Category Archives: Ideas

Why Can’t Digital Cameras Be Like Film Cameras?

I was in San Francisco today with my family and my sons wanted to visit a Salvation Army store to check out old camera equipment. Both of them are intrigued by the older 35mm film cameras. In the display case we saw a couple Canon AE-1 cameras, a Canon AE-1 Program (?), and an Olympus OM-1. These are, if I’m not mistaken, cameras from the 1970s. “Back in the day” I shot with a couple of small Pentax bodies from the same ear, the ME and the MX. (Each son has one of those bodies now.)

At this point, I’m a confirmed digital photographer – I have virtually no interest at all in shooting film again. I can sort of understand the retro appeal of film, and I don’t resent those who like to use it. (Though I’ll admit that I can get a bit annoyed when some folks become self-righteous about it… :-)

That said, the better cameras from the era are beautiful little mechanical/optical marvels. At one point I pulled out my excellent Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 lens – a great performer and a lens I rely on a lot – and held it next to the 50mm f/1.8 lens from the OM-1. My Canon lens simply looks like a big plastic toy next to the efficient and well-crafted little metal Olympus lens. And the body of the camera is solid and tight, and barely larger than the biggest point and shoot style digital cameras today. The control systems are simple and direct – the OM-1 aperture and shutter speed controls are both on the lens barrel, a simple switch turns the meter on and off, there is a MLU switch, and the viewfinder with its match-needle meter is big and bright. These are cameras that don’t give the appearance of trying to look like space ships and that don’t shout “my camera is bigger and more expensive than your camera!”

If a current manufacturer came out with a DSLR body like these, I’d be an immediate customer.

By the way, early happy birthday to Jameson – and enjoy your new OM-1!

(Update: After a comment from Jim Goldstein, I clarified a few things about this idea in a follow-up comment.)

Disclosing Photo Locations: How Much Information is Too Much?

(NOTE: This post originally included only the first section, based on the story that begins the article. The longer second part added in 2014 addresses some important related issues. A third section added in early 2017 recognizes a new and dangerous political factor. Additional editing is done from time to time.)

In the summer of 2010 I had the good fortune to join friends and fellow photographers (Charlie Cramer, Mike Osborne, and Karl Kroeber) for a few days of photography in the Tuolumne Meadows/Tioga Pass area of Yosemite National Park. Spending time with photographers who have so much experience and knowledge of Yosemite is always inspiring, and I was grateful to join them.

Pond with Boulders and Trees
Pond with Boulders and Trees

While sitting around during the “boring light” midday hours — before early dinner and travel to an evening location for the good light — Mike mentioned that they were going to a place that was best not publicized, and he joked (at least if think he was joking) that he “might have to blindfold Dan” if I came along.

Mike was a Yosemite ranger for decades, and he loves and cares for the place deeply. He was concerned about posts on my website in which I had named locations and given more information than necessary about them. He has seen first-hand the damage caused by too much publicity about fragile locations. He suggested that it is often better to share or acquire information about these places the old fashioned way — by word of mouth from an acquaintance or through on-the-ground exploration. He also noted that many of my photographs are not so much about the specific place as they are about some thing I saw there that is not location-specific — so specific location titles aren’t important and may even be a distraction from the real value of the photographs.

Mike’s comments caused me to think quite a bit about this issue. First, a few words of self-defense, but then some changes that I made at my website, on social media, and in other places where I share my photographs.

As we sat around the motel room talking about this, my first thought was, more or less, “How can my little photography blog have any serious effect!?”

Continue reading Disclosing Photo Locations: How Much Information is Too Much?

Fifteen Ideas For Photographing Professional Bicycle Races

Some might be surprised to find that I take every opportunity to photograph bicycle racing. Although I’m primarily an urban and natural landscape shooter (to generalize just a bit) I also have a passion for shooting a few other surprising subjects. One of these is professional bicycle racing. Although I never raced, I was at one time a very serious cyclist. I trained with folks who did race and for several years I rode as if I were preparing to race, doing over 10,000 miles per year. With that in mind, it might  seem less surprising that I interrupted my photographs of Death Valley, the coast redwoods, and the Pacific coastline to post a week of bicycle racing photos.

During the last few years I’ve been fortunate to be able to shoot stages of the Amgen Tour of California professional stage race in northern California. As I’ve done so, I’ve gradually figured out more strategies that let me get some effective photographs. Here’s a quick summary of a few of them.

