denoir wrote:
The region of Arizona that we travelled through this day was largely in the territory of the Navajo Nation – the largest Indian reservation in the US. It was very interesting to see and a bit sad. You can hardly believe that you are in America. The region seems to be poor, mostly rural and very run down. If one is interested in social documentary photography this region is definitely worth a visit.
You are not supposed to take pictures of the native American Indians, their culture doesn't like that.
I was on a photo tour where we visited some of the Hopi tribe mesas and saw their poor stone homes on the way from Canyon de Chelly to Tuba City in AZ. We could not take any pictures of them. They make money from the tourists who come through and buy their wooden Kuchina dolls. You need special permission to photograph them, and I think that is only done for special celebrations when they are in traditional outfits.
Thanks Benjamin, John, Joakim, Joe, Uzay & Dmitri!
wayne seltzer wrote:
With Antelope you don't want include any of the bright,direct sunlight sections at the top.You also need to go at midday on a sunny day to get the special beams of light.
Well, yes and no. With a lesser lens, I agree, but I think the 21 Distagon was supposed to handle that. One of the points of bringing a high performance lens was to be able to shoot in conditions where lesser lenses would fail. The 35 Lux ASPH worked quite nicely for the most part - although I would have prefered the 5DII for those shots as it has a bit more graceful handling of blown highlights than the M9. Of course at the same time the M9 gives much more latitutde in the shadows so it's not an easy choice.
We went there about 2pm so there were no sun beams. As in all places the time was dictated by when we happened to arrive and not the optimal time of day for photography. That was I'm afraid the price of such a packed schedule.
sebboh wrote:
i would expect rangefinder ultrawides to perform better with regard to flare simply because they can have smaller front elements and simpler optical designs
Possibly - especially lenses with fewer elements. The 21 Distagon is one of the most complex wide angle lenses ever built - it has 18 elements if I'm not mistaken. For comparison the new Leica Super-Elmar 21/3.4 (the first UWA lens that according to the MTF charts to outperform the mighty Distagon) has 8 elements.
Having said that, I had more issues with flare with rangefinder lenses than with DSLR Zeiss primes. The 28 Summicron is unpredictable when it comes to flare and you can get veiling flare at almost any angle when you least expect it. The Zeiss 18/4 Distagon is also rather sensitive to it.
sebboh wrote:
yeah, continental breakfasts always have horrid pastries. bread is generally a weakness of the US to though. the fresh bakeries that are prevalent throughout europe just aren't anywhere near as common here. i presume it's just because packaged sliced bread is so much more convenient with it's long shelf life (especially when you have to drive everywhere and can't just walk to the corner bakery).
My guess is that we'll see a convergence over the years. Sweden used to be awful as well in terms of bread but changed rapidly about 10-15 years ago. Now more or less every supermarket has an integrated bakery and you can get good quality fresh bread (at most an hour or two old) any time. Around the same time the supermarkets went through a change to be more like the American ones. They're still not quite as big and diverse but radically more so than they were 20 years ago. It seems to me that cultural differences and traditions actually play a minor part and that the overall global trend is one of convergence - we cherry pick the best parts from around the world and end up with more or less with the same thing everywhere.
AhamB wrote:
It looks like your shots were all taken looking up. Was it too crowded to take interesting shots that include the ground?
No, not at all. We were the only group in the canyon and I kept up the rear so I had clear shots at any angle in that direction. I just didn't think the ground level stuff was particularly interesting as you did not get the same type of play with light. Also you have to remember that antelope canyon has been photographed to death and the best chance of getting a unique shot is shooting upwards.
Another reason is DOF. The canon is relatively tight in the interesting places and if you don't want to go to a too small aperture (exposure time is a problem as you have little time as the group is moving along) it can be difficult to get enough DOF - even with an UWA.
I have to say that I like those 3 shots bettern than all of the earlier ones looking up. Especially the third one -- a very special kind of light and nice soft shadows.
