Great images Luka! Even if many are from popular vantage points, I agree with many others that you've succeeded in taking them to a level well beyond the expectations based on the photographic restrictions you endured.
denoir wrote:
A few words about Jackson, WY where we stayed when visiting the two parks. It’s a nice place and a great base of operation for Grand Teton and Yellowstone. Supposedly Jackson county has the highest income levels per capita in the US but although the people in the region are clearly well off we did not see any spectacular mansions. I suppose they are hidden somewhere in the woods. Jackson itself is very tourist oriented catering to various winter sports.
Like most other US cities we were in it is not pedestrian friendly. We had to take the car to travel about 100m from the hotel to a restaurant. There was no way getting there on foot! It felt particularly ridiculous as we drove a massive SUV. Perhaps one of the Americans here can answer that – what’s up with the hostility towards pedestrians? The city planners in just about every place we visited seemed not just to have ignored pedestrians but made life as difficult as possible for them.
Here in Stockholm, and for the most part in Europe in general the opposite is true – the cities are built with pedestrians first in mind with the car roads being a secondary concern. A car is considered a necessary evil for those that live outside the cities. This is probably going to sound unbelievable to most Americans but I actually only got my driving license a little over two months ago (I’m 31 yo), to a large degree because of this trip. I’ve always lived in cities where going by car is a major PITA compared to various forms of public transport or *gasp* walking or going by bike. ...Show more →
mpmendenhall wrote:
...a successful century of propaganda that equated getting to spend a big chunk of your income on owning/operating a car with "Freedom,"
+1.
Coupled with the need for a detached home with property for every family to escape from the urban masses.
Luka, let me guess... you work in the same city in which you live? Or, if not, can easily travel to work with transit?
That is a problem with the live/work arrangement found in many North American communities. Work is often in a different city and workers often live in bedroom communities. Many cities have encouraged the development of commercial or light industrial employment zones located near major highways and therefore outside downtown cores, away from where transit is traditionally most established. Many of these commercial/industrial zones are massive expanses of huge warehouses designed around access by car and truck.
Assuming a 'typical' family where husband and wife both work and their kids are probably enrolled in all sorts of activities, results in justification for the need to drive everywhere, because stuff is scattered all over the place. Shopping is increasingly found in 'big box' complexes that are not pedestrian friendly, assuming they're even near residential areas. It's development that is completely the opposite of high density urban cores, where one could live near work and also have many shopping and recreational options nearby. Instead people live in residential zones, work in employment zones and shop in commercial zones, often quite far apart. It results in stratification defined by income levels, since those who can't afford the suburban home and car won't live there. The exodus to the suburb turned many urban cores into ghost towns outside 9-5 work hours. People don't want to live there, and those who do tend to be less affluent. As a result, certain retailers can't sustain business there and others avoid it completely. It's like a catch-22 of non-sustainability. What is needed is a mix of and tolerance for all socioeconomic levels in order to attract a broader range of shopping and employment options.
Maybe with high average incomes in Jackson, it's assumed most will have cars. And if it's difficult to get around without one, then it helps keep out undesirables.
At least it's not like this everywhere in the world. I've been to Munich frequently over the past 10 years and it's a city that has great transit infrastructure, but more critically, has vibrant neighbourhoods in the core with every service necessary to make for convenient urban car-free living for a mix of young and old, singles and families, rich and (relatively) poor. Stockholm is probably very similar.
How did you bring all that gear from EU to USA? Did you manage to put all of it in a carryon?
I face this problem every time I fly, and I have lot less gear than you (5D, couple L zoom and couple TS-E's). But when you add a laptop and chargers it becomes a pain to carry it all.
I can't speak for Luka, but since you're from the US, your plan for air travel should be to book flights on US carriers whenever possible, even though this might mean somewhat lower inflight service quality. Their international carry-on allowances are the same as domestic flights. Generally it's around 40-45lbs for your carry-on. You'll also be allowed a smaller 'personal item' which can include a laptop bag or similar. Therefore you can easily bring on a fair amount of photo gear and related equipment.
