“Playing with NIK”

Fisherman’s Wharf, San Francisco
Copyright 2011 Andy Richards

My photographic imagery is 98% “traditional. I don’t generally experiment with special techniques. I try to portray what I “saw” in the field.  I don’t mean to say that this is the same thing as “reality.” Most of my landscape work is really intended to be art. I am not aware of any rule that says that photographic “seeing” in these conditions must match reality. Instead, I aim for what I saw in the field, or sometimes what I saw as a possibility in the field.

When I use the word “photorealistic” I mean what our eyes (and mind) might see, shown in a “traditional” photographic presentation

Nonetheless, I still believe 98% of the images I create are “photorealistic.” In other words, they are designed to look and appear as traditional photographic images.

High dynamic range (HDR) software is (or was, for a time) “all the rage” for some photographers. In my own view, it was more often than not, grossly overused and often produced garish results that the creator called “painterly.” My own very occasional use of HDR software (I prefer Photomatix) has been mostly for sophisticated blending of individual digital captures, with a goal of creating a “photorealistic” result. I blogged about this on 2 other occasions, first introducing the topic in my March, 2009 blog, “High Dynamic Range Photography,” and later “Managing Dynamic Range Digitally (a comparison of HDR conversion methods and software)” in September of 2010.

When I use the word “photorealistic” in this context, I don’t necessarily mean what was physically, electronically or chemically possible, but rather, what our eyes and minds might see, shown in a “traditional” photographic presentation.

I do appreciate that what many of us do, as photographers, is art. And art doesn’t have any pre-determined borders, in my view; even in a “traditional” photographic context. As such, I am not against trying new things in an effort to present an image in its best light.

Last month Google created an opportunity for owners of Nik products to “upgrade” to the entire suite. I took advantage. As I find time and opportunity, I have begun to explore some of the “preset” formulas in this set of plug-ins to Photoshop (and Light Room). The bread and butter parts of the suite for me have been Dfine noise-reduction software, Nik sharpener, and Viveza.

Fisherman’s Wharf; San Francisco
Copyright 2011 Andy Richards

Color Efex Pro is also part of the suite. Color Efex Pro is essentially a set of preset filters. As such, I have used it only sparingly and only for a very small handful of the many filters available. The graduated neutral density filter is by far my favorite, and the one that gets the most use. It just does a better job in a very short time period than any blending I can do on my own (including the estimable counterpart in Adobe Camera Raw). But with the Nik U-point control points and a great deal of adjustability in how all of these filters are applied, it is a pretty diverse set of filters. I have generally eschewed the filter called “details enhancer.” This is partly because I have seen it overdone so much and it reminds me of the garish HDR images referred to above, and partly because I think the “structure” adjustment in Viveza 2 and in Nik Sharpener is so much better, and so much more subtle.

Art doesn’t have any borders, even in a traditional photographic context

But recently, I was working on the image here and decided I would take a test run though some of the Color Efex filters. Suddenly, I found an image that I thought the details enhancer filter was well suited for. You can see the difference in the before and after images here. The traditional photorealistic presentation, is, in my view, unremarkable. It just doesn’t seem to have any punch to it, either artistically or visually. But the moderate use of one of the preset details enhancer filters transforms this image into what appears to me to be like a nice oil painting.

Over time, I am certain to experiment more and more with some of the “artistic” options in the Nik software. I probably won’t often say this, but thank you Google for making this suite of software so attainable recently.

Which Features should I Use? – Part II

Pete’s Lake Sunrise
Hiawatha NF, Michigan UP
Copyright Andy Richards 2012

In last week’s blog, I opined that most of the “gee-whiz” features on modern compact and DSLR digital cameras were occasionally useful, but not essential.  Obviously, there are some “features” on all equipment that are essential.  A digital capture device must have a sensor, a lens of some description, and a way to capture, save and transfer the digitally captured “image.” I don’t want to dwell on age, but when I started down my photographic road, the only truly  ”automatic” feature on a camera was the ability to automatically “stop down” the lens to the selected aperture when the shutter was triggered. Having a built-in light-metering system was a convenience, but not really essential and certainly not automatic. And before my time, some of the most talented photographers in history–Adams and Stieglitz come to mind—had even less “features” on their cameras. Yet somehow, they were able to make historically great photographic images. I also opined that the most important piece of equipment a photographer “owns” is the thing that sits on top of her shoulders.

