Five of My Favorite Landscape Photography Fallacies

My apologies for the lack of postings over the course of the last month.  I’ve been dealing with multiple medical emergencies in my family that have required me to make numerous trips back and forth between Chicago and Indianapolis and I’ve had next to no opportunity to do any writing–let alone any photography.  Things are still a bit on the hairy side, but I hope that everything will at least begin to ease over the coming weeks.  In the meantime, I managed to find a few moments to catch my breath and put together a breezy piece.

There are a great many misconceptions about most endeavors, but as this is a blog dedicated to the art and craft of landscape photography, that’s the subject I’ll focus upon in this entry.  Here are five (relatively) common fallacies:

1.  You’re a landscape photographer; goodness knows you don’t need a telephoto lens.

In the immortal words of Col. Sherman T. Potter:  Buffalo Bagels!  I would guess that at least 1/3 of my images are captured with a telephoto lens and something on the order of 10% of my images are captured using a telephoto lens in excess of 200 mm.

Swift Creek Overlook black & white, Red River Gorge, Daniel Boone National Forest, Kentucky

I know that when most people think of landscape imagery they immediately conceive of wide, open vistas, but–particularly when I’m photographing from an overlook–I almost invariably reach for a telephoto lens, to capture details that would otherwise be lost amidst a vast view.

Autumnal Impressions, Halfmoon Lake, Hiawatha National Forest, Michigan

The value of a telephoto lens can’t be overstated in its ability to isolate intimate nearby scenes, eliminating unwanted distractions from a composition.

2.  You’re a landscape photographer; you certainly aren’t concerned about your camera’s high ISO performance.

Let’s get one thing out of the way right now:  I fully realize that high ISO performance is more important to an action shooter, particularly one who works in low light, than it is to a landscape photographer like myself.  But even acknowledging that, the fact that it’s of greater relevance to someone else doesn’t make it irrelevant to me.

Apple Blossoms, Morton Arboretum, DuPage County, Illinois

In fact, it never ceases to me amaze me how often I hear other landscape photographers say something along the lines of “I don’t care about high ISO performance; I never move the ISO off the base setting.”  I guess these folks never shoot subjects that include elements that move…like foliage or blossoms…in the wind, particularly in relatively low light situations.

Oaks and Maples, Morton Arboretum, DuPage County, Illinois

I find myself doing this sort of thing all the time, and the ability to raise the ISO level by (as much as) a few stops without worrying about excessive noise is not infrequently the difference between a sharp image and a candidate for the round file.

3.  It’s not the golden hour; I guess you’ll be off to the motel for a nap, huh?

Regardless of the light conditions, there’s almost always something that you can shoot; you may simply have to work a bit harder to find flattering subjects than you would during the “golden hour.”  The truth is, many subjects–particularly waterfalls, creeks, streams and forest intimates–often work better in overcast conditions (i.e. on days when there is no “golden hour” at all).

Elakala Falls, Blackwater Falls State Park, West Virginia

Even in the middle of a harsh, sunlit day, you can almost always find subjects to shoot, be they intimates in deep shade or elements that simply work in mid-day light.

Summer Breeze, Jardin du Soleil Lavender Farm, Washington

Reflection abstracts are another subject that will often work well in the light of mid-day.

Oconaluftee River Reflections, Great Smoky Mountains National Park, North Carolina

Even if its just a scouting expedition, I’m pretty much always actively engaged as long as there’s light of any quality available to me.

4.  There’s no point in spending any time photographing landscapes east of the Mississippi River in North America.

(I hope the above images put the lie to that statement–all but one are of locations east of the Mississippi.)

Look, I love the western landscapes of North America as much as the next guy, and head out there as often as I can (which isn’t anywhere near as often as I would like).  And, there’s no question in my mind that eastern landscape photography is, on balance, considerably more challenging–in terms of composition and aesthetics–than it is out west.  But I’ve found it to be immensely rewarding.

Tunnel Falls, Clifty Falls State Park, Indiana

There are many, many wonderful spots in the eastern halves of the United States and Canada at which landscape photography is well worth the time and effort to investigate.  An added benefit is that many–though not all–of these spots are mostly overlooked by landscape photographers, making it possible to create your own iconic images.

Au Sable Channel, Pinery Provincial Park, Ontario

5. Well, the sun’s gone down.  Time to pack up.

Oh for the love of Pete…the number of times I’ve heard something like this, even from supposedly experienced photographers…it’s shocking.  The very best evening sky shows I’ve ever seen have all taken place after the sun has set.  Sometimes, the best of the action is 30 minutes (or more) after sunset.  (The morning corollary applies–the best morning skies are pre-sunrise.)  Consider my experience on my trip to the UP last fall.

Miners Beach at Sunset (western sky), Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Michigan

Whether it be the post-sunset western sky or the earthshadow effect to the east, resist the urge to break down your gear and leave when the sun goes down.

Earthshadow, White Sands National Monument, New Mexico

Particularly if you have a nice arrangement of clouds to the west, you’re almost certainly setting yourself up to miss the best of the action if you don’t wait for the post-sunset sky show to begin.

Pacific Sunset, Port Orford Head State Park, Oregon