If you have a connection to a non-US airline for your final or first leg, you might run into problems, though it depends.
One suggestion I would offer is to avoid camera bags that are excessively padded. They end up being quite large and heavy in their own right. Thinner internal dividers mean being able to pack equipment more tightly.
My main travel kit, previous to my M9 acquisition was this:
I use a laptop satchel as my second bag, though recently started using a Think Tank Urban Disguise 35 to carry the laptop, external drives and various chargers and other junk.
If I was traveling with just the Leica, I can fit it all into this bag:
Ajay C wrote:
Hope to catch up the next time you visit the 'valley'.
Absolutely. I actually made it to San Francisco as the meetings in Montain View ended a day early, but my visit only lasted a couple of hours. It's quite possible though that I'll be back in the Bay area later this year so we can arrange something then
rscheffler wrote:
Coupled with the need for a detached home with property for every family to escape from the urban masses.
Luka, let me guess... you work in the same city in which you live? Or, if not, can easily travel to work with transit?
...
The exodus to the suburb turned many urban cores into ghost towns outside 9-5 work hours. People don't want to live there, and those who do tend to be less affluent. As a result, certain retailers can't sustain business there and others avoid it completely. It's like a catch-22 of non-sustainability. What is needed is a mix of and tolerance for all socioeconomic levels in order to attract a broader range of shopping and employment options. ...Show more →
Sure, I can walk to and from work (~15-20 minutes walk) which I often do when the weather is nice. It's a nice walk by the water with ducks and other photogenic stuff
The interesting thing is that here in Sweden the trend is exactly the opposite. Everyone wants to move to the central parts of the city. We have increased segregation as well, but the inverse of what you see in the US – the central parts of a city are the desirable ones. In Stockholm in recent years the prices have gone up a lot. When I was in San Francisco the other day I passed Lombard street, which by any standard can be considered a desirable address in SF.
There was an 800 sq feet apartment for sale in the adjacent street that had the asking price of $500,000. The friend I was with (an SF native) showed me this as an example of how outrageously high the SF real estate prices were.
Guess what? That’s nothing compared to central Stockholm. That’s about 625 usd / sq ft while the average price in central Stockholm – and we’re not talking about some special address here are around 850 usd / sq ft. On a more desirable address prices usually go up to ~1200 usd/sq ft. That’s nearly twice the SF prices and even people in the high income bracket can only afford it because of the currently low interest rates.
The less affluent people live in the suburbs and the income levels are inversely proportional to the distance to the city center. So the ‘white flight’ and other de-urbanization effects are not the only way to increase segregation by income.
matejphoto wrote:
Luka,
How did you bring all that gear from EU to USA? Did you manage to put all of it in a carryon?
I face this problem every time I fly, and I have lot less gear than you (5D, couple L zoom and couple TS-E's). But when you add a laptop and chargers it becomes a pain to carry it all.
I had no problems. I had a large camera backpack which contained my 5DII & DSLR Glass + laptop. I also had a small Domke bag containing my Leica kit. I had those two as carryon luggage. Chargers , the tripod etc were all in my checked in luggage.
denoir wrote:
Filters are a PITA to use with the M9 anyway as you are not looking through the lens as on a DSLR so you can't really see the effect of the filter.
One thing I found actually that worked pretty well when using a polarizer with a RF is that you can just watch the meter and see how the exposure changes as you rotate the polarizer around. The point of maximum polarization is going to be where your getting the biggest drop is exposure.
Other thing that works is just to carry a second smaller one thats marked the same. Hold it up to your eye and rotate it and note the position where the effect is maximized and then then set the one on your lens to the same position.
Neither is ideal I suppose but I've found both to work pretty well, and certainly do like the effect for some shots.
denoir wrote:
There was an 800 sq feet apartment for sale in the adjacent street that had the asking price of $500,000. The friend I was with (an SF native) showed me this as an example of how outrageously high the SF real estate prices were.
