Tag Archives: sean bagshaw

  • Exploring Hart Mountain Wildlife Refuge In Winter

    Admittedly, winter is not my most prolific photography season. Cold, darkness and unpredictable weather often get the better of my psyche and I find myself making excuses or prioritizing office work. However, once or twice a winter I do manage to gear up and head someplace windswept and snowy with my camera. This winter Chuck Porter, one of my oldest and best friends, and I spent a couple days exploring the lonesome high desert in the Hart Mountain Antelope Refuge. Back when we were more energetic Chuck and I spent a lot of time climbing cliffs and mountains all over the western US and spurring each other on to complete questionable feats of endurance. Once we hiked the entire length of the Wild and Scenic Rogue River Trail, all 40 plus miles, in a day. Another time we climbed Mt. Shasta, Mt. McLoughlin and Mt. Thielsen in a 21 hour push. These days we are happy just to get out and camp for a weekend and do a little ski touring.

    Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge is a national wildlife refuge on Hart Mountain in southeastern Oregon, which protects more than 422 square miles and more than 300 species of wildlife, including pronghorn antelope, bighorn sheep, mule deer, sage grouse, and redband trout. The refuge, created in 1936 as a range for remnant herds of pronghorn antelope, spans habitats ranging from high desert to shallow playa lakes, and is among the largest wildlife habitats containing no domestic livestock. Located in a remote region of southeastern Oregon at an elevation over 6,000 feet, Hart Mountain is a wild and desolate place any time of year. In winter, blanketed by snow, it becomes a quite and seemingly endless surreal landscape.

    During our visit, Chuck and I skied through a couple of different areas, both very small in the total scale of the refuge. We talked about coming back one winter and skiing all the way across, but we'll see if I ever get the winter motivation to take that on. The two areas we explored on this visit were the hot springs basin below Warner Peak and Petroglyph Lake. Petroglyph Lake is sheltered on one side by a low cliff band that houses several panels of Native American rock art.

    Instead of going on at length about the skiing, sleeping in the car, eating bad food and all the other standard tales from a trip like this I'll just let the photos speak for themselves. You can click on each image to see it larger and then hit the back button to return to the article.

    Hart Mountain rising out of the clouds above Hart Lake.

    Old building at park headquaters.

    Winter Landscape

    Rok Chuk

    Hotsprings basin black and white

    Meandering hotsprings stream

    Skiing toward Petroglyph Lake

    Desolate and windswept

    Warner Peak above the high desert plain

    Skiing around Petroglyph Lake




    Wind sculpted snow

    Skiing in a snow shower

  • Pacific Northwest Photography Podcast Interview

    Talented outdoor photographer, Adrian Klein, is now producing a great podcast called Pacific Northwest Photography. Adrian recently interviewed me for his podcast, which you can listen to on the player above. During our conversation we chatted about favorite locations, adventures and photography equipment. I also give the behind the scenes tales of the two images below. You can also get the complete story behind my intolerance of goat flavored food products.

    I highly recommend checking out Adrian's photography at www.adrianklein.com

    and his photography blog at http://adriankleinphoto.blogspot.com/

    On Adrian's home page you can subscribe to his PNWP Podcast by clicking the red musical note.

    Lunar Eclipse Over Mt. Shasta

    Lunar Eclipse Over Mt. Shasta

    Double Falls, Glacier National Park

    Double Falls, Glacier National Park

  • Never Hurts to Check

    Bandon Beach, OregonIt never hurts to check back through old images. I apply a fairly rigorous editing process to my images. After a shoot I download the images and then begin the deleting. Using Adobe Lightroom I first find any images that are out of focus, poorly exposed, etc. and delete them. Next I go through and flag all the images that I think may have some promise. Looking at just the flagged images I now go through again and give each image a rank from one to three stars, with three stars being the top level images. Finally I give color codes to some of the stared images, red to indicate a prime select and yellow to indicate a basic stock image. Once this is done I am now able to quickly get back to the best images from a shoot as well as sort them by their potential future use.