The most important piece of equipment a photographer owns is that thing that sits on top of his or her shoulders

But having said all of those things, it is difficult not to acknowledge in wonderment, where we have come technologically. Lenses that “auto-focus” just continue to get better and better. “Image Stabilization” technology constantly improves. “Matrix” metering technology makes relying on the in-camera meter’s “judgment” of exposure more and more effective (and now with digital imagery’s immediate capture, the on-camera histogram display gives us immediate “confirmation” of exposure). Again, these are all tools—nothing more or less. They measure with increasing accuracy, but they are machines, tools and are far from perfection. Moreover, a blind reliance on them robs creativity! Recently, I came to the realization that my too frequent reliance on my camera’s “aperture-priority” (A or AP) setting was hindering my ability to obtain truly accurate exposure. But it was “easy” and I had become lazy. And it really made no sense. I work from a tripod 90% of the time and in those instances there is rarely a time when it makes sense not to make my own judgments about correct exposure. These “shooting modes”  (Aperture Priority and Shutter Speed Priority, for example) are very useful tools. But they are just that:  ”tools”.  They are designed to allow us to take our knowledge of (for example) exposure theory and use them to make settings easier to maintain.  Modern technology has given us some pretty amazing “help” tools.  But it is still the photographer’s responsibility to make judgments about which tool is correct for the job at hand.

It is difficult not to acknowledge in wonderment where we have come technologically

Understanding this, there are a number of features I regularly use.

Rear Focus Button

The “higher end” DSLRs often have a button on the rear of the body designated “AF” (or something similar).  On my Nikon bodies, its default setting activates the camera’s auto focus.  At first glance, this may seem redundant.  After all, a half press of the shutter release button already does this.   When I learned the utility of this button some years back from a  John Gerlach book, I almost literally smacked my own forehead. .  I assume that most major branded camera bodies have similar conventions. I shoot Nikon and have for 30 years, so it is my only experience. Your own mileage may vary, depending on whose tools you have in hand. But my Nikon bodies allow me to program the trigger for auto-focus (AF). Conventionally, most cameras start the AF mechanism by a partial or 1/2 press of the shutter button. For some hand-held shooting and for most “action” shooting, I like this. But in other cases, it is a hindrance. There are times when you want to set the camera’s point of focus independently of other settings. On the tripod, I may preset my exposure solution and may have metered off a part of the scene that I do not want the camera to attempt to focus on. But as soon as I activate the shutter release, it tries to focus again. Turning off the shutter releases control of AF is a way to correct this issue. My “landscape” shooting setting on my camera has this turned off by default. The only way to trigger the AF mechanism is to depress the dedicated AF button on the back of the camera body. It is a very useful function.  Using the rear focus button allowed me to set my focus independently of the shot in the Pete’s Lake sunrise shot.  I was able to meter off the blue sky, set my focus and then trip the shutter with my remote release, knowing nothing would change.

Not my best “grace-under-pressure” moment

The newer bodies generally  incorporate “shooting banks,” allowing you to program different features for different situations and then switch between these banks.  I have a “Landscape” bank and an “Action” bank.  I leave the conventional shutter release in the action bank.  If you do program this feature, remember you did it .  I had an embarrassing reminder of this a few years ago.  My wife’s former boss and our good friend had been appointed to a very important and prestigious position.  She asked me to bring my gear and ensure that we got some “keeper” photographs.  I had recently “discovered” the rear-button-focus “trick.”  My then D200 did not have the separate shooter banks.  I had not shot for a couple months since fiddling with, and changing the settings.  When I arrived at the location a bit early I got the camera out and was going to make a series of test shots to get the lighting, and lay of the room, etc.  My camera would not AF!  I tried everything I could think of (battery pull, on and off several times).  I was dumbfounded.  I guessed I was going to have to send the body in to Nikon for service (something — knock on wood — I have never had to do with a Nikon body).  Thankfully, the manufactures haven’t take MF away from us (yet – Congress may act on it soon ).  It weighed on my mind.  It wasn’t until I was home, later that night that I again, almost literally slapped my own forehead as I realized what had happened.  I had turned off the AF activation on the shutter button.  AF was working all the time (and yeah, all I had to do was press the rear AF button).  Not my best “grace-under-pressure moment!” .

