Image Quality in the Digital Age

Ke'e Beach, Kaua'i - Nikon D300, Tokina 11-16mm, Singh-Ray Color Combo & 3 stop grad ND, f/16, 1/6 sec. ISO 200

I’m a perfectionist when it comes to image quality. Like most photographers, I love getting the sharpest, smoothest images with the highest resolution and dynamic range that I possibly can. Recently though, I’ve started wondering if the whole photography industry might be a little too caught up with digital image quality. As a little Christmas present to myself this year, I picked up a nice coffee table book of Galen Rowell’s photography. I am surprised at what I see in his images. There is graininess, motion blur and focus errors in a surprising number of his photos. It’s not isolated to Galen’s work either. The same flaws are present in a National Geographic retrospective book that I looked at with photos from dozens of different photographers. Here’s the question I have to ask myself. Do these technical image quality flaws subtract from the awesomeness of the work in those books? Absolutely not.

I’m guessing that the vast majority of people who enjoy Galen Rowell or National Geographic don’t even notice those technical errors, so long as they are not photographers themselves. I think they are more impressed with the subject matter, lighting and composition of a photograph. This is a huge relief for me. There are countless wonderful images that I have grievingly cast into digital purgatory because they have a slight technical flaw. I have been taught how to look for these flaws by the countless camera review websites and photography blogs out there. People on these sites routinely discuss the sharpness of their photo prints when viewed under a loupe. Really? A loupe? When you have a gallery show, do you hand out loupes to all the visitors? The camera manufacturers love this because the inevitable conclusion to all our problems is always to buy more expensive gear. Are the corners of your images a little soft? Well then you need a “pro” lens. Are you making prints of your photos? Certainly nothing less than the highest resolution digital camera available will suffice. What’s interesting is that the personal work of most of the camera reviewers out there is artistically mediocre at best. But darn it, their images are “tack sharp.”

There are extremes in every debate. The infamous Ken Rockwell would try to convince us that he’d give up his digital SLRs and just shoot with the camera on an iPhone, but he’s too cheap to actually buy one. Gimme a break. Of course your camera matters and you should do everything you can to avoid blur, focus on the right spot and expose correctly. But seeing what Galen Rowell and the folks at Nat Geo accepted as good enough gives me a new perspective on how to judge acceptable vs. unacceptable quality in my own images. I can only hope to be as adventurous and creatively brilliant as the photographers on my coffee table, but it’s nice to know that technical perfection takes a back seat to more important aesthetic considerations.

Looking back on 2009

In looking back on the 2009, I realize that I’ve been extremely fortunate to travel to so many different locations around the globe. This year alone I took over 6400 photos in Tanzania, Hawaii, Utah, Oregon, Washington, and Colorado. I would be thankful for an itinerary like that any year, but the economic turmoil of 2009 has given me a new level of appreciation for a stable job at a great company and the ability to get out and see the world.

Here are some images that I’ve never shown from each of the locations I’ve traveled to this year. Most of these got lost in the digital shuffle of thousands of images on my hard drives or ended up on the cutting room floor because there were better images I wanted to share. In any case, I’m glad I’ve rediscovered them as they help keep the great memories of this year fresh in my mind.

Kalalau Valley, Kaua'i - Nikon D300, Tokina 11-16mm, Singh-Ray Color Combo & grad ND, f/16, 1/6 sec., ISO 200

A Storm Approaches, Utah - Nikon D40 (converted for infrared), Nikon 18-200, f/16, 1/125 sec., ISO 720

Multnomah Falls, Oregon - Nikon D300, Tokina 11-16mm, f/18, 1/6 sec., ISO 200

Aspens, Rocky Mountain National Park - Nikon D300, Tokina 11-16mm, Singh-Ray Color Combo, f/16, 1/10 sec., ISO 200

Wildebeest Fighting - Nikon D300, Nikon 200-400 f/4 VR, Nikon TC-14E, f/8, 1/500 sec., ISO 200