    However, I need to stay in the practice of going back and looking through the images that didn't receive a star or a color label from time to time. Often I will find a great image that slipped through the cracks or that I had a bias against at the time, but looks more appealing once I have distanced my mind from it a bit. The photo above of one of the rock formations and beach near Bandon is one such photo. When I took the photo I was hoping for a brilliant sunrise, so when the dawn came with gray conditions I was disappointed, but still dutifully took a few images. My lack of enthusiasm for the day affected how I saw this image when I was first editing the group of images it was in and it didn't make the cut. Nearly a year later I came across it while searching for different beach images. Now that I have had time to distance my mind from the fact that there wasn't a colorful sunrise the image really stands out to me. Now I rather like the dramatic, dark and somewhat ominous feel and muted tones. I have also moved the image quite a bit higher in my ranking system.

  • Intimate Painted Hills

    Intimate Painted Hills

    Intimate Painted Hills

    The painted hills in central Oregon is one of my favorite places in the state. The Painted Hills are located in the Painted Hills Unit of the John Day Fossil Beds National Monument along Hwy 26 just west of Mitchell. Even though the hills don't cover much area, the patterns and shapes and the way light plays across them is visually absorbing. I often take wide landscapes, but for this image I decided to zoom in for an intimate and abstract study. When photographed like this, the hills really do look painted...or rather, they create a photograph that looks like a painting. I'll have to print this large on canvas and see how it looks.

  • The Difference Light Makes

    Howard Prairie lupine right before sunrise.

    Howard Prairie lupine right before sunrise.

    Howard Prairie lupine at sunrise

    Howard Prairie lupine at sunrise

    For me, as for many photographers, light is the most important element in any photograph. Take these two photos for example. They were taken minutes appart during the June wildflower bloom in Howard Prairie in the southern Oregon Cascades. I like both, and other than the light, both are very similar. However, in the first image the sun has not yet crested the ridgeline so the scene is lit by indirect light that is being reflected from the sky and off of the surrounding landscape. It creates a very even wash of light with subtle transitions from darker to lighter areas and the feel that light is glowing from all directions, which it basically is. In the second image the sun has just crested the ridge and direct light is shining on the meadow and strongly backlighting the flowers and grass. The color is warmer, the contrast in the scene is much greater and there is a much stronger sense of the direction of the light. Knowing the characterisitics of different types of outdoor lighting situations helps me be to plan the timing of a photo to best convey the scene the way I envision it.

  • Outdoor Exposure iPhone App

    Outdoor Exposure for iEnvision iPhone app

    While a fine art photographic print is still my favorite way to enjoy great photography, technology is rapidly changing the ways it is possible to view, access and share art. The images that move and excite us no longer have to be confined to a wall or the pages of a book. I love to share my photographs and want people to be able to access them in a way that best suits their needs and purpose. A large fine art print will always be available to those who have the resources and space, but size, cost and location are no longer limiting factors to accessing photography and other visual art.

    The iPhone is one of the most innovative pieces of technology to recently come on the scene. It can be very valuable as a tool for communication and storing and accessing information, but it also has great potential in entertainment, education and access to media and imagry, includinig art.

    iPhone app graphic

    I recently partnered with the folks at Open Door Network in creating an iPhone application of my photography. The application is like a collection of slide shows that allow iPhone users to have a portable art gallery of my photographs right in their pockets. Photographs in the Outdoor Exposure for iEnvision app are organized into three collections including Landscape, Nature and Travel. Landscape includes photos of canyons, deserts, forest, lakes, mountains, oceans, streams and waterfalls. Nature displays abstracts, fall color, flowers, trees and winter. Travel takes you to Hawaii, Mexico and Nepal.

    iPhone app graphic

    In addition to viewing the gallery shows, the images can also be saved for use as iPhone wallpaper and each image links to the Outdoor Exposure Photography website for more information.

    iPhone app graphic

    Open Door Network's flagship iEnvision web image browser, as well as their line of Envi iPhone image applications access and organize images from the Web into fun to view and share slide shows for the iPhone. Other iEnvision "Envi" apps include Art, Earth, Space, Mountain and Yosemite.

  • Presentation: Climbing Denali

    Gripped perpetually by subfreezing temperatures and cloaked by five massive glaciers, the world famous mountain known as Denali (“the Great One”) beckons intrepid mountaineers from around the world. With a summit peak that is 20,320 feet above sea level, Denali (also known as Mount McKinley) is the highest peak in North America. An aspect that is painfully evident to climbers is that the peak rises 18,000 feet from its base (which is 6,000 feet more than Everest rises above its base, the Tibetan Plateau). There is also a higher risk of altitude illness for climbers than its altitude would otherwise suggest, due to its high latitude. It all adds up to a long and merciless climb to reach the summit, where climbers can encounter temperatures as low as -100 degrees below freezing.

