p.1 #1 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
There is a current Death Valley thread asking for something other than the usual iconic images. Of course many of the shots posted were of the DV iconic areas anyway including the Racetrack and the moving rocks. This thread got me thinking about taking the iconic images. Do we really all need to go to the same places and take the same pictures? How many more images of Mesa Arch at sunrise does the world or any of us need? Do we all need to go to the Racetrack and capture the image of moving rocks? Maybe so. There are reasons that these areas are so appealing.
Anyway, believe it or not, there are plenty of places where rocks move. Here are some images NOT from the racetrack and not from Death Valley. Sorry I wont give the location(s). It seems that the world is full of jackasses with jeeps and ATVs who want to run over everything.
p.1 #2 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
Hey Jim,
Yeah, I had heard there was a couple of moving rock locations, one of them just outside DV. I hadn't had a chance to get there yet. It's cool to find icon looking shots that aren't icons! Now, as to your shots, I have to say, it's great that they are large so that detail can be seen, but for myself, since I have to scroll so much since they are so large, it's hard to make a comment how good of a shot these are... a balanced composition is key, but when a person has to scroll, myself, I can't truly tell if the shot is balanced... We might not like it, but for vertical shots, keeping the long end at 600 pix so that they can be viewed without scrolling really helps...
p.1 #4 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
About the idea of everyone going to the "same places," I think you are on the right track. There is a whole world of incredible subjects out there, and some of the most interesting are in places that are most often overlooked. One time when I shot in a place with which I know you are familiar (20 Mule Team Canyon), I shot for over an hour without moving outside of perhaps a 30 foot radius. I like to say that you could set me down anywhere and I would be fascinated by looking for a way to photograph that exact spot.
While I certainly do not complete eschew icons - I've made my share of photographs at Zabriskie, for example - I either look for different ways to photograph them or only go to them when something truly extraordinary happens with the light or the weather or the atmosphere.
On the other hand, deeper knowledge of places is not something that one obtains on a first visit. If you are going to, for example, Yosemite - go the Valley. Shoot Tunnel View and Sentinel Bridge and the rest. Shoot Zabriskie in Death Valley. These places are icons for a reason, and you must start somewhere. Then go back to these places and begin to push out the boundaries of your experience, and learn to understand the places in ways that are impossible on a first visit. (I've been going to DEVA for over a decade and to the Sierra for more decades than I wish to admit to... ;-)
Regarding other locations for moving rocks... I have not visited them, but I have some knowledge of them (at least of one of them) from other DEVA denizens. One is not tremendously far from a DEVA icon, but not right next to it either, though there are stories that the rocks are smaller and that there might be some other "issues," including the vehicular yahoo one that you mention.
Camperjim wrote:
Ok, I downsized these. Better?
At the risk of opening up an issue to which there is no single right answer... I didn't see the originals, so I don't know how big they are - but my reaction is that the "right" size might be somewhere between what was reportedly too big and the current small size.
One way to think about a "right" size might be to consider whether the image might nicely fit on the screen of a typical netbook or the smaller Macbook Air without scrolling - so a size a bit smaller than the vertical/horizontal pixel dimensions of such a screen to allow for menus and so forth.
There are, of course, very real concerns about posting photographs too large relative to unauthorized re-use of the images. It happens. There is no complete solution, but among the choices that can help make images less useful to those who use them without permission is to limit size a bit. Including EXIF with photographer ID and copyright, embedding graphic copyright and watermark in the image, and avoiding the highest quality levels may also be good choices.
p.1 #5 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
I like the light in #3 the most, the other two seem a bit mid-day.
The perspective, I think, is a little too high. I'd like to see you lower and closer to the rocks to make a stronger foreground anchor.
I am envious of the cab-over, but it is a distraction in #1. If it had a decidedly stronger presence in the image I think it could be included giving the shot a mood or lifestyle feel. As it sits, it could be going down the highway and just be a random stranger driving through the shot.
I agree regarding icons and shooting them. I certainly understand and appreciate shooting them, but at least in posting on this forum I think they garner too much attention. It becomes easy for people to comment because they can compare and contrast with other images they've seen or taken, but for delicate arch to receive nearly 2 pages of comments simply because it is delicate arch when seemingly more beautiful photographs receive only a couple of comments is unfair.
p.1 #6 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
Nice images!
I agree with Chadbro, there's no need for the camper in the shot, it's not a permanent fixture of the location. With "content aware" it can be gone in a flash!