Irwin Lake; Hiawatha NF
Copyright 2012 Andy Richards

One would think these gridlines would follow the conventional “rule of thirds,” but they often do not

Focus Screen Gridlines

Many of the higher end DSLR bodies have a feature allowing you to turn on a grid.  I always turn them on as part of my initial setup.  I have them turned on on both my D800 and my new Nex-6 (review to come soon).  I suppose there are any number of shooters out there who prefer to keep their screen free of clutter.  But for me, these grid lines help with alignment, and theoretically with composition. Be very careful here, however. I am not sure what the rationale is for this, but many of these screen grids are not set at the conventional “artistic” intervals. One would think that these gridlines would follow the conventional “rule of thirds,” but they often do not.  NIKON, are you listening? (Yeah — I am sure they read my blog regularly ).  Nevertheless, gridlines do give you some guidance about placement of elements of composition within the screen.  I have found that relying on the horizontal gridlines for leveling the image is hit or miss.  The spirit level on the hot shoe is a more foolproof solution for that.

LCD Review

On most DSLR cameras, you can turn this feature on or off. I like an immediate review, so I can watch the histogram as I am shooting. It uses more battery life, but I carry a couple extras, so it has never been an issue for me.  One thing to note.  Exposure measurement tools (see my “discourse” on tools above) are not uniformly accurate.  We can take 3 same brand cameras; same model, same batch of manufacture, and meter on the same grey card in the same light and get 3 different measurements.  For sure, they vary less today than they would have 30 years ago, but they vary.  Likewise, the histogram feature will vary from model to model and manufacturer to manufacturer.  And, if you shoot raw (and you should be thinking about that), there is another challenge.  Since the raw file hasn’t been “converted” to a recognized format (a bit of an oversimplification, but useful for us here), the camera really cannot display a histogram of the raw capture.  Instead, it does an in-camera conversion to a jpeg and displays the histogram based on that jpeg thumbnail image on your camera’s LCD.  In practice, it can vary a great deal from the actual capture results (my own experience with several Nikon body/sensor combinations tells me I can push the envelope on the highlights side a bit)).  It is worth testing this by comparing the camera histogram with your post-processing software histogram.  Remember, these are measurement tools and good craft means you will do some experimenting and your own calibration.

Spot Metering Capability

Most modern bodies now have the ability to meter using spot, matrix (a/k/a honeycomb or “evaluative”) or center-weighted methods.  Many bodies being sold at market do not have Spot Metering capability.  Most of the “prosumer” and “pro” bodies on the market today do.  Some of the “enthusiast” compact cameras now do, also (i.e., the Sony Nex and Fuji X1 model lines which carry the same “APS” size sensors as are found in many DSLRS; the “micro” 4/3 top line models like Olympus’ OM5 , the Nikon 1 and  new Coolpix A).  Spot metering is a “must have” feature, in my view, for critical exposure decisions. Even better (and even more expensive) is a hand-held spot meter.  Particularly in Landscape situations and Studio shooting, where you typically have time to plan your exposure, spot metering can be the best method of determining overall correct exposure for a given image.  For those who may not know, spot metering “points” the meter measurement at a much smaller (radius) area of the image.  Using the longest lens or longest zoom, you can center the spot on the brightest, darkest and a neutral area of the image with at least some confidence that it is measuring only those areas of reflectance.  Knowing those parameters, you can judge which areas of the image you want to be properly exposed.  This is particularly useful in an image that has a lot of contrast between the darkest and lightest area.