    So, you might ask, “What’s the big attraction?” I'll be answering that questions and others as I present my multi-media program, “Above The Shadow Lands“ on Wednesday evening, March 4th, at The Stage Door Coffee House in Mt. Shasta. The presentation will focus on the story of my second ascent of the mountain in 2005.


    In 1998 I climbed Denali as part of a six person team. It was a great adventure, but we had a few difficulties. The size of the group was a challenge and the weather kept us on the mountain for three weeks. In 2005 I went back with my climbing partner, Brock. Better conditions, more experience and an efficient two person team made for smoother ascent. However, I still almost didn't make it.

    Climbing Denali is one of the hardest things I have ever done twice. The route we climbed isn't particularly technical and I'm not a great climber. However, the mountain is big and cold. Setting the goal and then preparing for and experiencing everything it takes to live, survive and reach the summit in that harsh environment made it an enormously powerful and rewarding experience...both times.

    This program is presented by the Mt. Shasta Trail Association. Admission is by donation at the door, and guests are encouraged to have dinner at The Stage Door previous to the program.

    Stage Door Coffee House, 414 N. Mt. Shasta Blvd.
    Wednesday evening, March 4th, 7pm.
    More information: 926-5966

  • High Dynamic Range Photography Techniques

    This article is adapted from a presentation I recently gave to the Southern Oregon Photographic Association.

    High Dynamic Range (HDR) photography is a type of photography that has seen a rapid growth in popularity recently. There are Flickr groups dedicated to it and it comes up regularly in photography forums across the web. In its most recent incarnation HDR photography involves combining multiple exposures of a scene using HDR imaging software, the most popular of which is Photomatix by HDRsoft. Just do a Google search for HDR photography or Photomatix and you can see thousands of examples of Photomatix HDR images.  The image below is typical of a lot of HDR images you will see out there. Some are technically excellent, some are uniquely artistic, some are captivating and some are just plain bad.

    The purpose of HDR photography is to create an image of a scene that has a greater range of light values than can be normally be captured by a single film or digital image. Depending on how it is used, HDR imaging software can allow the photographer to create an image that is closer to what the human eye perceives when looking at a high dynamic range scene. However, more and more it is being used to create surreal, whimsical or fantastical photo illustrations that don't necessarily reflect the human experience but fall into a whole new genre of photographic art (check out the Flickr group).

    I often use the basic concepts of HDR imaging in my work because I like to photograph in very extreme lighting situations that are awesome to experience in person, but impossible to capture with a simple click of the camera shutter. Sometimes I use HDR techniques to create images that are pure fantasy. Most often my goal is to attempt to recreate my personal experience in a way that is more accurate than my camera can record. Therefore, much of my HDR photography does not have the stereotypical cartoonish, haloed, surreal look that you will find in a lot of the current HDR images being made. I also do not normally use Photomatix or other HDR software to create my HDR photos. Rather, I employ a variety of other techniques first, depending on the situation, and turn to software as a final option.

    Before I get further into this discussion of high dynamic range imaging allow me to back up a bit and put a little context on the term "dynamic range". Most simply put, dynamic range, as it applies to photography, is the difference between the maximum (brightest) and minimum (darkest) measurable light intensities for a given scene, film, sensor, screen, etc. This range in photography is often referred to in terms of stops. A stop equals a doubling of the amount of light. A one stop increase in light results in double the light intensity and two stops results in four times the light and so on. The following dynamic range values are open to much debate among photographers and a lot of different values can be found depending on who you read or talk to.  So to avoid getting an argument started, let me point out that I'm using values I borrowed from other sources and only use them as simple reference points, not as the final word on what the exact values may or may not be.

    The human eye is said to have a dynamic range of as much as 24 stops. This would indicate that from the darkest shadow detail the eye can see, to the brightest highlight, the light intensity can double 24 times. That's a bit misleading however, because as we scan a scene our eyes adjust rapidly to darker and brighter areas and our brain quickly composites the various information into what seems like a single image. In reality, if a person is to look at one part of a scene without scanning (this is closer to how a camera does it and is called instantaneous dynamic range) , the dynamic range of the eye is something closer to 14 stops. However, we normally perceive a scene with the greater effective dynamic range because we naturally scan with our eyes.

