualifies here!!!

 

When taking an underwater photo, we, as photographers, personally apply our own ethics to how we approach and take it. Same applies to eating fish - on a personal basis. If you can afford to take underwater images, you can afford to make ethical decisions about eating unsustainably/destructively/cruelly caught fish - I accept that many people can't afford to be so choosy, but they aren't underwater photographers.

 

Negative publicity might work but might also have legal repercussions!

[secretsea18 0]

Back on topic!

 

It is interesting to see the entries in the POTW "Octopus". There are several mimic/wonderpus octopi in the water column in just this one online contest. If not "enticed" into the water column, these octopi in Lembeh must truly have learned their swimming skills well.

[AllisonFinch 7]

Well....Let's face it....the votes are in!!

When 4 out of the six winning pictures in the POTW octo contest show octos up in the water column, it is obvious that this is the new "gimmick". Pygmy seahorses are out, Squat lobsters are out, mandarin fish are out, jawfish with eggs are out, that means the new "in" picture has been discovered. Too bad for some of the octos.

[stewsmith 14]

what part of touching sea creatures is wrong.?

is it ok to touch sea creatures if we are not taking photos of them!

or is it still frowned upon if we touch sea creatures even though we are not photographing them.

 

i remember years ago going to the seaside with my family and climbing around the rock pools looking for little crabs and shrimps with my dad. was this so wrong of me to do so. should i not take my nephews and neices down to swanage or devon and show them around the rock pools. because of this involvement/interaction i had from an early age with the sea, it made me curious as to what was in the sea and so i become a diver.

 

if the animals in question ie octopus, were not harmed or distressed by lifting them into the water column is it so bad. i personally havent ever lifted an octopus, but i admit i have nudged the odd nudi to get a better shot. of course there are not too many people around that have the balls to say that they have also done this.

 

if the images taken are entered into a competition and the rules are quite clear that no harassment shots are allowed then that is the rule. do we not think that firing high powered strobes at close range to pygmy seahorses is ok. it would be quite intresting to hear from a few of the pygmys from lembeh.

 

answers on a postcard

[cor 0]

Whoa down boy. No one says every shot is harassment, just that many who want the same shot may push towards harassment to get it since it is a rare shot.

If I ever photograph an octopus naturally like that, I sure wont publicize it. These discussions may help raise awareness, but I think this subject is now completely unusable professionally or even privately for fear of being burned at the stake. I may even decide not to even photograph this if it happens.

 

Another subject permanently lost...

 

Cor

[davichin 18]

I think there are some pictures where is more or less clear that it is swimming by itself like in this video at around 1´33´´ :

 

 

I have never seen one swimming and I will not even have the chance of seeing one in, at least, one year...

I have to confess that when I saw Michael Aw´s picture I thought it was manipulated but, who knows?.

 

If I ever see one naturally swimming and think it makes a good picture I will take it and, if I think is a good one, I would show it or anything. If someone thinks I manipulated it so be it but I won´t change my way of enjoying photography for whatever some people may think/say.

[echeng 0]

Here's a perspective on the octo situation from a photo judge's point of view. If a questionable shot makes the finals of a competition, we contact the author and ask for detailed information about how the shot was taken. If the author says that the animal was not harassed, then we accept the shot on his/her word.

 

If we later obtain hard evidence that the author was lying, then his/her reputation will suffer down the line. Some folks have such bad reputations that judges are likely to just disqualify the shot outright. So if someone is known to lie and cheat in other areas of their lives, it is going to be hard for them to convince judges that they didn't harass an animal.

 

Note that the Wetpixel competition is anonymous until images have been placed into final rankings. It is at this point that image authors are contacted.

[Drew 0]

If I ever photograph an octopus naturally like that, I sure wont publicize it. These discussions may help raise awareness, but I think this subject is now completely unusable professionally or even privately for fear of being burned at the stake. I may even decide not to even photograph this if it happens.

 

Another subject permanently lost...

