EM

http://www.canary-project.org/photos_belize3.html

or

link

One example of “bias” (that word might be too strong) I saw was this image:

with a caption reading, “Dead Staghorn Corals in Belize’s Barrier Reef.”

Sure, this image DOES show dead coral. But I imagine few patrons would realize that almost every coral reef in the world (including so-called “pristine” reefs, if they even exist anymore…) naturally have expanses of “coral rubble.” Just areas of dead, broken coral junks. Possibly from bleaching events (anthropogenic or natural), coral disease, storm/hurricane disturbance, predation (Google “crown of thorns starfish”; it’s rad/scary), boat/diver/idiot damage, etc., etc. It turns out that these coral rubble zones are important for the recruitment and growth of new reefs. They also provide other general “ecosystem services” like shoreline protection and making pretty waves for surfers.

The images are certainly effective in evoking emotions of “wow, that’s pretty bad” or even “what can I do to save this reef?” And to this end, I think this project is pretty cool. I’m also really glad the project hasn’t adopted scare tactics like some other conservation advocacy programs I’ve seen. Those tend to only appeal to “the choir” while turning the real audience away. Conservation needs all the help it can get, and the Canary Project has adopted a rather novel and tasteful approach. I’m glad you guys are on our side.

DL

Thanks for your feedback (even though you probably didn’t think we would see it directly). I happened onto your reference to our project by accident, but I wanted to say we appreciate your comments as well as others that we have been reading on blogs. Many people have suggested that we do before and after shots. We decided initially that we did not want to do that because we felt that before and after shots are read as data and limit the reading of the photograph to the conveyance of information. We are trying to achieve a more resonant emotional effect. That being said: the demand for comparisons is so high, we are considering ways to incorporate that into our project.

As for bias, we are certainly making stylistic choices. Why does strike you as bias? How would you avoid bias based on your understanding of it? (These questions are earnest and not facetious).

Ed Morris
Executive Director
The Canary Project

I thought this was REALLY interesting for a number of reasons…
1) My grad school crap is focusing on “marine disturbance ecology.”

2) My previous work has been with “bioindicators.” The classic example of a bioindicator is the “canary in the coal mine” used to detect noxious gases. This site (under “Why Canary”) is supposedly aimed at a similar goal. Pretty cool.

3) As cool as this site is, I have a few words of caution/gripes:
a) No before and after shots of the same sites (I think Ms. Pfund alluded to this). Just like those weight-loss infomercials, before/after stuff is key for documenting “change.” Otherwise, there’s the problem of “shifting baselines.” Google that one and see whatcha get.
b) I’ll tell ya whatcha get: http://www.shiftingbaselines.org/index.php
What is “pristine” and what is not? Not so clear-cut…
c) Still plenty of bias in these shots. In the subject selection, lighting etc. I think many of the “dead reef” shots are purposely super-dark.

Definitely great for spreading word about environmental problems though! and cool fonts!

See also: http://www.marinephotobank.org/home.php