    By comparison, slide film has a dynamic range of around 5 stops, print film around 7 stops and the data contained within a quality digital RAW file closer to 10 stops. The average scene you might photograph has a dynamic range of about 10 stops but the kinds of extreme lighting scenes that I like to photograph are often in that 14 to 24 stop range of human vision, and sometimes even beyond.  So the problem is that much of what we photograph is within the range of what our eyes can see, but outside the ability of a camera (film or digital) to record all at once. The result is that we often take images that either have shadows that are totally black (underexposed), highlights that are totally white (overexposed) or a combination of both. This can be really frustrating when you remember seeing an amazing sunset over a luminescent ocean, but your photos show only dark, muddy waves and a featureless white sky. Enter the need for HDR photography.

    HDR photography is basically any technique for creating an image that contains a higher dynamic range than can normally be captured in a single frame in a camera (either film or digital). There are actually many ways to extend the dynamic range of a photograph , but a great number of digital photographers are now going strait to the computer software solution. While there are some great advantages to the "Photomatix" approach, I'll point out some reasons why it might be worth it to have some other tricks in the HDR tool box as well.

    So, what are some of the different ways to create higher dynamic range images? The ones I'm most familiar with include:

    1. darkroom techniques (available to traditional film shooters with serious darkroom skills)
    2. graduated filters
    3. careful processing of a RAW image file
    4. double processing a single RAW image file and manually blending the two versions together using photo editing software
    5. manually blending multiple bracketed exposures taken in the camera
    6. using HDR imaging software to automatically blend a set of bracketed exposures.

    As it turns out, HDR photography is almost as old as photography itself (there is some good historical information on Wikipedia). In the late 1800's photographers developed darkroom techniques that enabled them to create single images from two or more separately exposed negatives. This allowed them to produce a positive print that maintained the right exposure in both a bright sky and a dark foreground. Later, Ansel Adams and friends developed the Zone System which was designed to identify the best exposure for any scene that would later allow for the greatest degree of tonal information to be recovered in print. While not truly HDR because he was still working within the limits of a single exposure, his techniques did greatly improve the ability to get a high level of dynamic range from the negative to the print.

    Graduated filters are perhaps the least post production intensive way to create HDR images. A graduated filter is generally a piece of glass or plastic that has a gradient on it that fades from dark (usually neutral gray unless a color shift is desired) to clear. The dark half of the filter is usually placed over the brighter sky with the transition lining up with the horizon and the clear portion over the darker foreground. The darker portion of the filter "holds back" some of the light (usually 1, 2 or 3 stops worth) while the clear portion lets all the light through from the darker foreground. While this doesn't actually extend the dynamic range of the film or digital sensor in the camera, it does help balance a high dynamic range scene so that all the tonal information can be captured within the range of the camera (see example below). The biggest advantage to using graduated filters is that everything happens in-camera so there is no additional post processing time required. All darkroom and computer based HDR techniques require anywhere from several minutes to many hours of additional time. On the down side, graduated filters have a straight transition line that is very difficult to fit on a scene that doesn't have a straight horizon, often resulting in a dark "grad line" cutting across trees, mountains, buildings or any other dark objects that project above the horizon.

    Shooting and processing RAW image files (most current digital SLRs have the ability to shoot RAW files as well as jpegs) isn't technically an HDR technique because it only uses the light captured in a single exposure. However, there is so much data captured in the RAW format that during processing using a RAW converter (many exist but most cameras come with RAW software.   Programs like Adobe Lightroom or Adobe Photoshop also support RAW processing) it is possible to recover both shadow and highlight detail that appeared to be outside the dynamic range when the image was taken. The degree of latitude, often one or more stops in either direction, can be enough to create a final image that has a much greater dynamic range than what the camera appeared to capture (see example below / click to enlarge). The advantages to this are that it is fast, easy and all done with a single exposure. One downside is that even RAW files are limited to how much dynamic range they can contain, so it only works to a point. Another is that trying to recover too much detail from deep shadows in this way can result in a high degree of digital noise.

