Category Archives: Commentary

Rising Gas Prices: Where Will It End?

IMPORTANT: Read on for an important update to this April Fool’s Day 2011 that I have posted near the bottom of the page below the original story.

Gas Station Sign, Death Valley
Gas Station Sign, Death Valley

From a quick iPhone snap as I drove through this part of Death Valley a few days ago. Sometimes it seems like only thing higher than the temperature in Death Valley is the price of gasoline. I tell you, after putting 30 gallons in the Hummer, it will be a long time before I can afford to take another vacation!

© Copyright G Dan Mitchell – all rights reserved.


NOTE: This photo apparently “went viral” recently, on disinformation posts on social media claiming that this is the price of gas in California today. LOL. I have a bit more to say about that below in an “update” and in the comments section.

If you enjoyed this (hint!) April Fool’s Day post, you might enjoy these, too:

And, of course, the rest of this site features years of my photography, along with articles and stories on photography-related subjects.

And, more fun with Photoshop…

UPDATE 3/10/22: Because the image in this post was ripped off by disinformation posters on social media and used as a fake news meme… I need to give readers the full truth. (Sadly, it does kind of wreck the original April Fool’s joke, but here we are.)

In early 2011 I was in Death Valley to make photographs. I passed by this gas station at Furnace Creek, which is known for having some of the highest posted gas prices in the country. (Smart visitors get their gas for much less at nearby Stovepipe Wells or to the east of the park in Nevada, where it is way cheaper.)

For several years I had been doing an April Fool’s Day post that includes some preposterous story. (See links in the story below.) It occurred to me that I could do one this year (2011) by photographing the sign and Photoshopping preposterous gas prices in place of the actual prices. I don’t actually recall the real prices at the time, but they were probably in the $3-something range. So I pulled over and made an iPhone snap of the sign. (Some wonder: Did I buy gas here. Are you crazy! No! See the previous paragraph. And, no, I do not own a Hummer. ;-)

Conveniently, the “6” on the price for “Supreme” was easy to invert, so I used it to create a “9” that I photoshopped in for the dollar amount. And on April Fool’s Day 2011 I posted the image and the text you’ll find lower on this page.  There were several obvious hints in the story about its April Fool’s Day trickery, though I did manage to fool a few folks. 

That was the last I thought of it until (I think) 2019 when someone contacted me to point out that the image had been ripped off and posted by alt-right conspiracy theory disinformation social media accounts as “evidence” of the outrageous prices for gas in California. Yeah, our prices are higher than the national average, but not this high! Several media outlets contacted me about it, and if you look around you might still be able to find a few of the stories in which I debunked the claim and pointed to this old post. 

So, if you see this “photograph” somewhere online along with claims about the high prices of gas, let them know it is fake and point them here for the truth. ;-)


COMMENT OR QUESTION? Scroll down to the comment form.

G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer and visual opportunist. His book, “California’s Fall Color: A Photographer’s Guide to Autumn in the Sierra” (Heyday Books) is available directly from him. Blog | Bluesky | Mastodon | Substack Notes | Flickr | Email

All media © Copyright G Dan Mitchell and others.

The Economics of DSLR “Protective” Filters

The subject of whether or not to get so-called “protective” UV filters for DSLR lenses comes up a lot. I used to respond to the question frequently – so frequently that I eventually gave up and just wrote a post on the subject that I could refer people to when they ask.

However, during a recent weak moment I wrote a new response to the notion that ‘protective’ filters provide good value for all photographers. As I do from time to time, I’m sharing it here:

Someone wrote: … would you rather pay $150 on a filter that *might* compromise your shot or spend $150 on replacing the front element and have *no* possible risk of image degradation from the extra piece of glass?

I replied: This is essentially an insurance question. Obviously, if we knew that our lens would certainly be destroyed in a way that was 100% preventable by using a filter we would almost certainly get a filter. But that is an imaginary scenario that is far from reality.

Most lenses will never be damaged in any serious way. My hunch is that this is actually the fate of a very small percentage of lenses – probably far less than 10%, and I would bet closer to 1%.

Of those that are damaged, only some will suffer a blow to the front element. There are many other modes of failure – a dropped lens that breaks the mechanism, something crashing into the side of the lens, water damage, etc.