AhamB wrote:
I have to say that I like those 3 shots bettern than all of the earlier ones looking up. Especially the third one -- a very special kind of light and nice soft shadows.
One of the most rewarding things about posting images on a forum is to see how people can have completely different opinions about them. Usually people universally appreciate good craftsmanship but the agreements usually end there. I only posted those three images because you asked if I had any examples of ground level shots. Otherwise they would have stayed unused and forgotten in my LR database.
Generally my principle for picking the images I show here are photos that I like for one reason or another and that are technically decent. I do however also try to maintain a certain degree of diversity as far as it is possible.
Alright time for the last installment of this series – Zion, Death Valley & Yosemite. The images posted here are of course just a subsample of the whole image set. I will however post further images in the Leica M thread (and possibly the Zeiss thread).
We start with Zion National park. It was one of the highlights of the trip. Zion, especially the east section is something of a wonderland. I did not get much time there and would love to return. It was possibly the most difficult place to photograph because of everything being at weird angles making traditional compositions unusable. I also had really terrible light so I didn’t get many usable shots from that region. It poses a very interesting photographic challenge and I’d love go back and give it another try.
The central section of the park with the main canyon loop and where we spent a whole day is beautiful but more conventional.
I’ll start with one of those ‘impossible’ images. It’s not particularly good as I couldn’t find a composition that would work and because the light was very flat, but it will give you a realistic image of what the place looks like:
As you can see you have lines in basically all directions making it exceptionally difficult to create a geometrically simple composition. Diagonals won’t work, nor will traditional rule of thirds or golden ratio. In addition you have bushes everywhere complicating the image and making it very difficult to get a clean composition that doesn’t cut off a bush in half.
Moving on to more conventional things that were easier to photograph:
This was actually shot from the balcony of my hotel room in Springdale which is just outside of the entrance to Zion. It’s the longest exposure I’ve ever done and my first attempt at a star trail shot. I thought I’d include it here, even if I’m not particularly happy with the results:
Moving on to Death Valley NP. We only passed through Death Valley and apart from a quick rest stop in Furnace Creek only stopped in two places – Zabriskie point and at the Mesquite flat dunes. The former offered some very interesting views while the latter didn’t work out. It was simply too hot (nearly 115 degrees F = 46 degrees C) to hike to the larger dunes so all I got was a couple of photos of rather small piles of sand. Death Valley NP should be great to visit in February but in July it really deserves its name.
Finally on to Yosemite. It’s my favorite national park and this was my second visit. Yosemite may not have the uniqueness and exoticism of Arches or Zion but it has an immense grandeur that exceeds any found in the other parks. The scale of everything just blows you away. I can understand the attraction the place holds for photographers. The sheer size of things makes it also in a way distinctly American. In many ways the most distinctive difference between America and Europe is the overall scale. In America you have these huge roads, cars, houses, malls, err.. people .. Yosemite with its massive granite mountains and giant redwood and sequoia trees goes well with that overall scale.
I’m very jealous of the people living in the Bay area in California – having such wonderful nature relatively close by (3 hours by car from SF) must be fantastic.
We entered Yosemite through the Tioga Pass which had opened only a couple of weeks earlier. There had been record levels of snow this year.
Finally, to round things up a couple of words on the US national parks in general. I was extremely impressed how well organized they are. First of all there is all the information that you need on the web. Each national park has its own site with information on how you should plan your trip depending on the time you will spend in the park. There are maps, trail guides, news.. you name it. Very convenient and very professional.
We bought an annual pass for $80 that allowed entry into all the US national parks. When you enter a park you get a map and a brochure that highlights the various things in the park. Again, very well produced and very practical. All the parks have visitors centers where you can get additional information see exhibits about the park and usually there is a theatre where you can see a documentary show about the park. In Sweden, and in Europe in general the organization of the national parks is pathetic in comparison. At best there’s a sign saying that you’ve entered a park and if you are lucky there will be some sort of plaque with information about the park and available trails. It makes me wonder what the government is doing with our tax money.
