So, if they are so smart, how come the images coming out of my camera, more often than not, are not the way I want them to look?

Is it some failure in my technique, is it my fault, do I simply not have what it takes to get it right in camera? – or am I trying to achieve the impossible, trapped in a never-ending spiral of disappointment and failure.

Well, as a professional landscape photographer and author of books about photography technique, I don’t think so, and for a number of years now, have been studying intensely what contemporary DSLR cameras are capable of and where our responsibilities as photographers and artists lie.

For well over a century, cameras have been used to record light on some form of light sensitive medium; from glass plates treated with chemicals, to celluloid film and more recently sensors on digital cameras. No matter what the capture medium, whatever was recorded has had to be “processed” – simply put – MADE RIGHT.

Ansel Adams would spend hundreds of hours in the dark room, teasing highlight and shadow detail to create a final print that he considered to be representative of the scene as he saw it, and as an artist wanted to express it.

Our landscape images are expressive statements of our vision – NOT the cameras vision.

On a recent trip to the Yellow Mountains of eastern China, I took the following image on our first night. (before we were confined to bed for 5 days with the worst flu we’ve had in years.)

The image below is the RAW file – D800E – 14-24/2.8 @ 20mm ISO800 f4 2 minutes exposure.

The half moon was partially obscured by thin cloud and I like to make “good exposures” at night – that is, not too dark, as they suffer more from noise. As can be seen from the RAW file, the exposure has done a great job of capturing detail in the snowy forest and the granite spires, but the sky is all washed out and lacks any mood. This is a biproduct of relative luminosity, but our eyes do not see the world that way. We have a variable aperture – our pupil, that contracts and dilates depending on what we are looking at.

While this in it’s own way is a fair and honest representation of the place, it falls short of the feeling of being there – it lacks expression.

In the final image, which is the product of about 15 minutes work in Lightroom 4 and Photoshop CS6 – I have created a scene that, to me anyway. is a more striking and confident image. The sky has been darkened by 1.5 stops using layer masks and gradients – selective contrast and tone have been applied to the forests and rocks to give them a more ethereal look – that silken light of a pale moon.

click to enlarge

In every image I make, the RAW file is my negative – it is the result of my camera Harvesting Light – it is not my art. In these enlightened days we have insanely complex tools at our disposal. The ISO capabilities of modern DSLR’s allow me, as a night photographer, to make superb, noise-free exposures in the dark, opening up worlds of mystery, wonder and expression. If we fall into the “get it right in camera” mentality, we are putting obstacles in front of our expression – like telling an artist they can only use paints of primary colours and then asking them to paint the landscape!

Take control of your images – who is the artist and what is the tool?

The post The Vision Myth appeared first on Harvesting Light.