Of those that suffer a blow to the front of the lens structure, only some will result in contact with the front element. Of those in which contact with the front element occurs, some would not cause any damage or any significant damage. Some would damage the front element, but would be violent enough that the filter would not have prevented the damage. A few that might not have damaged the front element will send glass shards from the broken filter into the front element and damage it. In some subset of cases, all of the variables might line up just right and prevent damage.

At this point the user would have to replace the broken high quality filter at a cost that varies depending on a number of factors. Let’s use a figure if $100 for an expensive L zoom. The owner has now invested something on the order of $200… which is not much different from the cost of replacing a front element, as I understand it.

In terms of the probability of damage, the cost of the filter, the likelihood that the filter would save the day… the filter is probably one of the worst insurance investments you could make.

Am I unalterably and completely opposed to the use of ‘protective’ filters? Almost, but not quite. While I do not think that it makes sense to automatically stick such a filter on every lens for general use – see the link above for more on this topic – I can think of one sort of situation in which I might use one. I would consider a filter if I were shooting a sealed-body camera (such as a Canon 1-series) and was working in conditions that were truly dangerous to my equipment (and not just a bit of mist or ocean spray) and I was using of the small number of L lenses that become sealed (and not all do) with the addition of a filter.

Other than that? No.

G Dan Mitchell Photography | Flickr | Twitter | Facebook | Email
Text, photographs, and other media are © Copyright G Dan Mitchell (or others when indicated) and are not in the public domain and may not be used on websites, blogs, or in other media without advance permission from G Dan Mitchell.

Photographing Horsetail Falls – Random Thoughts About an Icon

Horsetail Fall, Early Evening
Horsetail Fall, Early Evening

UPDATE: As of 2020 I am no longer posting annual updates concerning this subject — and I am editing older posts on the subject in light of the need to be more responsible about not encouraging the onslaught. I also no longer recommend going to the Valley to see it. Unfortunately, too much exposure (yes, I played a part in it, unfortunately) has led to absurd crowds, traffic jams, littering, destruction of areas in the Valley where too many people go to see it… and the park has increasingly — and appropriately — cracked down. Parking options have been eliminated, at least one viewing location has been closed. Good news! The rest of Yosemite Valley is still there and often exceptionally beautiful at this time of year.

I recall first becoming aware of Galen Rowell’s famous photograph of Yosemite’s Horsetail Fall (the “natural fire fall”) many years ago, quite possibly as it appears on page 25 of my 1979 edition of his book “High and Wild” ( Sierra Club Books) which I probably picked up when I worked in a bookstore for several years. (Each bookstore employee had a shelf in a back room where we put aside books until we could afford them. My shelf often held books of photography including large format books of landscape photography. I still have original copies of several of the well-known Ansel Adams books in new condition, but that is a story for another post perhaps.) I am sure that I saw the photograph again from time to time, and the story of its creation is now well known. Of course, I did not really know then where the fall was, other than “somewhere in Yosemite Valley,” nor did I know when the purportedly brief appearance of the fall occurred each year. It was a mystery, almost a myth, and it seemed like something that only a few privileged people had been able to see.

Although I’ve visited the Valley for decades — long enough that I remember watching the unnatural fire fall being pushed over the edge of Glacier Point when I was a child – I had never really tried to find Horsetail Fall, much less photograph it. Truth be told, some decades ago I actually avoided the Valley for a number of years, with the exception of a time when I did a bit of climbing, since I preferred the high country of the park and elsewhere in the Sierra to the crowds and traffic in the Valley.

A few years ago – and a bit before the current insane craze for photographing the thing – I read more about Horsetail and finally got the urge to photograph it.  I think back to a February day when Northside Drive was closed for a period of major road work. It had snowed in the Valley and the only way to get over to the El Capitan picnic area was to park on Southside drive, load up a pack with camera gear, and walk the cross-valley road in the snow. Since it was my first attempt to photograph the fall, I walked across early. Having plenty of time, I turned west on Northside and wandered in a snow-covered El Capitan Meadow completely alone — no cars and, to the best of my memory, not another person. After spending perhaps an hour alone photographing the oak-filled meadow in the late afternoon, I walked back to the east and wandered up to the picnic area where a handful of other photographers were getting set up. I looked up and thought, “Oh, that’s Horsetail,” and then made some credible but fairly conventional photographs of the sight as the sunset light came on.