 

Cor

Cor, perhaps you are being a bit over dramatic I think if you had a shot that showed a bit of ground, no one could burn you at the stake. The point is that mimics(for instance) do swim off the ground, maybe 2-3ft off. A lot of the criticism is when you have the mimic doing a defensive posture in mid water column or so far off the ground that it is not only not mimicking anything but freefalling down, just so the sunball is available etc. Same for the pacific octopus

 

I think there are some pictures where is more or less clear that it is swimming by itself like in this video at around 1´33´´ :

 

 

I have never seen one swimming and I will not even have the chance of seeing one in, at least, one year...

I have to confess that when I saw Michael Aw´s picture I thought it was manipulated but, who knows?.

 

If I ever see one naturally swimming and think it makes a good picture I will take it and, if I think is a good one, I would show it or anything. If someone thinks I manipulated it so be it but I won´t change my way of enjoying photography for whatever some people may think/say.

That's a good attitude and yes that lionfish mimicry was not induced (although it was reacting to the divers). As for the crab... let's just say it was 'introduced' to the mimic for the reaction. Makes for good TV. The point of this whole thread isn't to vilify every photo there is of an octopus swimming in the water column. It's to raise awareness that some people have been known to ask guides to lift octopuses for shots or do it themselves. Hopefully this awareness allows people to make educated decisions about their photography. I think the majority of people would agree that tossing an octopus (unlike in a salad ) is not acceptable as part of a no harassment policy.

This is to let people know that the judges in competitions are savvy to this now and hopefully discourage that practice.

[MikeVeitch 0]

mimics actually mimic jellyfish when in the far water column..

[AllisonFinch 7]

Do I think some "touching" of octos is OK? Of course! I have had octos crawl onto my arm to have a mutual carressing fest. It was entirely initiated by the octo.

Yes, I have seen mimics in the water column, but they, every one, were chased there by an attempt to escape detection. I have never just swum along and seen them swimming there. But, I have surely not studied mimics for months on end. Just reacted to the few I have been able to observe.

Many of the shots I have seen show very angry/stressed ( as seen by the colors) octos in defensive postures.

[Drew 0]

Allison et al

First of all, mimic octopuses have been observed to swim from the bottom to the surface (over 10m) and back down again, often in erratic behavior/changing colorations etc to put off predators. Roger Hanlon (whose study recently just came out) has observed this and so have I. However, he has spent A LOT of time in the water and has documented one such occasion. I've only seen it twice and only shot it once since I was out of film the first time! I didn't even know it was a mimic back then

Anyhow, let's not assume that everyone out there is harassing octopuses. The aim of the thread is to create awareness to a possible problem, not vilify anyone with a mid water shot of an octopus (unless it is exhibiting very unnatural behavior).

[craig 0]

Many of the shots I have seen show very angry/stressed ( as seen by the colors) octos in defensive postures.

I believe it is presumptuous to assume that an octopus is "very angry/stressed" due to its color in an image. We don't even know what "very angry" is to an octopus. These creatures, like everything else underwater, live in the wild where they must be in survival mode at all times. Changing colors for them is not strictly used as an alarm to indicate diver harassment.

[oceangrl 0]

Tim

We are not going to solve anything by discussing it but by discussion, some people may make that conscious decision not to do that when they are presented with that situation etc. It's sorta like discussing sex between teenagers and parents. Just cos you don't talk about it don't mean it don't happen

 

Oceangrl

Which resort?

 

Hello Drew,

We dived with Bastianos Lembeh Resort. We where very happy with our main guide, but the one in training was a bit of a nuisance. On one of the rest breaks he even through his empty snack packet in the water, so much for them maintaining the environment that brings them a income.

 

Happy diving!

[craig 0]

Hello Drew,

We dived with Bastianos Lembeh Resort. We where very happy with our main guide, but the one in training was a bit of a nuisance. On one of the rest breaks he even through his empty snack packet in the water, so much for them maintaining the environment that brings them a income.

