Posted by Phil Ellard on December 28, 2011 at 1:07 PM
This year i wash thinking of using a flash to allow me to photograph barn owls when the light is less favourable dawn dusk, not night. I had no worries about the affect on the owls as i have seen so many images taken this way including many at night with big flashes...
I then read online that flash is not advised as it will impair their eyesight afterwards for a bit stopping them hunting? I am unsure weather this is true for one they hunt almost purely by sound anyway?!
But i am worried about upsetting them. I can photo them for ages on apost from a car and they barely give me a glance but i have this thought of my flash firing and feathers fly everywhere and a blinded barn owl flying into the side of a bus...
Any advice or experience on this would be appreciated ...
Hope you had a great christmas, and happy new year
XXX
Posted by Graham Goddard on December 28, 2011 at 4:52 PM
I wouldn't do it for a number of reasons, but I think you've answered your own concerns here Phil.
Have a good 'un !
Cheers mate
Posted by Phil Ellard on December 28, 2011 at 5:47 PM
I think you are right Graham, it was just an idea i had after seeing images clearly taken with flash, but so much of this is new it is always good to ask for other peoples advice .....
Phil, like you, I've seen images of owls being photographed in flight/landing etc using a flash. To me these birds rely on all their senses to hunt successfully and also to just get around. When I think of how long an unexpected flash burns itself into my retina for then its surely going to do the same to them? It sounds like you've made the right decision already
Posted by Phil Ellard on December 29, 2011 at 7:03 AM
Thanks Simon, yes i have. It was a strange one as you say there are so many taken that way but i did have concernst but as i have no experience in this i thought i would ask it sounds like a silly question i know ... Cheers again
Posted by David Sewell on December 29, 2011 at 9:00 AM
I'm going to try to extend this debate, although my personal sympathies tend towards those of Graham and Simon.
The early wildlife photographers, up to the time of Eric Hosking, used bulb flash for owls and other nocturnal birds. I had bulb flash on my first Kodak Instamatic, and can vouch for the fact that it was far more painful on the eyes when the flash went off compared to the relatively low powered electronic flash available at the time. This was mainly because a bulb flash was of much longer duration. Photographers like Hosking used bulb flash on owls very successfully and without causing actual harm to their subjects as far as I know. You also have to bear in mind that bulbs were one-off use. Getting a single picture in a night would be the norm and the bird was therefore disturbed only once.
By the time I took up bird photography in the 1970s technology had moved on and practical electronic flash was available for use in the field. I used a Mecablitz 402 with twin flash heads, and used it on most species up to blackbird size. In 1976 I worked little owls at a nest by night, and used flash on it. The owls coped with the flash, and raised two healthy owlets. At the time I would have said that electronic flash caused no disturbance. As I look back, however, I think I am confusing disturbance and harm. No harm was caused, but the amount of disturbance or stress is unknown. As flash was electronic I could take a number of pictures a night, although the cost of film stopped me taking too many.
Today technology has made huge strides. I still have the Mecablitz, but have not used it for years. Like most other people I prefer natural daylight for wildlife photography. For owls, however, daylight is not what we perceive as natural for most species, and we prefer to see our pictures with dark or black backgrounds. This usually involves the use of flash to some extent. I think there is a world of difference between a bit of fill-in and firing a flash in total darkness. There is also a difference between a perching owl and one that is hunting.
To a certain extent I think the ethics of wildlife photography reflect the technology available. The early photographers had to use bulb flash on owls as there was nothing else available that would do the job. By the time I photographed my owls at nest a better technology was available and caused less disturbance. Having said that, I would no longer photograph owls at a nest and certainly wouldn't use flash to do so. Today technology has moved a lot further, and most of us would hesitate to use flash on owls. My limit would be fill in flash, low-powered and primarily used to give a dark background, but the best advice is if in doubt - don't.
David
Posted by Phil Shaw on December 29, 2011 at 10:44 AM
I have a friend who is a veterinary opthalmologist. His view, supported by the available research literature, is that there is no likelihood of causing harm to owls by using electronic flash of the type that is available from the camera manufacturers. Obviously, as others have pointed out, if you are trying to photograph an owl in flight in darkness, this may affect its ability to see where is going for a second or so. Multiple bursts of flash affect the regeneration time of the retinal pigment required for vision in low light and although not directly harmful, should be avoided in my opinion because of this - it becomes progressively longer with additional exposure.
An owl's eye is very much the same as a human eye and their experience of flash is likely to be similar to ours. Certainly, I would be reluctant to condone using flash on owls in flight at night and unless you have fixed up some kind of pre-focused photo-trap this is unlikely to be successful. Photographing perched owls at night or birds in flight during hours of daylight, though, will cause no harm to the bird. David's advice above "if in doubt, don't" is definitely good advice: I would add "if you do, don't over do it" - so don't keep hammering away at the subject until the flash starts smoking. What it comes down to in the end is not just avoidance of harm, but in ensuring that you are treating the subject with respect.