Horsetail Fall, Sunset (#2)
Horsetail Fall, Sunset (#2)

I returned to photograph Horsetail a few more times, on occasion making this the main goal of winter visits to the Valley. I explored the surroundings near the picnic area more thoroughly, and found more nearby areas to shoot from that created some variations in perspective. I joined the growing throng at a more accessible spot and there figured out that the fall could be photographed from more than precisely one location. Before I was done I created a few photographs of the subject that I like. (I don’t mean to imply that I was always successful. On one “memorable” evening I set up and watched as the sunset light began to glow and focus itself on the fall. It was just about to reach its peak… when someone hit the “off switch” and everything went gray as the setting sun dropped behind clouds far to the west.)

Over the past couple of years more and more people have shown up for Horsetail. It might seem odd that few others photographed it for so many decades after Rowell made his iconic image, and that then many suddenly began to try to do so. But a couple of things changed. First, the advent of digital photography and DSLRs has radically increased the number of photographers out and about and searching for things to photograph. There have long been many people with cameras in the Valley, but it sometimes has seemed to become a bit crazy in recent years. Secondly, and not entirely unrelated, the Internet has made it much easier to share information about such things as Horsetail and, even more so, to quickly update people on what is happening right now with certain photographic subjects. I think this has encouraged photographers whose time is limited and who want to “get that shot” as quickly as possible to be ready to drop everything and head out now if they hear that conditions will be promising.

And the crowds certainly do show up! A few years ago I drove to a viewing area area one February day — the road was open once again — to find a parking lot completely full and then some. Photographers were set up tripod-to-tripod and scattered in nearby forest and meadows. One evening I decided to try the other location again, and having caught on to what was happening I arrived quite early… to find that photographers were already staking out their spots hours ahead of time. I found a spot up a hill a ways in some trees, and waited… as scores of photographers began to show up and point their lenses in the same direction.

Unfortunately, the problem has continued to spiral out of control, with newspaper and magazine articles and breathless social media posts amping the thing up beyond all reason… and beyond the park’s ability to withstand the onslaught. In places where a dozen or two folks used to show up on a busy night, the crowds doubled, then doubled again, then reached into the hundreds and now into the thousands. Traffic jams ensued, huge crowds assembled in fragile meadows, forests, and river bank areas, trampling down vegetation and soil and leaving litter behind. The park service had no choice but to (wisely) institute restrictions, and as of 2020 access has been made much more difficult and limited and one of the two popular areas has been closed entirely.

That lovely, mythical, magical experience of a decade or more ago no longer exists. I urge readers to forego this one. The Valley is still utterly beautiful at this time of year, but go elsewhere and photograph its other wonderful features. Don’t be part of the out of control horde…

Horsetail Fall, Sunset (#3)
Horsetail Fall, Sunset (#3)

Photographically, the subject has become less and less appealing to me. I’ll photograph an “icon” in more or less a couple circumstances. First, I’ll do it if I don’t already have a decent image of the icon in question. Once I have an effective image I’ll often stay away unless there is something extra special about the conditions or unless I can find a new or different perspective on the subject or unless I’m working to refine a way of photographing it that I have worked on previously. It is hard, I think, to attempt this with Horsetail. The number of locations from which it is photographed is rather limited. Most photographs are made more or less from two basic locations, with slight variations. And while weather conditions can vary a lot in the Valley, the range of conditions that will still permit the sunset light to hit the fall and be photographed is very limited.

In the end, even very good photographs of the fall tend to look quite a bit like other very good photographs of the fall, mostly varying only a bit. Although I’ve recently seen many competent and well-made photographs of the fall… I’ve only seen one that was truly original. (I’m not going to identify it here since if I don’t want to encourage the next crowd to start coming out to try to recreate that image! :-)

So, I didn’t go this year. I was in Death Valley at about the time that the light started, and I spent time doing night photography on a later weekend when I might have gone.

I think I prefer to remember that evening a few years ago when I walked across the Valley in snow, spent an hour alone in El Capitan Meadow before walking to the picnic area, photographed Horsetail in the quiet with a small number of other photographers, and then walked back across the Valley in the peaceful darkness of the early evening.


G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer and visual opportunist whose subjects include the Pacific coast, redwood forests, central California oak/grasslands, the Sierra Nevada, California deserts, urban landscapes, night photography, and more.
Blog | About | Flickr | Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | 500px.com | LinkedIn | Email

Text, photographs, and other media are © Copyright G Dan Mitchell (or others when indicated) and are not in the public domain and may not be used on websites, blogs, or in other media without advance permission from G Dan Mitchell.