Another thing that I liked very much and that is typically American is the number of choices available within the parks. For instance the trails are divided into three categories – easy, moderate and strenuous. The easy category features wide paved trails with limited elevation change. The strenuous category can be for really hard core hikers. You have places like Angle’s landing at Zion where experienced hikers die on a regular basis. You get a fair warning about the difficulty and danger of the trail but ultimately the choice is yours. There is no health and safety department forbidding you to take a dangerous path because it might not be 100% safe. Even if we did not have much opportunity to make use of that it was very refreshing to get a break from the nanny state that just loves to micro manage everything and all the decide what is or isn’t good for you.
The American ideal of individual freedom and individual responsibility is at least to me very attractive compared to the European “what’s good for society” approach. I say “ideal” because reality is far more complex and in some aspects American society is subject to more control and regulation than European society is. Still, I do appreciate the traditional American core ideals of individualism and self-sufficiency. I could go on, but this is perhaps not the place or the time to have a political discussion
The bottom line is that I had a great trip. It was a very cursory overview of the national parks in the southwest and I’ll looking forward to going back to some of the places for longer visits.
Thank you for all the comments and I hope you enjoyed the photos.
Great set Luka. Looks like you had some really harsh lighting to deal with in many areas but you managed to work around that. I would love to see the results from a trip where you were working on your time and had the right lighting. All said, hell of a set of photos you shared with us, thanks. I look forward to seeing more in the various threads.
Luka, yes that is the good part of living in SF bay area, Yosemite, Tahoe, and Big Sur all beautiful places to go. Except Yosemite is closer to being 4hrs away ~180-200 miles. I guess you didn't stop at Mono Lake, near the Eastern Entrance of Yosemite? Need to photograph the Tufa's there sometime too.
Anyway, you had a hard task photographing these places in the harsh midday light.
Good thing is you will now be more familiar with these places when you come back again and spend more time at each place.
I agree with Boris that HS-3 and DV-2 are my favorites too from the last two sets.
BTW, two things I wanted mention:
Yes, I like the maps and seasonal newspaper with nice front page photograph they hand out for free.
You may have read about all the state park closings due to the California budget crisis. The amount of money going to state and National Parks like Yosemite is being reduced and we will have to see what happens in the near future. Of course some state parks like Pt. Lobos near Carmel/Monterrey has resorted to closing the park before sunset and giving out ~$100 parking tickets to unsuspecting people like me if you are there after 7pm which right now is when the light starts to get nice for photography there. We were only a half hour late getting back to our car after a several mile hike. Instead of wanting to help the state parks with donations which I would have been willing to do, they have pissed me off and my ~$100 parking ticket fee will be there only donation from me.
Also, I love in America too that we are usually free to go anywhere and take our own risks and not have govt. interfere. Well, I just heard yesterday that they had to close Vernal Falls trail in Yosemite due to one or more people getting swept over the falls from the top. 8 people have died in Yosemite so far this year from the dangerous raging river waters due the unusual high snowpack from this winter.
denoir wrote:
I’m very jealous of the people living in the Bay area in California – having such wonderful nature relatively close by (3 hours by car from SF) must be fantastic.
We entered Yosemite through the Tioga Pass which had opened only a couple of weeks earlier. There had been record levels of snow this year.
indeed i'm very happy to be back in SF after living for 12 years in a place where the best you can get with 3 hours of driving is a 500ft hill (with cornfields on top). there are some quite wonderful nature areas just half an hour to an hour from SF as well (no nothing that can compare to yosemite).
another wonderful set, it's nice to see shots of yosemite where the distant mountains actually blurs with atmospheric haze instead of the typical over clarified shots. also always interesting to hear outsiders impressions of the US. i think this shot is probably my favorite of the set:
Re: photographing Native Americans... it really depends on who they are, enough so that I find it to be a case-by-case basis. I've been in small Indian towns here in NM and had people gladly pose for me, and on the other hand I had a 20-something Indian dude with a guitar strapped across his back shout me down because I took a shot in a crowded bar that might have included him in the frame (it didn't).