Mirror Lock Up

I admit that I have not done much empirical testing on my own on this feature. My seat of the pants judgment ( I did some comparison shots of some macro images shot with my film-based Nikon F2A on slide film some years back, with and without lockup at several shutter speeds) was that I couldn’t see any real difference.  There has always been some controversy over whether this is real or legend.  I know there are those who argue that its utility is overstated. But it seems that the majority who weigh in on it believe strongly that it is a significant factor in image quality. I know several photographers who I have great admiration and respect for who swear by its use. After observing their images for several years, I began using it.  It is one of those things that you can say, probably helps, and certainly cannot hurt, your imagery.   One little nitpick I have with Nikon is that if you are using their wireless remote shutter release, you cannot use their mirror-up feature. What is up with that, Nikon?

 

Mirror Lockup, in the appropriate circumstances, probably helps and certainly cannot hurt, your imagery

Aperture Priority/Shutter Speed Priority Settings

As I mentioned above, there is a danger in over-reliance on something that works sometimes.  This is one of those areas. This feature sets up the camera computer and light meter linkage to make its best guess (and yes, it is a guess) at the proper exposure for a given aperture or shutter speed setting. In Aperture priority, you set a constant aperture, and the camera varies the shutter speed in order to achieve correct exposure for the conditions. If you are concerned about sharp focus within a range (depth of field), this is a setting that can in many instances, be useful. I will now most often use it when hand-holding shots, especially if things are moving fast, in order not to have to think about too many settings. I never use the “program” settings on any DSLR for any reason!

Neither of these settings are a substitute for thinking

Blue Angels
Fleet Week Air Show
San Francisco, CA
Copyright 2011 Andy Richards

Shutter speed priority is just the opposite. You set a constant shutter speed, and the camera makes its best guess at the appropriate aperture setting for the conditions. I use this rarely, but sometimes when action shooting. In the handheld shot of the Blue Angel Jet, I had shutter speed priority set the whole afternoon. The conditions were relatively bright and I wasn’t concerned too much about too large settings; or even about depth of field, for that matter.

Neither of these settings are a substitute for thinking, and I am afraid they sometimes become that, due to over-reliance on what are some pretty darn good results from today’s modern computers (ah……I mean cameras).

DOF Preview

This is a feature that has been resident on camera bodies for many years. When I was looking for a body, I typically “specced’ this feature. This preview button “stops down” the lens to its actual aperture when the shutter is tripped. On modern SLR/DSLR body/lens combinations (modern in this case meaning from the early 60′s on) the lens is always open to its widest aperture setting while focusing and looking through the viewfinder. Only when the shutter is tripped does it “stop down” to your selected aperture. This means that what you see through the lens in terms of focus and depth of field is what would be rendered at the lens’ widest aperture. Among other things affecting depth of field, the wider the aperture, the shallower the depth of field. Conversely, the smaller the aperture, the more depth of field exists. Essentially this means more of the image from front to back is in acceptable focus as the aperture gets smaller. Lots of people pressed that DOF button on the camera and saw that everything got dark and wondered what the heck good that did? What it is doing is mechanically stopping down the lens, so you can see the effect of the selected aperture on depth of field. As for the darkening, stop it down and wait a while. Your eyes will adjust and you will see the effect on depth of field of changing the aperture. When depth of field is critical in an image, this is an invaluable tool.   In the Blue Flag Iris image, I wanted to keep the central part the blossom in sharp focus while letting the some of the edges and the entire background go softly out of focus.  I used a telephoto lens to achieve this effect, and the DOF preview function was critical to “seeing”  what the end result would be.