    Sometimes, I find that a single RAW file contains all the tonal range that is needed for a properly exposed image, but I'm not able to get the entire image to look good with a single RAW conversion. In these cases I will do what is called double processing the RAW file to create two different exposures and then manually blend the exposures using various blending techniques in Photoshop. Exposure blending is a tricky art/skill in itself that takes a lot of practice to do well. Alone, it could be the focus of a multi-day workshop (I'll have to work on offering one), so there isn't time to go into depth here. I have a very basic post on the topic HERE. In the examples below, the first image was RAW processed to have the desired sky exposure. The second is from the same RAW image file, this time processed for the desired foreground exposure.  The third is the result of blending the two exposures in Photoshop. This technique works great as long as the entire dynamic range of the scene is contained within the RAW file. For that reason this technically isn't a true HDR technique either, but the results can be a much greater dynamic range than could be achieved by single processing the RAW file and way beyond anything that could be done with a jpeg capture or film.

    When the dynamic range of a scene is too great to be reigned in with graduated filters or to contain within a single RAW capture, I apply the manually blended multiple exposure technique. The blending techniques I use here are the same as the ones I use with the double processed RAW file technique, and again are a topic for a multi-day workshop. The advantage of this approach is that I can take as many exposures in the camera as I need to contain the complete dynamic range of a scene. Using this technique I can easily take a series of exposures that can contain the full dynamic range of just about any situation, including the full 24 stops of human perception and even beyond. The blending process for combining two or more different exposures is tedious and can take hours or even days, and if not done well the result is obvious and bad. So, I only use it on images that I think are going to be great. There are many advantages. Most important to me is that this technique produces the cleanest, sharpest, artifact free, data rich final images. Another advantage is that I have complete creative and local control over how I blend the exposures and what I want the final image to look like, allowing me to get as close as possible to what I envisioned when I took the photo. In the example below, the dynamic range between the sky and the foreground was way beyond the 10 stops I could contain in a single RAW file. I didn't want to use graduated filters so I could avoid the additional flare they can cause when facing into bright light and because of the irregular shape of the lighthouse projecting above the horizon. I bracketed four different exposures, but was able to create my final image by blending together just the darkest and lightest of them. I think the final result is not only appealing and believable, but also very high quality and noise free which means it looks great as a large print as well as on the computer screen.

    Finally we come to the technique that a vast majority of HDR jockeys are using these days, and that is to combine the tonal values of multiple exposures using HDR imaging software, most popularly Photomatix. The technique for capture is the same as the previous technique, namely shooting on a tripod to avoid camera movement and bracketing two or more exposures that can contain the entire dynamic range of a scene, often in one stop increments. Some HDR images contain as many as seven different exposures or more. Using Photomatix is much quicker than manually blending, usually taking about five minutes or so. The advantages are that when it works well, it can do an amazing job and can sometimes handle tricky areas that are particularly difficult to manually blend. It can be a huge time saver and, as noted earlier, can produce some amazing surreal effects and artistic styles that can't be obtained any other way. However, I usually only go to Photomatix as a last resort because, like with anything, there are trade offs. The controls in Photomatix are fairly blunt, making it difficult to make fine adjustments. Also, I find that what I see in the tone mapping (also a topic for another time) preview window is not always what the image ends up looking like once it has been rendered in its final form. Often times the resulting HDR image has strange color shifts, increased shadow noise, cartoonish colors, halos, edge fringing and an overall loss of contrast. Also, anything that moves in the scene from one exposure to the next creates weird ghost images in the final photo. In addition, the adjustments in Photomatix are only global, so any local adjusting that I need to do has to be done back in Photoshop, not saving me much time in the end.

    In the following example I first blended four exposures of an old house using Photomatix to create the resulting HDR image. The software did a pretty good job in some areas. The image certainly contains a wide dynamic range of tonal values, but I wasn't happy with the color in some areas, the overall contrast or the way that the movement of the clouds between exposures created problems in the final image. In addition, some areas of the sky were still overexposed. I fully admit that my skills using Photomatix are somewhat lacking, but I often find that no matter what I do, some images just don't succeed.

    Photomatix HDR image

    Not satisfied with the result, I decided to spend the time working on a manually blended HDR image. It took a lot of painstaking work, but I found that the resulting image was much cleaner, with better overall dynamic range, color, contrast and sky detail. The manually blended image also has close to zero digital noise, edge fringing or artifacting making it a much higher quality file for creating fine prints.

    Manual blend

    Manual blend

    The next photo (Double Falls) is of another high dynamic range scene. With a bright sky and very dark canyon I knew it couldn't be handled with a single exposure. I shot several exposures and then generated an HDR image using Photomatix. I felt that in this case the program did a pretty respectable job. However, I decided I would also try my hand at a manual blend so I could do a direct comparison. Even at web resolution, my hand processed HDR has greater tonal contrast and density than the Photomatix image. I was also able to make creative decisions about localized luminosity, color and contrast that I could not with Photomatix.