OPINIONS: (Do what you will with them )
I think sizes should be larger at this stage (year 2012). Anyone serious about landscape should be looking at a 20-24" monitor at this point. They aren't expensive anymore.
Personally, I don't think you need to tell where a location is. If people think it's Death Valley - then fine. I think it's about the "art" unless you are doing documentation.
p.1 #7 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
chadbro, thanks. I do agree the perspective on these images is a bit high. I tried to find an angle which would help to show the trails. That is pretty tough in the glaring midday sun. I guess if I cared I would have stayed or returned when the sun was lower. Although I posted these, the whole mystique of the moving rocks seems to me to be way overdone and sort of silly. There is certainly no mystery. If you are on one of these playas on a windy day, you can barely stand up or walk.
p.1 #8 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
ckcarr wrote:
NOPINIONS: (Do what you will with them )
I think sizes should be larger at this stage (year 2012). Anyone serious about landscape should be looking at a 20-24" monitor at this point. They aren't expensive anymore.
Ahem. I'm serious about photography. One of my computers has a couple monitors, one larger than the sizes you mention. But I also use a laptop with a smaller screen for most of my browsing.
And there is still that pesky "unauthorized use" issue. I certainly agree about larger sizes when it comes to the pleasure of viewing photographs. However, the reality of today's world is that sharing full screen-size images w/o watermarks, copyright notices, and the rest is essentially an invitation to unethical people to take your best work and use it without compensation or credit.
Everyone has to figure out their own compromise here. For those who don't mind giving away their work for free and without credit, sharing very large and very high quality images online is an option. (I still counsel the inclusion of some copyright info and so forth...) At the opposite extreme, for some I suppose it can make sense to not share any work online and to completely ignore the web and social media. Somewhere in the middle, many make a decision to share in a size and form that is less likely to be used without authorization but which may still allow them and their work to be part of the online world.
While I would love to show everyone what my photographs really look like, I'm going to stick to that middle route at this point. (If any of you are in the the SF Bay Area and want to see "the real thing," just let me know. Or if you run into me in the field, I may be carrying a few prints...)
p.1 #9 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
Camperjim wrote:
chadbro, thanks. I do agree the perspective on these images is a bit high. I tried to find an angle which would help to show the trails. That is pretty tough in the glaring midday sun. I guess if I cared I would have stayed or returned when the sun was lower. Although I posted these, the whole mystique of the moving rocks seems to me to be way overdone and sort of silly. There is certainly no mystery. If you are on one of these playas on a windy day, you can barely stand up or walk.
Actually, there is mystery about these rocks - both in the objective and the romantic sense.
No one actually knows for certain how they move, no one has seen them move, and there is every chance that the actual movement is quite a rare thing and that it may be a very long time since some of those trails were created.
Originally some proposed that the motion was entirely a matter of very strong winds "blowing" the rocks across muddy playa surfaces. Some recent research has suggested that this might be the case with some very small rocks, but that to move the largest rocks seen at the Racetrack Playa in Death Valley the winds would have to be many hundreds of miles per hour. I've been out there when it was very windy... but that is essentially impossible.
A more recent idea involved ice. Yes, ice. It does get cold enough to freeze water (and to snow) in these places. This theory suggests that the surface of the shallow water pooled on the playa freezes, locking rocks in its grip. The ice, or sections of it, can then be moved around by strong winds that don't need to achieve that impossible speed - this works much in the way that winds can move the arctic and antarctic ice packs. Parallel tracks of some groups of rocks support this possibility.
I've heard some other theories that involved slightly more complex stuff - ice freezing around the rocks an then rising as more water enters the playa, etc.
The "romantic" mystery is certainly present for many of us, especially if you stand among these rocks, completely alone in such the immense silence of the place on a night when the playa glows under the light of the full moon.
p.1 #10 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
gdanmitchell wrote:
A more recent idea involved ice. Yes, ice. It does get cold enough to freeze water (and to snow) in these places. This theory suggests that the surface of the shallow water pooled on the playa freezes, locking rocks in its grip. The ice, or sections of it, can then be moved around by strong winds that don't need to achieve that impossible speed - this works much in the way that winds can move the arctic and antarctic ice packs. Parallel tracks of some groups of rocks support this possibility.
I certainly don't have a clue on any of this, but doesn't it seem like....., if the playa froze solid enough to lock the rocks in it's grip, it would be too frozen to leave the 'tracks' the rocks make.(??)