Blue Flag Iris
Shiawassee National Wildlife Refuge
Copyright Andy Richards

In Camera Noise Reduction

This is an in-camera computer setting. It tells the camera that when an exposure exceeds a certain amount of time (the shutter is open), to take a second frame with the shutter closed (resulting, theoretically, in a pure black exposure) and then to “merge” parts of the image. This is ingenious and does an admirable job of noise reduction, by “replacing” noisy parts of the image. I generally have this set for night time images.  The night image of a hotel in downtown Austin, Texas, was one of the very first images captured on my D700, which I purchased specifically because of its reputed image quality and particularly its noise handling characteristics.  The noise reduction utility is pretty impressive.

Austin, Texas Downtown
Copyright 2010 Andy Richards

Image Stabilization/Vibration Reduction

This is a function mostly built into lenses, although some manufacturers have ingeniously built it into the camera body itself. For those manufacturers who have built it into the body, bravo! (I don’t pretend to completely understand the science and engineering involved here, but I have found myself wondering, year after year, why all manufacturers haven’t offered this feature in the camera body rather than the lens? Obviously, part of the answer lies in the question: whether one works better than the other). For the rest of us, it becomes a decision to make when selecting and buying a lens. I read a comment recently that made some sense to me. The writer (a good friend of mine and talented photographer) said he shoots mostly from a tripod and almost exclusively landscape and does not see the need for the additional expense, nor the additional weight. Personally, I would lean toward getting it if possible. And this, even though I keep it switched off 90% of the time. But I would like to have it available for the other 10%. My 70-200 has it. My 24-70 does not.

Yukon; Skagway, Alaska
White Pass Railroad
Copyright 2010 Andy Richards

Again, this is a tool that can be overused and falsely relied upon. Vibration reduction is not a substitute for good technique. Nor will it “fix” an otherwise bad image. And, like any tool, you have to understand what it does, and more importantly, what it doesn’t do. It can give you some “defense” against camera shake (in handholding situations), assisting as much as 2 stops. You cannot “freeze” a moving target with vibration reduction. I use it where warranted and turn it off where I don’t need it. I always turn it off when my camera is mounted to a tripod on solid ground. What I will say about it is that—in the case of Nikon’s “Vibration Reduction,” it works. It most definitely helps “stabilize” the camera in hand-held situations. The image of the Alaskan Yukon was taken from a moving train using a VR 300 mm lens.

Which Features should I Choose; Which Features should I Use?

Forest Color; Hiawatha NF
Copyright 2012 Andy Richards

I‘ll freely admit I am sometimes a thief of ideas. Recently, my friend, Dean, from the SOV Photography Forum, asked a rhetorical question: whether participants thought some of the “bells and whistles” available on our modern digital cameras might actually detract from our imagery? Broken record here (although one has to wonder how many readers “get” that analogy anymore) – but I’ll repeat it anyway: a camera is merely a tool (Dean knows that, of course. He is an accomplished photographer in his own right. It is why his question is “rhetorical”).

Unfortunately, many of the tools in the physical tool bag hinder the best use of the most important tool!

But it’s an interesting question, Dean. Every experienced photographer has a bag of tools. Some are big bags, some not so big. Every good photographer has their own favorite tools. But the best photographers all have one tool that they universally agree is the most important tool in the “bag.” We all have it. It is always securely mounted, squarely between your shoulder blades. And unfortunately, many of the tools in the physical bag, hinder the best use of that most-important tool!

Many of the features camera manufacturers work hard to “R&D” and bring to market, are extremely useful enhancements to the tools. They aren’t necessary enhancements; just useful enhancements. I have said this before here, but if I were teaching beginning photographers, my ideal teaching tool would be a very basic SLR/DSLR that would only be used in “manual mode.” This would hold particularly true in the area of exposure theory. I want the photographer and her creativity to control the tool; not the opposite. I am concerned that when we start relying on all the “gee-whiz” “smartness” of today’s modern digital camera, we develop the tendency to focus (pun intended) on features rather than image making. And as we plan our shooting around the features, we begin to loose the creativity that distinguishes a photographic image from a snapshot.

