Raison d'être
These photos were taken over 2006-2009 (a few are from earlier years) mostly in southern France, principally Var.
The website is principally for interest and to actively invite comment and feedback. The commentaries are largely based on my own observations, in particular the comparison of ID and distribution/altitude information given in leading reference books with my own experiences - which sometimes diverge.
I hope that the more people who see the beauty of these fascinating creatures, the more it will lead to an appreciation that we need to be more pro-active in protecting them against the greed of humans that seem to only be concerned with "development" and monetary profit. This is particularly true in the UK, where species are declining at alarming rates, resulting in a number of extinctions in the past two or three decades. The work of Butterfly Conservation is vital - if you feel strongly about this and are not already a member of BC (http://www.butterfly-conservation.org/), I urge you to join.
Prior to 2006, I used a Canon 500 film camera with a Sigma 105mm macro lens. At the beginning of 2006, I decided to "go digital", as it was time-consuming to scan the negatives for images, plus the loss of resolution, and bought a Canon 20D, still with the 105mm lens. At the start of 2007 I upgraded the lens to a Sigma 150mm macro, mainly because the 150mm lens does not extend when focussing (the 105mm did, and occasionally scared the subject off), it is silent when focussing (the 105mm makes a slight whirring), and greater working distance for the same size image. In 2009 I am still using this combination, which I find quite suitable.
I bought a cheap tripod in 2005 in case I found I needed it, but it stayed in its case until... I was persuaded in May 2007 to persevere with it, and to compare the results of hand-held and tripod. I am now convinced and have converted from the "why do you need a tripod, hand-held is perfectly good" camp to the "look closely and you'll see the blur caused by camera shake" camp. The cheap tripod served its purpose, although it wasn't very robust, and I bought a Manfrotto Neotec with a ball-joint head for 2008; it is expensive, as tripods go, but the speed of set up is vital in the field when there often isn't the time to extend six tripod leg sections and adjust three levers on the head.
The species count of butterflies we have seen in France is 205 and although ticks on a list are not the prime motivation, it is a great thrill to realise that you are looking at a species that you have never seen before. From an English perspective, it's hard to get your head round the fact that the Heath Fritillary (Mellicta athalia) and Adonis Blue (Lysandra bellargus) are common species almost everywhere.
Butterfly watching in England has been (and still is) highly enjoyable over the past four decades but you know you’re unlikely to see anything unexpected. And that’s the thing about France – there are just so many species (about 239 mainland species, plus a few Corsica endemics) that you never know what you’re going to see. Much of France is under recorded and it is quite possible to see species in areas where they are "not supposed to be". Much of the country, especially in the mountainous or pre-mountainous areas, is undeveloped and the butterflies are as numerous as they have been for centuries.
I principally use the Collins guide by Tolman and Lewington (1997) (on species pages referred to as "T&L") and the learned work by Higgins and Riley (1971) (on species pages referred to as "H&R"). These two abbreviations and the two below in brackets are used on the species pages to refer to these books.
T&L is the best European publication for illustrations, which include all major variations, absolutely necessary for identification purposes. Richard Lewington’s illustrations are superb - you have to look twice to realise that they are drawings, not actual photographs. This easily compensates for the text part of the book, where my experience is that the information regarding distributions, altitudes and flight periods is often unreliable. The text is very brief and seems to rely heavily on the illustrations, rather than attempting to give detailed textual guidance on identification features. It is worth buying for the illustrations alone. There was a later Tolman "photographic" guide to European butterflies with limited text and not even a single photo for quite a few common species. Hardly a photographic guide, then, and I would not recommend this book.
The book on French butterflies (Les Papillons de jour de France, in French) by Tristan Lafranchis (on species pages referred to as "TLFr") is very thorough and is packed full of very accurate and current information on distributions by département, larval hostplants, flight periods and altitude ranges. You have to have some knowledge of French but it is worth buying for anyone planning to spend time in France. I was rather disappointed at the number and quality of photographs (although a few of them are exceptional), but it is worth buying for the information alone. It's a very heavy book, being printed on quality coated paper, so not ideal as a field guide. Available from the author at lafranch@otenet.gr.
In 2004 Lafranchis published a more recent book in English "Butterflies of Europe" focusing on identifying European butterflies (on species pages referred to as "TLID"), at 350 pages it is generally considered to be the best European ID field guide. In 2007 it was translated and updated in French, Polish and Dutch. The English edition is available from www.amazon.fr/gp/offer-listing/295216200X or directly from the author lafranch@otenet.gr for 36 Euros or 25 GBPounds (postage to the UK included). A DVD-ROM version of this book is in preparation with 3-4000 photos (imago, caterpillar, hostplants, habitats), additions and updates to the English edition (three new species illustrated: Agrodiaetus orphicus, A. eleniae, Melitaea ogygia); this DVD-ROM will be ready in early January and available from the author lafranch@otenet.gr for around 45 Euros.
I have followed the revised taxonomy (classification) and nomenclature in Lafranchis' ID book on this web site. The taxonomy of European butterflies is a highly contentious subject among taxonomists and there are (or were) numerous differences between experts, unfortunately confusing for non-taxonomists. There has been a very recent consensus among taxonomists, resulting in new scientific names for many species; as the current scientific names are generally well-known and understood, I have kept to this until such time as the new taxonomy becomes widely understood and is in general use.
Photos are shown at the top of each species page as a grid of 400x267 pixel images for comparison purposes, with larger versions below - click on the grid image to go to the larger image. Some early (pre-2005) photos do not have enlarged versions.
Even with the aid of enlarged photos and many excellent reference works, it is still quite difficult to identify certain species with any degree of certainty, especially the Pyrgus family of grizzled skippers. So the identifications are my “best guesses” in many cases and any comments are welcome – via the contact page. I am indebted to several experts on European butterflies who have knowledge about the identification of difficult species that is far greater than even the more detailed books, in particular Tim Cowles, Guy Padfield and Matt Rowlings. They all have excellent web sites and there are links to them on the links page.
I have used the standard notation to describe wing-areas, e.g. upf for upperside forewing, uph for the upperside hindwing and similarly unf and unh for the underside. The areas of each wing are defined as basal, discal, marginal etc and the specific locations (especially relevant with regard to the positions of eye spots or "ocelli") by the “space” between veins e.g. s6. For simplicity, the wing diagram from Butterflies of Europe by Tristan Lafranchis can be found here.
I have endeavoured to differentiate between "subspecies" and "form" as defined in H&R, in that a subspecies relates to differing populations of a species that occupy separate although often contiguous areas and as such may be considered separate geographical races. A form may be any recognisable variant, e.g. female form, seasonal form i.e. different broods, local forms that co-exist with the nominate form, or a variety or aberration.
Incidentally, I would not catch any butterfly for the purposes of identification or photography. I have no problem with the use of nets for scientific purposes such as identification of species where photographs alone would not be enough. Every photograph was taken in the wild without disturbing the subject.
All photographs are copyright Roger Gibbons. I would be happy (flattered, even) to grant permission for non-commercial use.