 

Happy diving!

This is another example of divers thinking they know better about how the locals should live than the locals do. There's a reason Lembeh has a lot of floating trash but that doesn't mean they don't care about what they do.

[Drew 0]

Craig, I think Lembeh would still be critter full without the rubbish the locals (and foreigners as in non-sulawesi people) throw into the sea. The rubbish just shows the wonderful adaptability of these creatures. I think it's quite universally accepted that plastic/toxic pollution in the sea is not a good thing anywhere in the world. I think it's also fair to say that many Indonesians are not as educated about these things nor brought up to care about these things and when they are, it shows like in the case of Ubud. I don't think it's terribly imperialistic to lament improper disposal of plastic, although in Sulawesi as in most parts of Indonesia, they DO NOT have a recycling facility at all. Perhaps instead of selling weapons, we should sell recycling plants on the cheap to the countries that need it like China and Indonesia.

 

Oceangrl, thanks for the info.

[craig 0]

No doubt, Drew, but your point is a long way from proof that the locals don't care. Can either you or oceangrl honestly claim you know all the issues involved in the pollution there? I'm not advocating pollution, I'm objecting to the assignment of blame.

 

I would say that the pollution in Lembeh is part ignorance and part poverty. I'm certain the locals would prefer the problem not exist but they lack the time, resources, and understanding to deal with it. If oceangrl wants to believe it's due to thoughtless divemasters then she's free to do so, but it's far outside my personal experience with the divemasters there.

 

I routinely witness people in my own communities throwing garbage whereever it suits them. Yes, I consider them a-holes but they live in a society that knows better. In Lembeh, garbage is everywhere and the community stardards of behavior are different. Hanlon's razor applies in this case.

 

That said, if we all decided to pitch in and clean up Lembeh's trash problem overnight, it would not transform their pollution issue. Too many people there live in circumstances where they can't afford to care about it and won't give it a second thought. We can afford to care about environmental issues because we've been born into cultures with a high living standard and have never known differently. Yes, our opinion on the matter is healthier but it isn't entirely of to our credit. I often say, from personal experience, that wealthy people almost universally believe they are wealthy because they are better than ones who aren't. Before judging the locals in Lembeh, walk a mile in their shoes.

[John Bantin 101]

I believe it is presumptuous to assume that an octopus is "very angry/stressed" due to its color in an image. We don't even know what "very angry" is to an octopus. These creatures, like everything else underwater, live in the wild where they must be in survival mode at all times. Changing colors for them is not strictly used as an alarm to indicate diver harassment.

 

These two didn't seem to give a damn whether I took pictures (10mm with two strobes) on not.

http://www.divernet.com/cgi-bin/articles.p...;action=display

[hoovermd 0]

...

I routinely witness people in my own communities throwing garbage whereever it suits them. Yes, I consider them a-holes but they live in a society that knows better.

...

 

 

I live in a SoCal beach community and I'm always surprised to see someone toss a cigarette butt into the gutter 1 block from the sand. Although not as surprised as they seem when I make them go pick it up

[Graham Abbott 0]

How did this animal end up being mid water long enough to take a few decent photos?

 

I've seen shots like this a few times now, which I think have all been from Lembeh. I've seen a mimic do it when it was being chased by a photographer. I'm just wondering if the wonderpuss is the same, I've yet to see the wonderpuss go into the water column like this.

[DavidScubadiver 0]

I had a dive guide who used his tickle stick to pry out a small octopus so he could put it on his hand and pass it along. Made me so angry. I assume that the more they are harassed the less diver friendly they become. I would much prefer to chance upon an octopus who is curious about me, and perhaps never see one, than to see them regularly because they are pulled into view and thereby limit my chance of having a natural encounter. I don't make my living from photography though. And I don't eat seafood. Or other animals. So I recognize I'm a bit more sensitive than others may be.

 

When we die, lets just hope the cows are not guarding the pearly gates. Or in this case, the Octopi.