    While it is possible to get away with some digital artifacts and pixel degradation in web sized images, my large fine art prints have to be as sharp, clean and noise free as possible. Upon closer inspection, I noticed that the Photomatix image had much more shadow noise than the hand processed image, as well as strange color shifts in the water and areas that were still blown out.

    Click to enlarge

    The Photomatix HDR image also experienced edge fringing and loss of sky detail where clouds had moved between exposures.

    Click to enlarge

    So, in conclusion, I find that having multiple techniques to capture and create images when confronted with high dynamic range situations allows me to better express my visual experience and artistic vision through my photographs. Often the use of graduated filters or shooting and carefully processing my images in the RAW format is all I need to properly render the dynamic range of a scene that is just a little greater than average. As the dynamic range of the scene increases I begin to employ more agressive HDR techniques, such as double processing and blending a single RAW file or bracketing multiple exposures in the camera and blending two or more of these by hand. Sometimes I even use combinations of these techniques. Does HDR imaging software have its place? Absolutely. I choose to use it when time is a factor, when the images will only be shown at lower web resolution so noise and fringing isn't as important, when I want to create something that has that very stylized "HDR look" or when nothing else I have tried works. In addition, I'm sure that HDR imaging software will continue to improve and advance. In the not too distant future, I fully expect to see digital cameras that have HDR sensors which will be able to capture 15, 20, even 25 stops of light or more in a single frame, which will make much of this discussion obsolete.

    I'd love to hear other tips, techniques, opinions and experiences regarding HDR imaging, so please feel free to leave a reply or share this post.

  • Blue October Sea

    From a trip to the southern Oregon coast with a group of Ashland photographers a couple of weeks ago. I liked the barnacle patterns on this rock and spent some time working on longer exposures to capture some wave motion for an interesting middle ground. As many of us who like to capture wave motion in our ocean photos well know, it is hard to get in the right position and still stay dry. I ended up stranded on this rock for several wave cycles until the surf went back out enough for me to wade to shore...the surf here wasn't dangerous, just wet.

    On the hike back to the car a woman approached me on the beach and said, "are you Sean Bagshaw?" I immediately wondered what I was in trouble for. It turns out she was with someone in the group. I had wandered off for quite a while and they were ready to go. Since she was walking my way they asked her to have me get a move on. Apparently they had told her I would be easy to spot because I would be carrying a tripod and most likely be wet up to the waist. I hate being so predictable.

    Canon 5D, 16-35mm f/2.8 L @ 28mm, 2 sec @ f/18 and ISO 50, 3 stop ND filter for longer exposure time.

  • Photo Journal: Photographing Double Falls

    This amazing location required a 4:00 AM wake-up and a cross country hike through grizzly country in the dark up on Logan Pass in Glacier National Park. It was well worth the effort. Streams cascading off all sides of a bowl shaped valley converge at this narrow slot in the rocks. During the summer, melt water flows off the canyon walls in several places creating four of five separate falls, but in the fall just the two main falls remain.

    I first became aware of this waterfall from Galen Rowell's classic photograph. A couple of years ago it ran on the cover of Outdoor Photographer Magazine and included the following caption: "Light conditions like this are notoriously difficult to photograph. The contrast between the sky and the shadowed ground is too much for film or an image sensor to handle. At the time Rowell made this image, he used a split neutral-density filter to control the contrast. If he was alive and photographing the same scene today, Rowell would have used a digital camera. He'd have known that he could employ some sophisticated RAW-software techniques to double-process the image file."

    I took that advice and photographed the classic scene in two separate exposures, one for the sky and one for the dark foreground and then manually blended the two images in Photoshop to allow the entire range of light that I experienced to all be contained within a single image.

    The magazine caption also noted the irony that in a location famous for being on the continental divide, a place where water usually flows in opposite directions, toward the east or the west, would also be a place where so many streams flow together.

    Two exposure manual blend. Canon EOS 5D, Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 lens, 3 stop Sing-Ray split neutral density filter, circular polarizer, 3.2 sec @ f/10 (sky), 15 sec @ f/10 (fore ground), ISO 100

Items 1 to 10 of 11 total

per page
  1. 1
  2. 2