First Winter Trek

Coyote - Nikon D300, 18-200mm, f/5.6, 1/200, ISO 200

This morning I set out to take photos in Rocky Mountain National Park for the first time this winter. I wasn’t expecting to get any great landscape photos because I was more interested in testing out my winter gear and my own perseverance. I arrived at the Bierstadt Lake trailhead well before sunrise and I immediately noticed how little snow there was in RMNP. I had fully expected to use my snow shoes, but the trail was mostly barren. That didn’t stop it from being cold and windy, though. I don’t know what the temperature was, but IF it was above 0 F it wasn’t by much. Within minutes of being on the trial, the water in the tube that runs to the bladder in my backpack froze solid. I’ll definitely have to figure out how to solve that problem before I attempt longer winter hikes. I also think that I will need to strictly limit the amount of camera equipment I carry. It’s nice to have every lens and filter with me so that I can adapt to changing conditions, but winter hiking adds a lot of other gear like snow shoes, poles, ice axe and all the extra clothing. I need to pull a Galen Rowell and hike with only what I absolutely need. A carbon fiber tripod would be nice too!!

Aspirations of becoming road kill - Nikon D300, 18-200mm, f/5.6, 1/125, ISO 200

With the lack of snow and dull sunrise this morning, I didn’t even take out my camera on my hike. But the day still had something in store for me. As I was driving back down through the park, I spotted a pack of Coyotes. They were headed someplace and stayed close to the road for a few miles. In fact, they walked ON the road for much of the way. Good thing it was still very early and there were no cars. I quickly grabbed my camera which was sealed in a zip lock bag warming up after my frigid hike (this helps to prevent damaging condensation). Of course, all the settings on the camera were set for landscape photography, not wildlife photography. In the excitement of the moment, I didn’t think to change the settings so a lot of the photos didn’t turn out so great, but I think it was more fun just seeing them. There’s always something special about seeing wildlife in their natural habitat.

Coyote Stretching - Nikon D300, 18-200mm, f/5.6, 1/1600, ISO 200

Coyote Playing - Nikon D300, 18-200mm, f/5.6, 1/60, ISO 200

The Impossible Safari Shot

Lion Pride - Nikon D300, Nikon 200-400mm, f/14, 1/125, ISO 200

The above photo represents a depth of field challenge. This shot was taken this past January on a safari in Tanzania with my Nikon D300 and a Nikon 200-400mm f/4 VR lens. Our guide got us as close as he could without disturbing the animals, but I still needed the telephoto lens to get closer. My hopes of getting all, or at least most of the lions in focus were dashed when I realized how shallow the plane of focus is on a telephoto lens like the 200-400mm.

The first thing that came to mind was to stop down to f/11, f/16, or even f/22  in order to increase my depth of field and get the lions in focus. That causes the shutter speed to slow significantly, however. A general rule of thumb for big telephoto lenses is that you want to shoot at a shutter speed at least twice that of the focal length you’re using. This helps to avoid motion blur caused by vibrations in the lens. The shot above was taken at 280mm, so that means I should’ve been shooting at least 1/560 sec. But f/14 yielded a shutter speed of 1/125 sec which is dangerously slow for a big lens, especially since I was only resting the lens on a bean bag on the roof of our Land Cruiser. I suppose I could’ve increased my ISO to get a faster shutter speed and still have a small aperture, but I’m a snob. I want the best quality I can get out of my camera and I resist raising ISO unless I absolutely have to.

100% enlargement

The truth is, there was no way to get all the lions in focus even at f/22. This was one of the biggest lessons I learned about photography while in Africa. Although I wish I could’ve captured all these lions together in focus, the next time I’m fortunate to come upon a scene like this I’ll look for creative ways to work with the shallow depth of field of my telephoto lens. I’m sure you’ll agree that getting closer to my subject was not a really an option in this case!