Reading my Magic Lantern Guide for any of my DSLR Cameras (I like this series as a plain English, more logically laid out instruction book than the manual that comes with the camera), or sorting through the menu systems, it becomes obvious that there are a mind-boggling array of “features” built into these modern miracles of technology. Where we have come since my original all-manual AshiFlex 35mm SLR back in the 1970′s is nothing short of amazing. But like everything “new,” I am not certain it is all “good.”

With modern digital cameras, there is a tendency to focus on features rather than on image-making

It is a fact of economic life that the sales of all cameras by the major manufactures is driven and supported by the general consumer (and indeed by the consumer-oriented “Point and Shoot” cameras). While the pros and those of us hobbyists who “dabble” in the higher-end camera bodies may not always appreciate it, those consumer purchases are what fuel the R&D and support the ability to offer the so-called “flagship” cameras sold by manufacturers. So, whether we like it or not, we are bound to get “prosumer” and “pro” camera bodies that are bloated with “features”some of us may think are useless features (actually, a fair percentage of working pros use the features I have just called “useless,” so I am clearly being unfairly biased here. But they use them knowing what they do for them; they tend to be time and post-processing saving tools).

I do not recommend most of these features for most serious users. When I buy a new model, I usually spend an hour or so, learning about these features (mainly about where they are found in the menu system and how to turn them off). The modern DSLR camera is a small computer. But is has nowhere near the computing power of your desktop, nor the editing power of a computer program like Lightroom or Photoshop (or any of the other commonly used editing programs, for that matter). So why would anybody want to rely on an inferior processor for their end-result images? But if you turn on all the “gee whiz” features (sharpness, so-called “vivid” image rendering, and even white balance setting and fine tuning, that is exactly what you are choosing to do).  The image at the beginning of the blog was taken on my D700 which has as many “features” as any camera out there.  Yet my image was rendered with all the gadgetry shut off, the image quality settings all at “neutral,” and my camera’s settings turned off (all except for AF, which I use almost universally).  I used the manual exposure setting on the camera meter with a spot metering setting.  It required me to “think” about everything I was doing.  Yet, in my view, it is one of the better quality images I have produced in the past 5 years.

Oh, and one other thing: in order for some of these features to have any effect on your images, you must also choose to let the camera render your images in a jpg (or sometimes tiff) format. If you capture and save your images in the manufacturer’s native raw format (an in most cases, you should), none of these in-camera features will have any effect on your captures. I know that some pros (particularly sports photographers, and wedding photographers and some photojournalists) will choose to shoot in jpg format. But they do so with great knowledge of their choice, including the limitations that go along with those choices.

I turn almost all of the features off

Blindly enabling those automatic exposure, do-it-for-you “priority” settings, like Aperture Priority, Shutter Speed Priority, or the worst of all, Program Mode has a limiting effect on your photography. Note that I said “blindly.” I am not saying that these features (with the possible exception of the “Program Mode,” for which I cannot imagine any other legitimate use than to switch it on to hand the camera to a passer-by to take a snapshot of your family or group – something I am not sure I would do anyway, with an expensive camera  ) do not have their significant useful purpose. They are tools that need to be used for specific circumstances and with full knowledge of what they do—but more importantly, their limitations.  The Red Jack Lake image, again, was a no bells and whistles settings image.

Red Jack Lake; Hiawatha NF
Copyright 2012 Andy Richards

My personal approach (and it perhaps needs to be put into the perspective that I am primarily a landscape photographer) is to turn everything off. I don’t want any in-camera enhancements to the digital image. I want it neutral (As my friend Al Utzig never hesitates to point out, I am not afraid of “enhancing” an image. I just prefer to do it in the controlled environment of my computer). Once I have turned everything off, I will go back and selectively enable tools that I find personally useful.

So where am I going with this? Rather than re-hash it, I’ll suggest you go back and look at my series “Taking Your Photography to the Next Level.” This gives you the background on why I don’t think these “features” are always a good thing. If you are experienced, and know the basics of photography, perhaps you can start using these features to your advantage, as the tools they are. However, even experience photographers would do well to sometimes go back to basics. I recently came to the realization that I was relying too much on the ease and simplicity of the Aperture Priority Setting on my DSLR bodies, to the detriment of good exposure technique, and more importantly, I was limiting my own creativity to work with other aperture and shutter speed the way it was intended to be used.  Once again, the Elliot Falls image was made using manual exposure mode with no special items on the camera turned on.