I'm kinda surprised someone hasn't set up some sort of gear to do some time lapse imagery along with a recording weather station of some sort. It doesn't *seem* like this should be that awful hard to determine with the technology available today.......and enough money.
p.1 #11 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
Fo, I suspect the mystique is of more interest than a scientific study.
For anyone who has not visited, I strongly recommend you find a way. Death Valley was a pleasant surprise for me. After 10 days it was hard to leave. Unfortunately my solar panel controller fried and I needed to go to Vegas to get it fixed. Now after a quick visit to Valley of Fire and a quick visit to see relatives in Lake Havasu, I am still tempted to return. I have yet to see Joshua Tree or Mojave Preserve so I am still trying to decide on tomorrow's direction, assuming I get my RV oil change and get moving tomorrow.
p.1 #12 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
Fo Tollery wrote:
I certainly don't have a clue on any of this, but doesn't it seem like....., if the playa froze solid enough to lock the rocks in it's grip, it would be too frozen to leave the 'tracks' the rocks make.(??)
I'm kinda surprised someone hasn't set up some sort of gear to do some time lapse imagery along with a recording weather station of some sort. It doesn't *seem* like this should be that awful hard to determine with the technology available today.......and enough money.
The theory is that the surface of the water freezes, but that it remains liquid below.
There have been some extensive studies to map the locations of the rocks using gps. The researchers have actually given names to many of the individual rocks!
p.1 #13 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
Camperjim, while driving to DV through Arizona, and seeing so many beautiful places outside of my window, I was thinking the same thing. Add to this that there was a great light and I had a very strong desire to stop and start taking pictures. But I convinced myself that I need to go to DV at least once - perhaps to set my level, as I am, as they call it, "emerging photographer".
As about racing rocks, it only makes sense that there should be other locations - and may be within much easier reach.
p.1 #15 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
ala... not sure what you mean about set my level as an emerging photographer. I did have lots of interesting changes to my perceptions of photography while in DV. Saw lots of heavy shooting. Lots of folks lined up at Zabriskie endlessly clicking 9 exposure bracketed frames. Also met the park photographer, Bob Greenburg, who coached me on shooting only the "best of the best". Unfortuntely that did not work that well. I was awestruck and had to capture everything. Still I did restrain my shutter finger and I did a lot of thinking about standing at Zabriskie or Badwater or Mesquite dunes or artists palette and blasting away. Do we really need more of the same images even if the light might be a bit different or our comps a bit more deliberate? There does indeed need to be another level to photography with something more than just another good version of the same well shot iconic images.
Edit: another issue that really disturbs me is the apparent small size of our world. It seems no matter where I go someone else has been and has shot the same scene, usually better, and can name the individual features. I all but refuse to learn the names of these features.
p.1 #17 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
Camperjim wrote:
Edit: another issue that really disturbs me is the apparent small size of our world. It seems no matter where I go someone else has been and has shot the same scene, usually better, and can name the individual features.
The smaller and more local the subject, the more likely that you may find one that hasn't been shot before. Eventually, some rock in some little hollow, or a tree by a nameless lake that everyone else walks past, or one of thousands of anonymous gravel washes, or many other things can produce a fine photograph.
Potential photographs are everywhere, possibly even right outside your front door. To me that is amazing. :-)
p.1 #18 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
Mike K posted some nice shots and a link to the work of a NASA scientist and his group's work that sounds a bit more plausible than those from the digital desert. SOme interesting discussion there too!
p.1 #19 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
Dan, maybe down the road we won't need or want to take any landscape images. Google is blanketing the earth. There are millions of security cams. There are many millions of archived images on flickr, etc. At least I still know a few spots hidden in southern Utah that have not been totally discovered. I can always throw away the cameras and just sit in peace as a hermit somewhere in the middle of nowhere.
p.1 #20 · The Playa moving rocks and other icons...
Jim, when talking about "emerging", I am talking about myself - I am trying to find my voice and learn from those who are better than me.
Coming from a different part of the world, I absolutely do not worry about running out of the subjects for photography ... believe it or not, but there are still a lot of undiscovered beautiful spots - say, in Siberia, but they are hard to reach - no roads for Google cameras to ride on.
)
... believe it or not, but there are still a lot of undiscovered beautiful spots - say, in Siberia, but they are hard to reach - no roads for Google cameras to ride on.