All of them work.
We (photographers) often forget that we shoot mostly for the general public, and rarely, if ever, for other photographers. We also tend to forget that photography has a utilitarian function as well, not just being fine art. Photographs like these might have a number of utilitarian uses, not least of which is illustrations for magazine articles and covers. In that sense (e.g., magazine cover), having a portrait version can be very useful. It also makes sense not to compose too tight, as magazines might need a lot of "empty" space around for text.
So, keep doing them in multiple versions. And here is one you forgot (square):
Yes. That's the best.
Interesting twist, Slobodan. As usual, you give me a perspective I had not considered, so thank you for that.
The reasons you listed for taking multiple shots in general are exactly my thinking behind doing so for this butterfly: multiple applications from fine art, to a magazine cover, for a species ID book, etc. Normally, in the past, I would have just taken the "bullseye" shot (#3) and filled the frame with the butterfly. However, in trying to develop an artistic perspective, I have been experimenting with different compositions to see which one(s) harmonizes the best. The Zebra Swallowtail happens to be my favorite butterfly, so I wanted to take multiple shots of it before this season ends.
Regarding your squared suggestion, I have to admit that Russ has me programmed "never to crop," so for me
not maintaining the "original photographic dimensions" seems to be a sin
However, the crop you did does remove some arguably wasted-space, and might fit better in (say) a magazine
column article, where (just thinking about it now) I have seen many photos cropped for reasons of space.
So thanks again for the suggestion,
Jack
.