Category Archives: Technique

About Backcounty Photography Gear

Reader “Paul” asks about gear for backcountry photography and how it may vary from trip to trip:

Dan, I’m curious. On your trips, what percentage of your pack is reserved for anything photographic in terms of weight? And what percentage is camping? Or does that change with your experience and knowing ahead of time what your photographic expectations are?

Great questions, Paul. The answer gets a bit complicated, but let me try to get to the heart of what I think is a question about how much weight/stuff to carry for various sorts of backcountry trips. (A longer article — My Backcountry Photography Equipment — goes into even more detail.)

Alpine Lake, Morning
A solitary sunrise angler stands on shoreline rocks at an alpine Sierra Nevada lake reflecting a nearby peak

Alpine Lake, Morning. © Copyright 2019 G Dan Mitchell – all rights reserved.

As you imply in your question, the answer varies — sometimes a lot — depending on a bunch of factors: how fit/young you are, the terrain you’ll cover, your willingness to bear weight for photography, whether your focus is more on miles covered per day or the photography itself, what you’ll do with the photographs after the trip, and more.

Continue reading About Backcounty Photography Gear

Photographic Myths And Platitudes — Diffraction Limited Aperture

It has been a while since I posted an article in my “Photographic Myths And Platitudes” series — so here is a new one! It is a bit different than some of the previous posts in that it is based on something I wrote elsewhere in response to a lengthy (and long-winded!) discussion that suggested hyper-awareness of the so-called diffraction-limited aperture

What is the diffraction-limited aperture, you ask? It is a real thing — not a myth — though it is sometimes over-emphasized by overzealous techno-photographers.  In simple terms, as you stop down a lens its potential maximum resolution declines as a result of diffraction blur. (Keep in mind that other factors affect sharpness, too. Also, this happens to every lens, from the cheapest to the most expensive — it is a universal optical phenomenon.) At some aperture, the increase in blur becomes significant enough, in a technical sense, to be more of a “limitation” on image sharpness than the ability of the sensor to record detail — e.g. the “number of megapixels” of the sensor. A simplistic interpretation of the concept suggests that a photographer should avoid other apertures in order to “get the sharpest image.”

As with many things in photography, it isn’t that clear-cut.

Now on to my original post. It is a bit technical, though I think most photographers should be able to follow it — and I will conclude with some simple, straightforward practical advice. (And here I remind readers that sharpness is not the most important, much less the only important thing in photography. Far from it!)


Sharpness, or at least the perception of sharpness, is a more complex thing than choosing the aperture the provides (to the extent that this can be determined) the highest optical resolution at the sensor plane, measured at either a) the best performing point in the frame, or b) the average across the frame.

(Speaking of “the extent that this can be determined,” I wonder how folks would answer the following question: Which is “sharper,” the image with the best center resolution but slightly lower corner resolution or the image with slightly less center resolution but better overall resolution across the frame?)

While we might consider whether f/16 will be softer than f/8 on some lens/camera combination — it almost certainly will be softer — it isn’t irrelevant to ask: “How much softer, and will this affect my print?” In quite a few cases the difference in maximum resolution in the print will be essentially invisible. In other words, while you will get optimal resolution at some particular aperture, you will actually still get extremely good print resolution at a smaller (or larger) aperture, too.

If there is no particular photographic reason to choose a smaller (or larger!) aperture, you might as well use whatever aperture you think will produce the highest resolution. That best resolution aperture will vary based on the lens you are using, the camera format, and arguably the photo site density of the sensor. To generalize, if you are shooting full frame it will probably be somewhere in the f/5.6-f/8 range with many lenses. (Other things can affect that — for example, what the maximum aperture of the lens is.) On a cropped sensor camera you could, in many cases, use either the same aperture or guess at one stop larger or so — while realizing that there could be resolution downsides to going larger with some lenses. Trade-offs abound! (I’ll spare you the technical discussion of all of the variables. You can think me later.)

But, seriously, if you are calculating the “sharpest” aperture to the closest 1/3-stop for each lens and using that aperture in the field and avoiding others that are slightly different, you probably aren’t really gaining anything significant from your efforts, and you may be sacrificing things that could make your photographs better.

That said, if we know that some mid-range aperture can provide the highest resolution, why use other apertures? And if we do use other apertures, won’t we end up with a softer print? Continue reading Photographic Myths And Platitudes — Diffraction Limited Aperture

What You Get Is Not What You See

Recently I spent more than a week photographing in a beautiful area of the Sierra Nevada backcountry. A short walk above the spot where we camped was a magical meadow — a place filled with light, grasses still green but starting to turn golden, high elevation trees scattered around the edge of the meadows, and a deep valley separating us from alpine valleys topped by steep granite peaks and ridges with scattered snow fields. At times clouds would float by and add some interest to the blue Sierra Nevada sky.

What I saw

Here is one of several photographs I made in this meadow, with the first example being a small version of a print-ready final interpretation…

Subalpine Meadow, Forest, and Peaks
At the edge of a subalpine meadow, surrounded by forest and high peaks

Here is another version of the photograph, straight out of my raw file conversion program and before I did additional work in Photoshop…

File after raw conversion operations

I think it reflects fairly well what I saw while I stood behind the tripod as light softened by closer clouds spread across the meadow. I’m confident that anyone who had been there with me would agree.

What the camera saw

But that is not what the camera saw. Here is what my captured file looked like before I did my raw conversion post-processing…

RAW file as exposed before conversion processing

Yuck!

This SOOC (“straight out of camera”) image looks pretty bad. The sky is OK, but the meadow is dark and flat-looking, not showing the actual quality of light at all, and the forest appears to be almost completely black.

What’s up here? Am I trying to trick you and present a false version of the scene? Am I an incompetent photographer who completely blew the exposure? Am I trying to “compensate” for a bad exposure by using radical post-processing?

The answer is “none of the above.” Continue reading What You Get Is Not What You See

A Few (More) Thoughts on Back-Country Photography

I recently was asked a few questions about backpacking photography, mostly related to equipment, so I thought I’d post something to augment an existing article on this website: My Backpacking Photography Equipment. (You’ll probably want to take a look at that one, too!)

Backpackers, Near MIlestone Basin
Backpackers, Near MIlestone Basin

Scott emailed recently to ask several questions, and I’ll consider some of them here. His first question has to do with gear, as in  “how much” to take. He suggests that it is hard to find a balance between high enough quality imagining, sufficient equipment to cover possibly opportunities, and carrying the stuff! Once you start carrying the stuff on your back, fundamental compromises among conflicting demands are necessary.

He carries the following gear: Continue reading A Few (More) Thoughts on Back-Country Photography