  1. Time trials, especially those on short courses, can be the best opportunity to shoot riders on their bikes. Each competitor rides the course individually, so you can get a clear view of the rider approaching. Because lower ranked riders go first, you can experiment with locations, lighting, and so forth on them… and have your shooting strategy worked out by the time the big names arrive.
  2. If you want to shoot the peloton (the pack of riders) try to do so at a start in a downtown area that includes “parade laps” – where the pack does a few loops at less competitive speeds before heading out on the open road. You’ll have similar opportunities at the end of a stage that finishes with several downtown loops, though things tend to happen a lot faster at the end than during the parade laps.
  3. If you try to shoot a sprint finish and cannot be right at the finish line – and you probably cannot – try to be in the area 100-200 meters from the line. At this point there is tremendous action as the final sprint starts to take place and, in my experience, some very dramatic shots are possible – even more so than at the finish line when the race has usually already been decided.
  4. In all of these situations, unless you are very experienced at tracking riders close up with a long lens as they fly by at high speed… practice on every rider that comes by. I’ll even practice tracking support motorcycles, police escorts – anything that moves. Eventually you want to pan smoothly while you remain continuously aware of the position of the riders in the frame – and the non-rider elements in the background. To put it mildly, this isn’t easy – and it takes a lot of practice.
  5. When you track riders moving at high speed, think about putting their torsos/hips in the center of the frame vertically. Unless you are shooting very tight, if you center their heads you’ll get lots of empty space above them and cut off their legs and bikes.
Team Gerolsteiner Warms Up for the Prologue
  • Pick your shooting location carefully. You certainly want a spot where the riders are likely to be in dramatic and dynamic positions. Turns can be good for this, for example. But also carefully consider the background to your shot – who is standing on the other side of the road and what is beyond the riders. (I once shot a series of riders warming up for a time trial… only to realize later that there was a bright green outhouse behind them!) Also think carefully about the ambient lighting. If the riders are backlit there is a good chance that they will be very dark. I try to place myself in a position where they will be front or side-lit.
  • Counter-intuitively, very high shutter speeds may not always be a good choice. Yes, you may stop the action – but you also may end up with very static looking shots. In many cases you’ll more effectively capture the speed and motion of racing if you lengthen the exposure and track the riders, thus allowing some motion blur.
  • Don’t let bad weather dissuade you from shooting. Often rain or clouds or fog can make for some of the most dramatic images. Be careful with your gear, but try to take advantage of these conditions.
  • If you are going to try to shoot the pack in the middle of a long road stage, you need to plan carefully. The road will often close well before the peloton arrives, so you need to be in place well ahead of time – an hour or many hours before the race passes. If possible, scout the area where you think you’ll shoot ahead of time. Look for a dramatic setting – an expansive view, a bridge, forest, anything that can make your shot something other than just “bikes on a road.” Consider shooting on an uphill section – the pack will go more slowly. Try out different focal lengths to see what will work best in your location. Consider having two camera bodies with different lenses – a telephoto to do long shots as the group approaches and a shorter lens to shoot the pack as it is right in front of you.
  • The pack will pass very quickly. A few motorcycles will pass, then the pack will suddenly appear in a rush of color and wind, followed quickly by the support vehicles… and then they are gone. You’ll have only seconds to shoot. You must pick your spot ahead of time. You’ll almost certainly want to use burst mode – perhaps shooting jpg so that you can get more images before the camera buffer fills. Better to err on the side of using a focal length that is too short (wide) than one that is too long (telephoto) – you can crop later if necessary.
  • The actual race is not the only thing worth shooting – there are many, many interesting subjects before and after the race. I often find interesting subjects among the spectators waiting for the pack or even watching the peloton pass. One of the great things about pro bike racing is that you have amazing access to the riders in the team area before the race. I often spend at least an hour there before the race, shooting like crazy so that I don’t miss anyone. You may look up and see Lance Armstrong riding past you five feet away, or you might see some guy you don’t recognize talking to fans – only to find out later in the day that he was the stage winner. I generally use a relatively long lens in this area and “snipe” – getting close shots of riders. (You’ll generally have far fewer opportunities like this after the race, when the riders quickly disappear.)
  • Occasionally try things that aren’t quite so obvious. I once found myself on an inside corner a few blocks from the end of a stage as the peloton came into town. I put on my widest lens – a 17mm zoom – and stuck the camera through the fence down low to the ground. With the camera in burst mode I shot as riders leaned into the turn only a foot or two from the camera.
  • Large apertures are often better than small apertures. Yes, the small apertures give you greater depth of field – but they also force you to shoot a slower shutter speeds (not always a bad idea…) and put non-central subjects in sharper focus. Often the riders will stand out more against an out of focus background than against a busy in-focus background. (It is difficult to generalize too much about this though – if you are already throwing much of the scene out of focus by using a slow shutter speed, there can be advantages to the smaller aperture.)
  • When shooting individual racers, especially in the team area, do shoot a lot of frames – but also think carefully about what the riders are doing and what they look like. I’ll often try to quickly get an initial shot that is serviceable – but once I get that I become a bit more selective. I’ll watch the subjects face for the most interesting expression or better light. I’ll also watch to see them interact with fans – this often creates really compelling moments.
  • Shoot a lot. Things happen quickly, and not just on the course. Not every shot is going to be a great one, but you’ll often have little time to carefully consider each shot – better to work on instinct. (Oddly, I realized a few years ago that the closest experience to this might be shooting certain types of wildlife – birds in flight for example.)
  • © Copyright 2010 G Dan Mitchell – all rights reserved.

    G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer 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 | FacebookGoogle+ | 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.

    A Question About Noise and Prints

    A reader asks:

    I’m curious if you know the answer.  I don’t print very often so I’m not experienced with it.  I keep reading about noise in digital of course.  I also have read many remarks about noise not being visible in print under some conditions.  So I’m curious if there is a threshold.  For example, on the 5D2, what is the print size where noise becomes visible at a given ISO?  The 7D?  I realize that where it becomes objectionable may be subjective, but I thought it may be interesting to know when it is visible or invisible in print.

    Let’s assume other technical details are handled well… good exposure, good focus, sharp lens, and no camera shake.

    Thanks for writing. This is a great question and a subject that lots of people worry about. I’m not sure I know the answer, but I have an answer based on my own experience. The situation turns out to be a bit fuzzy in the end – in other words, if there is a threshold a number of factors could change your notions of where it might be. (I welcome comments from others who have experience to share.)

    From reading photography discussions one could get the idea that image noise in digital photography is a terrible and limiting problem. Discussions often focus on questions like “which camera produces less noise?” and “how do I fix this noise problem.” We see 100% magnification crops of images in which noise is, indeed, quite visible. There are most certainly noise issues that we have to concern ourselves with, but all too often people get worked up over noise issues that are insignificant or even imperceptible – and which are often easy to resolve. Continue reading A Question About Noise and Prints