Guess what? That’s nothing compared to central Stockholm. That’s about 625 usd / sq ft while the average price in central Stockholm – and we’re not talking about some special address here are around 850 usd / sq ft. On a more desirable address prices usually go up to ~1200 usd/sq ft. That’s nearly twice the SF prices and even people in the high income bracket can only afford it because of the currently low interest rates.
The less affluent people live in the suburbs and the income levels are inversely proportional to the distance to the city center. So the ‘white flight’ and other de-urbanization effects are not the only way to increase segregation by income. ...Show more →
that actually sounds kinda cheap to me for that location in san francisco. what you describe in stockholm is present here to. it's not just rich people moving to the gated suburbs to avoid the less moneyed and people with extra melanin. the huge advantage of the suburbs to most americans is space and money. you can get two more bedrooms and a yard for the same price if you live in oakland, san leandro, or berkeley instead of san francisco, and those are real cities. if you look at a normal american city where the suburbs are just residential with nothing else around, the price differences between city and suburb is even bigger. many families move to the suburbs simply so they can afford a place where all the kids aren't in the same bedroom as them. then of course there's the issue of schools...
denoir wrote:
Thanks Carsten. Ansel Adams did a shot of the Horseshoe bend? Do you perhaps have a link to the picture? I'm afraid that I'm somewhat illiterate when it comes to the bulk of his work. I made a point of not looking up photos of the specific areas where I was going in order not to be too influenced by the work of others.
As it has been photographed about a gazillion and a half times I can't rule out that it has been shot like that before, but I have not seen any shots that are just like that one. ...Show more →
I haven't either but I do recognize the view. In fact, I was there in '90, but somehow I think I was standing at the top rather than at the bottom.
I can't find that Horseshoe Bend shot by Ansel Adams, which makes me wonder if it was someone else? I have it firmly in mind, but I'll have to get back to you on that one.
Awesome set once again Luka I really like the one with the moose!
Regarding the dust issues, my suggestion would be a macro with selection of the desired areas and then use of content aware, hopefully it may work decently. But as you mention it will prob involve loads of manual work.
I suppose you would need two macros one for vertical captures and one for horizontal, but a rotation of the image solves that problem I suppose.
Just bumped saturation and did a sharpening in photoshop in that shot. The DR is there because of a lee hard grad ND (and a polarizer which I kicked myself for later). Luka, I feel your pain with the dust on the sensor. I still shoot my trusty 5Dc and i've had the experience of coming back from a trip to lovely spots all over my images.... a royal pain in the @#! if there ever was one. Really love your work and was wondering if you got any shots of grand prismatic from atop of the hill thats right next to it .... would love see it with the M9 and your glass
Luka, from your second series my favorites are GT-3 and YE-5 and I think I would like a cropped version of YE-2 (without the top 20-30%, as a more abstract graphic art).
Alright, part 3, Mesa Verde, Arches & Canyonlands
Mesa Verde National park was not in the original itinerary but we squeezed in a quick visit. Unusually enough, it was raining. Mesa Verde is most famous for the Pueblo cliff dwellings, the most famous being the Cliff Palace.
Arches National park was probably the most exotic and interesting of the parks we visited. The nature is just completely different from anything I’ve ever seen. I was also very surprised by the intense colors in the desert.
Canyonlands is not far from Arches and is much larger. Large parts of the park are however difficult to access by car. We visited the one that is the easiest to access – the “Island in the sky” district. The views were impressive but as you are so high up you that you have the same type of view as from an airplane. It’s a sort of detached experience and not as up close and personal as for instance Zion NP where you are down in the canyon.
denoir wrote:
I'm close to crying like a little girl each time I think the time it will take to clean each frame of that crap. I'll probably have to think of some way of automating it - like a saved selection mask combined with content aware fill in Photoshop. I'm pretty sure it will still involve a lot of manual work.
IIRC LR has a brush for stamping out that stuff, you you can cut and paste that action between photos.
and favor #3, #7 and #9. 
I'll probably have to think of some way of automating it - like a saved selection mask combined with content aware fill in Photoshop. I'm pretty sure it will still involve a lot of manual work.