Is there any value in adding multiple similar photos of an organism?

One potential non-immediate benefit could be 3D reconstruction and dimensional estimates which could be derived from multiple images by future researchers. There is already significant progress on recreating entire 3D scenes from a single image. e.g.

And tools designed for photogrammetry using multiple images already exist, although these tend to be naive with respect to complex and moving creatures such as birds and butterflies, however one could envision the extension of tools specifically adapted to those needs:

Also, as someone who has done several image analysis projects for or in collaboration with other researchers, having extra images is always helpful. As others have noted, they can function as a kind of insurance. That particular spot on the wing of some Lepidoptera species might only be visible in one of your photos.


What I see at times is one “rogue” picture in a group, that is not the same species. Most times I pick it, but as times I am sure I miss it. One issue is that it slows the ID process, in many cases for a bird you know from 1 or maybe 2 pictures, but you need to look at them all

You are right re macro shots and depth of field. I try to do focus stacking if possible, but not always possible.

For my bird examples, it rarely matters.

Here is a nice example of where I think the multiple shots add no value: maybe 2 needed as quality not great

[Link removed by moderator so as not to call out a specific user]

PS Not picking on the observer, but some exposure adjustment would help here as well.

I’m also guilty of taking many photos if something looks cool, even if the additional photos have little added value. For example, I had a whole photo shoot with this grasshopper the other day.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.