Category Archives: Ideas

Equipment, Ideas, Photographic Myths and Platitudes, Technique

Photographic Myths and Platitudes – ‘Landscape Photography Lenses’ (Part I)

33 Comments

(NOTES: This article has been updated periodically since its original publication, including a more significant update in 2019. And, yes, there is a Part II.)

A recent discussion got me thinking once again about another “myth” of landscape photography, namely that some lenses are appropriate for landscape photography and other lenses are not. There are several such myths, including but not limited to the following aspects: focal lengths, zooms versus primes, maximum apertures, expense, etc. While I could have a lot of fun (or not!) starting with the zoom/prime question, I have saved that for Part II. (Short preview: I think that “zooms or primes?” may be the wrong question, the image quality implications are not as simple as you might think, and I use both… but tend more and more to rely on zooms.)

Instead, I’ll start with…

Focal Length

The trigger for this was a discussion of the suitability of a certain type of lens for landscape photography. I had made a point concerning a 85mm prime that I sometimes used, and the other party disagreed with my perspective. Several rebuttals to my thinking were offered, but the one offered as a sort of trump card was that using a 85mm lens for landscape is an inappropriate choice, and one should use a wide-angle zoom like a 16-35mm lens.

While many landscape photographers know better, especially those who have done this for a while, it is surprising how many assume it to be accepted wisdom that proper landscape photography is done with ultra-wide to perhaps normal focal length lenses, and that the first and perhaps only lens that a landscape photographer would want would be such a lens. (Again, I’m not getting into the prime v. zoom question here – I’ll save that fun topic for a later post. :-)

In my view, the best answer to the “what focal length is best for landscape?” question is the focal length that works best for the photograph I am making right now. My current kit, based on full frame DSLR bodies, covers focal lengths from 16mm to 400mm — technically 560mm if I add a 1.4x TC. While I sometimes work with less than the full kit (when backpacking, for example), when I’m not constrained by weight or other limitations I carry lenses to cover this full range and typically use most or all of them. What follows is an overview of some of the lenses I use, accompanied by some photographic examples and explanations.

Continue reading Photographic Myths and Platitudes – ‘Landscape Photography Lenses’ (Part I) →
Commentary, Ideas

What Do YOU See?

2 Comments

Earlier this week a reader posted a message on Facebook about one of my photographs (probably one of the more perplexing ones to some viewers/readers – a black and white photograph of a wall) and said: “not to be meant as criticism: but why did you take this picture – what intrigued you about the scene?”

I thought this was a great question, and I answered as best as I could. (Admittedly, I’m not always fully aware of precisely why I make a particular photograph – I may simply know at some intuitive level that it is interesting to me.) My quick answer was:

First, I’m intrigued by minimalist geometric (and sometimes natural) subjects. There were several things that caught my attention here, including: the gross difference between the large (almost but not quite) black area on the right and the thin and brighter area of the window frame on the left. I also liked the way the faint (and fading) shadow continues the line of the one bit of structure than interrupts the vertical pattern on the left side. And, although it isn’t visible until you see a large print, the larger area on the right side of the frame is far from plain – it is a fabric-like texture that is, itself, divided into rectangular squares.

It was, of course, first shot in color. I’ve gone back and forth on the color v. black and white question. The colors are so muted that you might actually think that the color print was black and white, so I’ve more or less decided to go with black and white.

Finally, you might think of this as a sort of “study” in which I’m experimenting with some very simple form ideas. As you might have noticed if you follow my stuff much, I post a photograph every day – and I have no illusions that I can produce 365 great photographs every year! :-)

And then I also included: “I’d be interested to hear more about your thoughts and reactions to the photograph. Ultimately, that interests me as much or more as my own thoughts.”

Part of her response included:

… I find it fascinating, in all its “mutedness” – but it is such an unlikely picture – and image of something that doesn’t easily catch someones eye. People pass this scene by – or better – they do not even go there (why would someone go to a wall besides a window – we’d not face it, we’d turn our backs on it). So ordinary, yet fascinating…

Her response was wonderful, and made me think of some things implicit in the photographs that I had not recognized until she suggested them. I had thought of the “mutedness,” which I thought of as a sense of “quiet” in the image. But her idea about how “people pass by the scene” and the comment about “why would someone go to a wall beside a window…” made me realize some things about the photograph that I had not thought of – partly precisely what she noted, but beyond that some idea that the photograph suggests things that are not really in the frame, and one thing that is at least odd about it is that the subject is the thing that a visitor to this place would be least likely to look at.  I often learn a lot about my photographs from others. That may seem like an odd thing to say, but I can almost never see my photographs quite the same way that others do – if for no other reason than because I created them.

Commentary, Equipment, Ideas

An Itinerant Photographer and His iPad: A First Report

10 Comments

I returned last night from a week-long visit to New York City. While this wasn’t just a photography visit, enough photography was part of the plan that I had to carry a reasonable amount of equipment. Typically I would bring along my Macbook, but this time I decided to leave the laptop at home and see if I could get by with just an iPad instead.

I knew that this would necessitate some compromises in the way I usually operate on the road. For example, serious photography applications like Photoshop and Lightroom simply don’t run on the iPad, so there would be no possibility of doing real post-processing work on the road. The iPad doesn’t have a “real” keyboard, instead providing an on-screen “virtual keyboard” – more on that below. On the positive side, the iPad is positively tiny compared to any real laptop. It makes my 13″ Macbook seem terribly bulky by comparison. The iPad slips easily into the external pocket of my Crumpler Eight Million Dollar Home camera bag, and doesn’t add enough weight to the package to be worthy of note. The battery life is tremendous and the charger is very small.

What follows is an early report on certain aspects of iPad use by the traveling photographer – or at least this mobile photographer. Continue reading An Itinerant Photographer and His iPad: A First Report →

Commentary, Ideas, News

Thinking More About the Need for Discretion

10 Comments

Earlier today I posted (elsewhere) a photograph of an interesting, unusual, and perhaps somewhat fragile natural bridge located in a part of California that I frequently visit. Although I did not give directions to the feature or even narrow down its location within less than perhaps a 25 mile radius, shortly after posting the image a person replied… and included a photograph of someone standing on top of the bridge.

Sheesh.

I’m astonished at the self-centered behavior of some visitors to the wild world. They apparently don’t realize that their momentary thrill risks the very ability of later visitors to experience the thing that drew them there. Why in the world a person would go to all the trouble to find and visit these sometimes remote sites and then show little respect for them is beyond me.

I was brought immediately back to a conversation I had with my friend Mike earlier this summer. Mike is a retired national park ranger who has a deep love for wild places. He had expressed concern and reservations about the clarity with which I sometimes described the locations of my photographs. Mike’s concerns were several, but among them was the worry that too much information shared with too many people who have too little invested in the protection of these places might endanger them. At first I wondered how my little web site could have any significant impact, but after checking into some internet statistics I began to see that a fair number of people might be reading my descriptions.

The particular feature that I’m thinking of today is a delicate and rare natural arch in a place where such features are not common. Although it seems like a sturdy thing, being made of rock, it is actually quite fragile in the geological sense. There are cracks in the arch at both ends, and any time a person adds his/her weight to the structure stresses are created that can only hasten its eventual collapse.

But people do such things. I’m more inclined than ever to refrain from offering specifics about many of these locations, especially those that are potentially subject to visits by too many people and/or that are by their nature fragile.