Wot Flower???

Well what is in a name?  Quite a lot actually.  I have been going through the codes of practice and 2008 exhibition CD for the RPS Nature Group and one of the overwhelming impression for me is the need for authenticity and correct scientific names or as the code puts it...' should convey the essential truth of what the photographer saw at the time it was taken...'.  Now this posses me with certain problems.   I have little problem identifying fauna but flora is another matter.  The three photographs illustrate this really quite well.

All three were taken in a local park which is part of a flood meadow.  This produces an abundant bloom this time of year, one that cries out to be photographed.  However, here is the problem.   I know these flowers are Meadow Buttercups and Dandelions - no problem there.  However, interspersed in the meadow are far more delicate flowers which I have no idea of their name.  I have gone through my pocket field guide and am no further forward.  However, they make a lovely photograph but would this be acceptable for the Nature Group?   

Of course I have no answer to this yet and I am sure this will not be a problem as there will be many helpful people who will be able to identify the errant flower,   But does this effect the validity of the photograph?  I suppose the answer to this is yes and no.  Yes as a record of the plant but no when considering the broader aesthetic value of a photograph.

To examine this further consider the flower photographs of Niall Benvie.  Here he takes really wonderful portraits of individual flowers.  However, when you see his set up and the way his final images are produced it really does place a question mark over whether they are an authentic record of the flower.  Indeed this really does raise a whole series of questions about the use of flash photography - does this record the '...essential truth...'?   

Now I am not critising the rules it just something I will have to get used to and I have to say it is rather interesting way to photograph.  Indeed, the better you know a subject then generally the better the photograph.  As the code of practice puts it '...The photographer should be familiar with the natural history of the subject; the more complex the life-form and the rarer the species, the greater his/ her knowledge must be...'

This will make for an interesting learning curve.