Incidentally, if you are shooting with flash to obtain a dark background, you will not be shooting at "fill" output levels, you will be shooting with flash as the main lighting source, usually at high power to overcome whatever ambient light there maybe. My preference is to shoot with flash at low power as "fill" or "balanced" to avoid dark backgrounds.
Posted by Phil Ellard on December 29, 2011 at 11:34 AM
Thanks David and Phil, very interesting. Certainly my thought was to use a defused flash to give a little more light to allow me to drop the iso a bit \ increase shutter spead not at night, in day light but just when a little more light is needed i ma not looking to completely blacken the BG....
for what it is worth i am just as concerned about causing disturbance \ stressas actual harm
Posted by Craig Jones on December 29, 2011 at 6:47 PM
Phil far too many unanswered questions when it comes to flash with animals, loads of experts and loads of conflicting advice, but unless the subject says it doesn’t hurt them who or what are we to believe?????? welfare before any shot 100% no to flash for me
Posted by Phil Ellard on December 29, 2011 at 6:52 PM
Discussion
9 repliesI then read online that flash is not advised as it will impair their eyesight afterwards for a bit stopping them hunting? I am unsure weather this is true for one they hunt almost purely by sound anyway?!
But i am worried about upsetting them. I can photo them for ages on apost from a car and they barely give me a glance but i have this thought of my flash firing and feathers fly everywhere and a blinded barn owl flying into the side of a bus...
Any advice or experience on this would be appreciated ...
Hope you had a great christmas, and happy new year
XXX
Have a good 'un !
Cheers mate
The early wildlife photographers, up to the time of Eric Hosking, used bulb flash for owls and other nocturnal birds. I had bulb flash on my first Kodak Instamatic, and can vouch for the fact that it was far more painful on the eyes when the flash went off compared to the relatively low powered electronic flash available at the time. This was mainly because a bulb flash was of much longer duration. Photographers like Hosking used bulb flash on owls very successfully and without causing actual harm to their subjects as far as I know. You also have to bear in mind that bulbs were one-off use. Getting a single picture in a night would be the norm and the bird was therefore disturbed only once.
By the time I took up bird photography in the 1970s technology had moved on and practical electronic flash was available for use in the field. I used a Mecablitz 402 with twin flash heads, and used it on most species up to blackbird size. In 1976 I worked little owls at a nest by night, and used flash on it. The owls coped with the flash, and raised two healthy owlets. At the time I would have said that electronic flash caused no disturbance. As I look back, however, I think I am confusing disturbance and harm. No harm was caused, but the amount of disturbance or stress is unknown. As flash was electronic I could take a number of pictures a night, although the cost of film stopped me taking too many.
Today technology has made huge strides. I still have the Mecablitz, but have not used it for years. Like most other people I prefer natural daylight for wildlife photography. For owls, however, daylight is not what we perceive as natural for most species, and we prefer to see our pictures with dark or black backgrounds. This usually involves the use of flash to some extent. I think there is a world of difference between a bit of fill-in and firing a flash in total darkness. There is also a difference between a perching owl and one that is hunting.
To a certain extent I think the ethics of wildlife photography reflect the technology available. The early photographers had to use bulb flash on owls as there was nothing else available that would do the job. By the time I photographed my owls at nest a better technology was available and caused less disturbance. Having said that, I would no longer photograph owls at a nest and certainly wouldn't use flash to do so. Today technology has moved a lot further, and most of us would hesitate to use flash on owls. My limit would be fill in flash, low-powered and primarily used to give a dark background, but the best advice is if in doubt - don't.
David
An owl's eye is very much the same as a human eye and their experience of flash is likely to be similar to ours. Certainly, I would be reluctant to condone using flash on owls in flight at night and unless you have fixed up some kind of pre-focused photo-trap this is unlikely to be successful. Photographing perched owls at night or birds in flight during hours of daylight, though, will cause no harm to the bird. David's advice above "if in doubt, don't" is definitely good advice: I would add "if you do, don't over do it" - so don't keep hammering away at the subject until the flash starts smoking. What it comes down to in the end is not just avoidance of harm, but in ensuring that you are treating the subject with respect.
Incidentally, if you are shooting with flash to obtain a dark background, you will not be shooting at "fill" output levels, you will be shooting with flash as the main lighting source, usually at high power to overcome whatever ambient light there maybe. My preference is to shoot with flash at low power as "fill" or "balanced" to avoid dark backgrounds.
for what it is worth i am just as concerned about causing disturbance \ stressas actual harm