How I Title My Photographs, and Why

If you follow my photography you might notice that the titles I give to my photographs are not typically very “poetic,” instead tending to be relatively straightforward labels of the subjects. If a photograph is of a place I often simply refer to the location in the title, perhaps with the addition of a word or two identifying aspects such as season or time of day. If the photograph features a snow-covered tree, my title will likely be along the lines of “Snow-Covered Tree, Clouds.”

Not very creative, but I have my reasons.

Some photographers prefer to provide evocative and poetic titles for their images. To make up a few examples that sound like what I’m thinking of, you might see titles along the lines of “Endurance,” “At the Ends of the Earth,” or “Standing Against the Storm.” Another approach is to use enigmatic titles along the lines of “What She Saw,” “It Came in the Night,” “Sometimes it Gets Old,” “I Think of You When the Light Fades.”  (To the best of my knowledge these are not the actual titles of anyone’s actual photographs… but you never know! If it turns out that they are real, the connections were entirely coincidental.)

I’m not generally a fan of that approach to naming photographs. I hope that the photograph may speak for itself through whatever it is and says as a photograph. If the subject and its execution as a photograph evoke thoughts of strength or beauty or wonder or something else compelling, then I prefer to let the photograph do the talking. If it doesn’t have this effect on its own, I’d rather not try to gussy it up by adding a title to compensate for what it doesn’t intrinsically “say” as a visual image.

In addition, often the photograph is not “about” anything other than the subject itself – it is simply presented as is for consideration on its own. Not every photograph of the sea has to try to explicitly be about loneliness or a distant shore or an emotional storm or calm thoughts or a long voyage, real or metaphorical – sometimes it is just a beautiful image of the sea, with all of the interesting (we hope!) visual elements of place, light, color, texture, form, and so forth. Not every photograph of an urban environment must try to suggest a story of alienation, or urbane sophistication, or people in a rush, etc. – it may just present elements of the urban scene for your consideration as imagery. You are free—encouraged, even—to make your own associations and find whatever meaning of your own you can in the image.

I suppose that I do need to qualify all of this a bit.

First, this is my point of view, and I understand and appreciate that others may feel that the title is part of the message of the photograph. In fact, there are great examples of photographs in which the title really is a significant part of what “makes the photograph work.” In some cases an ironic dissonance between the nature of the image and the title can be effective, for example.

Second, I don’t necessarily think that description of the context of the photograph is a bad thing. (I’d better not think that – or I’d have a lot of explaining to do concerning how I present photographs in this blog!) I think it is reasonable to inform viewers about the subject and say something about the circumstances of the creation of the photograph, for a bunch of reasons that I won’t enumerate here.

Third, I suppose that my bias might be traced to several sources. One may be the fact that many (but not all) of the photographers whose work I admire tend to take a similar approach. Another may be from my background in music, where a piece may simply be what it is and not have a specific non-musical meaning at all.

One more thing…

I decided a few years ago to mostly avoid using photograph titles that identify places that are best not named. Sometimes this is simply because the photograph is more about the immediate subject (those “rocks and trees”) than about the large and specific area and its identity. In other cases those “Trees and Rocks” are in a location whose character might be harmed by too many visits by too many people. If I were to name the location with too much specificity this could make me complicit in a process that accelerates the destruction of the very things that make it so precious— its quiet, peace, remoteness, and even its loneliness. In the past, when news traveled more slowly and among smaller numbers of people, naming these places had a much less dramatic effect. However, today, any mention is instantly cataloged and entered into searchable databases, cross-linked with other references, ready to be looking up and attached to full GPS coordinates and detailed directions for access. In this world I think it is better to be circumspect about such places. And, no, I’m not trying to “keep my places secret.” I’m happy for other people who deeply love and appreciate them as I do to discover them in the same ways I do… and to join me in sharing a responsibility for their protection and safety.

G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer and visual opportunist whose subjects include the Pacific coast, redwood forests, central California oak/grasslands, the Sierra Nevada, California deserts, urban landscapes, night photography, and more.
Blog | About | Flickr | Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | 500px.com | LinkedIn | Email

Text, photographs, and other media are © Copyright G Dan Mitchell (or others when indicated) and are not in the public domain and may not be used on websites, blogs, or in other media without advance permission from G Dan Mitchell.