An interesting (but non-technical question): you were on the road for about three weeks - how many pictures did you take and how many were ultimately deleted? As I am sure this will probably result in a fabulous pie chart, what was the distribution by lens?
Great set Luka. Looks like you had some really harsh lighting to deal with in many areas but you managed to work around that. I would love to see the results from a trip where you were working on your time and had the right lighting. All said, hell of a set of photos you shared with us, thanks. I look forward to seeing more in the various threads.
joakim wrote:
More great photoshop Luka!
Freudian slip Joakim?
wayne seltzer wrote:
I guess you didn't stop at Mono Lake, near the Eastern Entrance of Yosemite?
We did on my insistance. Interesting place and terrible to photograph mid day. I only took a photo or two realizing that they would be worthless.
The amount of money going to state and National Parks like Yosemite is being reduced and we will have to see what happens in the near future. Of course some state parks like Pt. Lobos near Carmel/Monterrey has resorted to closing the park before sunset and giving out ~$100 parking tickets to unsuspecting people like me if you are there after 7pm which right now is when the light starts to get nice for photography there. We were only a half hour late getting back to our car after a several mile hike. Instead of wanting to help the state parks with donations which I would have been willing to do, they have pissed me off and my ~$100 parking ticket fee will be there only donation from me....Show more →
It sound like you need to bring back Clint Eastwood as mayor of Carmel.
“I know what you’re thinking: ‘Did he shoot 36 frames or only 35?’ Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement, I’ve kinda lost track myself. But being as this is a Nikon FM, the most reliable documentary photography camera in the world and I could post your mug shot on every internet forum, you’ve got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?”, or something like that
corposant wrote:
An interesting (but non-technical question): you were on the road for about three weeks - how many pictures did you take and how many were ultimately deleted? As I am sure this will probably result in a fabulous pie chart, what was the distribution by lens?
I took 2908 pictures – that’s an average of about 150 per day. I deleted about 20 which were out of focus or had motion blur. Otherwise I generally don’t delete pictures. The actual number of pictures I’ll use in the end is smaller as I very often shoot multiple shots of the same subject with minor variations in framing. I can be pretty picky about the framing and the approximate nature of rangefinder framelines increases the number of total pictures quite a bit. To demonstrate the point, here’s a simple screen grab from lightroom:
You can see how I can take essentially the same shot five or six times before I’m entirely happy with the framing. When working off a tripod with a camera that has live view I typically only take one shot for a given composition as I can see the exact faming before releasing the shutter.
As for statistics, here are the percentage of shots grouped by lens, place and aperture:
As the M9 has no electronic coupling to the lens the aperture number are approximate (the camera estimates the aperture based on the light coming through) so I’ve rounded the numbers to whole f-stops.
As you can see I’ve kept it in the f/5.6 – f/8 region for the most part to get the most out of the lenses at the expense of DOF control.
Luka, what amazes me at best is that you are systematically doing awesome landscape work when the sun is high, which is quite boring most of the time for conventional landscape photographer. Main amount of landscape masterpieces is doable at dawn and dusk, which requiers strong self-discipline and a little bit of luck but ability to see nature's wonders under harsh radiant brightness of daylight is nothing but a rare talent.
denoir wrote:
I took 2908 pictures – that’s an average of about 150 per day. I deleted about 20 which were out of focus or had motion blur. Otherwise I generally don’t delete pictures.
Wow. My my total number of keepers since November 2005, when I went digital, is less than that (2200 out of 13000 taken).
The actual number of pictures I’ll use in the end is smaller as I very often shoot multiple shots of the same subject with minor variations in framing.
I can do that, variations in framing and/or exposure, but keep only the best.
Especially the third one -- a very special kind of light and nice soft shadows.
.. Yosemite with its massive granite mountains and giant redwood and sequoia trees goes well with that overall scale.