In an upcoming blog, I’ll discuss my own use of some of these features and why and when I use them.

Good Shooting…………………….

It’s That Time Again!

Porcupine Mountain State Park
Upper Peninsula, Michigan
Copyright Andy Richards 1997

Predictably, I do this every year. We are a month or less away from Fall foliage season, and I feel compelled to write about it in my blog. Sometime in about the middle of August, things start a natural progression that show that Summer is winding down and Fall approaching. It has always been in a sense a bittersweet time for me, as I have never been a Winter person. I love being able to get outside, get into the woods, onto the water, or even occasionally, the golf course.

Craftsbury Common, Craftsbury, Vermont
Copyright 2010 Andy Richards

Early Fall is, has always been, and probably always will be, my favorite time of the year. Ironically, it seems to be one of the most short-lived seasons, and is a time when things are dying, turning, or being harvested. There is something exciting about the sights and smells of that time of the year and I am always sad when, sometime in November, things turn grey and snow is in the air. But from now until then: exciting times.

Glade Creek Grist Mill
Babcock State Park, West Virginia
Copyright 2011 Andy Richards

Fall always has been, and always will be, my favorite time to photograph

In my view, Fall is the best time to be a photographer. Along with the sights and sounds, comes clear air, with puffy clouds, low-angled light, and shorter days. Why are shorter days good? It means that we don’t have to roll out of bed quite so early to beat the sun, nor wait quite so late for the evening light. And of course, there is the foliage. There is nothing wrong with green foliage (or even the pastel “colors” of early spring). Spring itself rivals Fall with everything coming into bloom. But the Fall foliage is still the “king” of photographic subjects. It makes everything come alive and give color and interest to scenes that might otherwise be “just nice” or even “ho-hum.”

Jordan Pond
Acadia National Park; Maine
Copyright 2009 Andy Richards

Fall foliage is the “king” of outdoor and nature photographic subjects

Foliage need not be just the traditional reds, oranges, rusts and yellows of large, deciduous trees. Sumac, grape vines, corn and beans nearing harvest-readiness also provide some wonderful, colorful photographic subjects and backdrops.

Harvesting Soybeans
Saginaw County, Michigan
Copyright 2002 Andy Richards

One of my favorite image subjects is the reflection. And nothing brings a reflection more interest than the vibrant colors of Fall foliage.

Kit Carson National Forest
Copyright 2008 Andy Richards

In years past, I have traveled to Vermont, Maine, Virginia, West Virginia, California and New Mexico. Each has their own “take” on foliage. We were too early for foliage in the San Francisco Bay area and wine country and I will undoubtedly return there in the late Fall in the near future, for the colorful vineyards. The “bucket list” also includes the Great Smoky Mountain National Park, The Grand Teton and Yellowstone National Parks, Alaska and closer to home, Cuyahoga National Park in Ohio. I also hope to spend some time in Canada just to the Northeast of our Upper Peninsula and on the Bruce Peninsula, just East of where I live, and in an area surrounding the North Channel of Lake Huron known as “the Canadian Shield” one day.

Boley Lake
Babcock State Park, W. Virginia
copyright 2011 Andy Richards

As football season starts up, students go back to school, the vacationers close up the summer cottages, and things begin to gear up for Fall, excitement builds for my own photographic senses. I always have a week-long, dedicated trip planned for foliage photography. This year, I travel to the familiar, Michigan UP for a week-long workshop by my friend and mentor, James Moore, where I will have the great privilege of serving as the “local guide.” We have locations lined up, and I have watched the later summer rains and now-changing weather with great anticipation.

The Common Road
Waitsfield, Vermont
Copyright 2010 Andy Richards

I hope you have a plan to get out during the “season” and photograph some of the wonderful foliage on our continent!