Photo of the Day

Ke'e Beach Trees - Nikon D300, Tokina 11-16mm, Singh-Ray Color Combo, f/16, 1.3sec, ISO 200

While I was waiting for the sun to go down at Ke’e Beach on Kaua’i, I snapped this before I had to hustle into position to get the sunset. Nothing spectacular, but I couldn’t resist the evening light on the interesting trees. It’s amazing I didn’t get any chickens in this shot because they were everywhere. Apparently, the last hurricane to hit Kaua’i (’Iniki in 1992), freed all the chickens from their pens, and now they live wild all over the island.

Photo of the Day

Ho'opi'i Falls, Kaua'i - Nikon D300, Tokina 11-16mm, Singh-Ray Vari-N-Duo, Singh-Ray 2-stop GND, f/18, 1/3 sec. ISO 200

It’s snowing like crazy in Colorado right now, so I thought I’d post a Hawaii image. This is Ho’opi’i Falls on Kaua’i…or is it? There is debate as to whether these falls go by that name, or the next falls up-stream. In either case, it’s a beautiful hike to get in there. This location claimed the life of my brother’s Manfrotto tripod and almost took his D700 with 24-70mm lens too!

Which lenses to take to Africa

Young Male Lion - Nikon D300, Nikon 200-400mm, f/8, 1/800, ISO 200

Ever since I returned from Africa earlier this year, I’ve been wanting to analyze the EXIF data of my photos and figure out which lenses I shot most. I’m interested in seeing if it was really necessary to haul the Nikon 200-400mm f/4 lens on the safari. The 200-400 is truly an excellent lens, but it’s a pig and I grew tired of carrying it. It’s also a little unnerving traveling with a $5500 piece of glass (I rented!). There’s no question that I needed the reach of 400mm, but did I need the constant f/4 aperture? Would a smaller, lighter lens like the Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 work just as well? Below is a chart of how many shots I took with each lens I brought on the trip and which apertures I used. I didn’t bother breaking out f-stops below f/5.6 since that’s usually the maximum for most variable aperture lenses like the 80-400mm.

I am really not surprised that the overwhelming majority of my photos were shot at smaller apertures than f/5.6. I think there are a couple of reasons for this. First, we really weren’t in that many low light situations. Tanzania’s National Parks typically close around 6 or 7 PM and you must be out by then, or you risk being fined. Secondly, the focus plane of big telephoto lenses is extremely shallow. If you’re taking a picture of a lion at f/4 with a 400mm lens, you’re likely to get his nose in sharp focus, but the rest of his face out of focus. This becomes even more of an issue when there are multiple animals. One afternoon we came upon a pride of 13 lions all sitting together. It was totally impossible to get them all in focus even at the smallest apertures and highest ISOs.

So could a smaller, variable aperture lens like the Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 replace the big 200-400mm on a safari? If I was going on an African safari tomorrow (I wish!) I would still take the 200-400. The 80-400’s biggest drawback is that it doesn’t have the internal focusing motor that Nikon’s more modern lenses have. This makes it slow to focus. In Africa, you typically need very fast autofocus to track moving animals. The 200-400mm focuses very quickly because it has the AF-S motor. But there are rumors that Nikon may soon update the 80-400 to include fast autofocus. The current word on the street is that the 80-400 may be replaced with a lens in the 100-500mm range (I have no insider info). If that lens is real and has the excellent optics of the 80-400, I could definitely see it going on my next safari in place of the 200-400. For the time being, though, the best safari lens combo (for Nikon) is the 70-200 and the 200-400.

Lava Boat Tours: Extreme Danger or Fun Adventure?

Lava Ocean Entry - Nikon D300, Nikon 70-200mm, f/2.8, 1/400, ISO 800

On my recent trip to Hawai’i, my brother and I stopped off on The Big Island for a few days to explore Volcanoes National Park. Our goal was to photograph flowing lava up close. Since Kilauea is so unpredictable, it’s impossible to know where lava flows will be during your trip or if there will be any at all. One relatively consistent area for lava viewing is the coast line near Kalapana where lava flows from the Pu`u`O`o vent of Kilauea into the ocean. The reaction of 2000 degree lava with sea water is an impressive sight, creating a huge, glowing steam plume that rises into the air. Unfortunately the designated viewing area for the ocean entry is over 2 miles away. If you were to hike all the way out to the ocean entry, you would not only risk a $10,000 fine, but your life as well. The lava is constantly expanding the coast of the Big Island, but the newly created land is extremely unstable and frequently falls off into the water. Many people have been injured and even killed from walking out on the lava bench.

Another option for getting a front row seat to the lava ocean entry point is to sign up for a lava boat tour. Several companies launch boats from Pahoa and take you to within 20-30 feet of the lava…yes, that’s right, 20-30 feet! It was exactly what my brother and I were looking for, so before we left for Hawaii, we booked a sunrise lava boat tour with Lava Ocean Adventures.

Lava ocean entry - Nikon D300, Nikon 70-200mm, f/2.8, 1/50, ISO 800

Once we arrived at Volcanoes National Park, we stopped by the visitor center to see what Kilauea was up to. We mentioned to the park ranger on duty that we were doing a lava boat tour the next morning. The look that came over his face immediately made it clear that the lava boat “industry” was a major thorn in the side of the National Park Service. He launched into a diatribe about how insanely dangerous it was to be on a boat near the ocean entry. He carefully outlined all of the dangers, including being gassed by the steam cloud which is made up of hydrochloric and hydrofluoric acid, falling off the boat into near boiling water, and being blown to bits by tephra blasts that are powerful enough to toss boulder-sized rocks 30 feet in the air. Perhaps even more scary than those immediate threats was the possibility we could inhale microscopic glass fragments that are aerosolized in the violent reaction of lava entering water. The long term health risks are similar to breathing asbestos.

Needless to say, I was more than a little worried. I spent much of the evening on my iPhone researching the dangers the park ranger mentioned, but I was unable to find any solid evidence that the situation was as grim as he described. We decided to go through with the boat tour and obviously survived the immediate dangers. To mitigate the glass fragment issue, I tightly tied a folded shirt over my nose and mouth. When the boat went near the steam cloud, I held my breath and closed my eyes. Of course, I was the only person on the boat doing this. The captain and crew who have done these tours multiple times a day for twenty years didn’t bat an eye.

The experience was really quite fun. Being close enough to feel the heat of the lava on my face was thrilling and surreal. Photographically, it was nearly impossible to get any meaningful shots. It was very dark and the boat was constantly being thrown around in the choppy water. The autofocus system on my Nikon D300 was totally confused and most of my shots turned out as abstract blurs–even at f/2.8 and ISO 800. Everyone else on the boat with little point and shoot cameras gave up taking pictures early on. The lava boat crew will tell you to bring a wide-angle lens because they get you so close, but you absolutely need a fast telephoto. The 70-200mm f/2.8 VR is about as good a lens as you could have for this.

Lava bench collapse - Nikon D300, Nikon 70-200mm, f/2.8, 1/320, ISO 800

Was it dangerous? Yes, I’m sure it was, although it didn’t seem like it. There were no major explosions during our tour but we did see a partial lava bench collapse (see photo directly above). Unfortunately, it may only be a matter of time until a lava boat tragedy occurs. The collision of lava and sea water is just too unpredictable. Things DO blow up out there. As for the environmental hazards, this report and a few others on the internet suggest that the park ranger we spoke to may have been exaggerating the danger a little. That’s fine, it’s his job to protect people. There’s no doubt that those toxins exist out there, but there is conflicting information about how high the concentrations actually are.

I guess it all comes down to how badly you want to see lava and what level of risk you’re comfortable with. For me, the lava boat tour was at the upper limit of what I’m willing to do for a photo. I’m very glad that I went and I had a great time though. I think what’s most important in these situations is to get all the information you can–carefully weigh the risks, and especially pay attention to your inner voice. If you don’t feel comfortable with something, speak up. You could always go drink Mai Tais on the beach–just don’t forget your sunscreen. UV rays cause skin cancer you know.

Photo of the Day

Rocky Mountain National Park - Nikon D300, Tokina 11-16mm, Singh-Ray Gold-N-Blue Polarizer, Singh-Ray 3-stop GND, f/16, 2.5 sec.

Mud and Blood in Hawaii

Nikon D300, Tokina 11-16mm, Singh-Ray Vari-N-Duo, Singh-Ray 3-stop Reverse GND, f/16, 30 sec., ISO 200

Imagine for a moment if you were to go on a photographic expedition to Hawaii. The scene that probably unfolds in your head is a very pleasant one… you casually setting up your tripod on the beach with a warm tropical breeze at your back. It’s hard to imagine worrying about anything more than maybe getting a sunburn or missing first light because you had too many Mai Tais the night before.

You can probably guess by the title of this post that my brother and I had a somewhat different experience when we recently spent 5 days on Kauai and 3 days on the Big Island taking photos. In reality, it was a humbling experience because we had greatly underestimated the extreme nature of the Hawaiian landscape. Like any place, it has it’s dangers and those dangers often become worse when you’re setting up sensitive photo gear in precarious places to get the shot of your dreams.

Our overall experience on this trip is perfectly illustrated by our very first morning photographing the sunrise from the Mokolea Lava Pools on the eastern shore of Kauai. We had scoped out the location the previous evening and figured out that we would have to drive to a small beach about a mile away and hike in. With our 30 pound packs of camera gear, we hiked across the sand in the dark until we came to a large river that separated us from the lava pools. No problem. We found the narrowest part of the river and waded across, being careful not to fall because of the soft sand under our feet. After a little bush-whacking we made it to the lava bench and began looking for the famous maelstrom that fills with seawater when the waves hit it and then empties out like a toilet flushing as the waves recede. Immediately, we noticed the lava bench we were walking on was covered with algae making it extremely slippery. It took us several minutes to locate the lava formation (still in the dark at this point) and we proceeded to get inspired and find locations to set up our cameras.

Because landscape shots are often more interesting when there are extreme foreground elements to complement the middle and background, you have to use a wide angle lens and get very close to the ground. This was precisely my strategy for the Mokolea Lava Pools except that getting close to the ground meant getting close to the crashing waves on the lava bench…and when I mean crashing, I mean CRASHING. I literally got into the water with my camera and tripod, screwed on my brand new Singh-Ray Vari-N-Duo filter and started setting up my composition. I noticed the image in my viewfinder getting progressively hazier as I adjusted the tripod. Sea spray was the culprit. Knowing that salt water is the kiss of death for digital cameras, I quickly ran back onshore (being careful to not slip on the algae) to get my rain cover out of my pack so I could protect my camera while I waited for the sun. No sooner than I got back to my camera, a huge wave hit me, grabbed the rain cover and started to wash it out to sea. A quick poke with my tripod leg saved the rain cover, but now it was soaking wet…with sea water. It was useless to me now.

My Camera in Peril on the Mokolea Lava Bench

While dealing with that and trying to stretch my thin t-shirt over my camera to protect it, I didn’t even notice the storm that was brewing just off shore. With no warning whatsoever, it started pouring rain. It was like someone just turned a dial to “torrential” and flipped the switch to “ON”. My pack on shore with all my camera lenses was getting soaked. So were all my Singh-Ray filters that I had set out on a rock. But I was in triage mode…save the most expensive gear first which, of course, was the camera I was using. The rain turned off and on a few times and during the breaks, I would wipe off the lens and make a few exposures and then switch back to protecting the camera from more rain…though it got soaking wet anyway. I have a new appreciation for Nikon’s weather sealing!

Fortunately, the only equipment casualty of the morning was my brother’s GPS geo-tagging device which stopped working after a suspected dunk in the water. In all the chaos I did manage to come away with an image that I’m pretty excited about (see above). But just about every other worthwhile image from the trip had some similar adventure associated with it. It is fair to say that Hawaii is a very challenging environment for serious landscape photography. But I honestly had a great time and would do it all again in an instant.

On the hike back to the car, there were a few more instant-on hurricanes and I tripped and fell face-first on the rocks (damn algae). Welcome to Kauai!