The advances in digital SLR technology over the past few years have allowed photographers improved control over exposure than ever before. It is possible for landscape photographers to capture images that are technically superior to the film images of the past. The recent wave of D-SLR’s, such as Canon’s 5D and Nikon’s D200, show a clean pair of heels to 35mm in terms of resolution and freedom from grain and noise. Careful scrutiny of the best digital renderings reveals that virtually every part of even the most complex scene can now be optimally exposed. Where our predecessors would have allowed a shadow to go to black or a specular highlight to be blown out, we can now produce images retaining detail from the brightest highlights to the deepest shadows. Through the use of highlight/shadow clipping warnings and the in-camera histogram, coupled with post-capture processing like blending exposures, double processing of a single RAW file and HDR (high dynamic range) imaging, today’s photographers possess exceptional control over exposure. Furthermore, digital users have the advantage of knowing whether the shot is ‘in the can’ while out in the field. Of course, the work of the past will endure despite the use of yesterday’s technology. While many people are now able to take technically excellent photos; dedication, persistence and artistic vision are not assisted by this new technology.
The effect of many filters can now reliably be added by post-capture software. However there are three that cannot be properly reproduced. These are the polarizer, neutral density and the graduated neutral density filters. While similar effects can be produced in Photoshop, I have found them to be less than satisfactory. To be prepared for any wilderness or travel landscape I usually carry the following filters:
These are designed to block ultraviolet light. However, with the possible exception of extremely high altitude locations, UV filters have little effect on images. Personally I have never noticed a difference even at 4500 meters above sea level. Most people use them as protection for their lenses rather than their UV filtering properties. I have some concerns about the additional glass causing picture degradation so I do not use them routinely. Where there are environmental hazards such as wind-blown sand or sea spray, I often use a UV filter while composing the scene then quickly whip it off for the shot. I carry enough filters to fit each lens thread.
These are indispensable filters that have a variety of uses for landscape and even interior photography. They are often used incorrectly and I see many photographers who leave them on the lens all the time. The effect seen through the viewfinder can be seductive (increased contrast and saturation) but often their less desirable effects are not obvious until reviewed on a monitor.
The most common reason I use a polarizer is to remove glare reflected from wet or shiny surfaces. This results in more vibrant and saturated colours. In the case of landscapes, these situations include: seascapes with wet rocks, harsh sunlight on foliage and vegetation, rainforests, and waterfalls. There are few rules in life that are absolute, but I have never come across a waterfall or rainforest scene that did not benefit from a polarizer. Remember that the polarizing effect is greatest when the lens is at 90 degrees to the sun. There can still be significant glare from vegetation even on overcast days and a polarizer can make the difference between a flat looking image and one with vibrant colours. The photo of the gooseberry leaf was taken on a miserable, wet and overcast day. They were perfect conditions to show off the detail in this macro shot. The polarizer took the glare of the wet surfaces and made the colours pop. Landscapes are not the only scenes that benefit from polarizers. Harsh sunlight reflecting off buildings and other objects often need filtration too. You can always hold the polarizer in front of the lens and rotate it to see if it improves the view.
Polarizing filters have a very useful effect on bodies of water whether they be puddles, lakes or oceans. This is a function of their reflection cutting properties. When water is still, clear reflections are often seen, such as a mountain reflected in a lake. The polarizer at full strength can eliminate the reflection allowing the ground under the water to be seen. At its weakest point the polarizer has almost no effect; if the intention is to maximise the reflection, it may be better to avoid a polarizer all together. By rotating the filter, the photographer has creative control over the balance of how much he or she wants to ‘see through’ the water. There is no post-capture processing that can simulate this property of the polarizer.
Occasionally I will come across a landscape with water where the exposure is difficult because of the high contrast caused by low light levels and specular reflective highlights. A polarizer can tame these harsh highlights. This technique will be discussed further in part 2 of this article.
The polarizer is also often used for darkening skies and helps achieve that deep blue sky you often see in photos. This is probably a result of the filter increasing contrast and its ability to cut through haze. Due to problems with uneven polarization of the sky in wide-angle shots I have been using it less for this purpose. Instead I prefer to use a 1 stop hard neutral density filter which darkens the sky evenly.
Polarizers can be expected to cause about 2 stops of light fall-off on a lens which lengthens shutter speeds for long exposures. This is the reason I do not carry a neutral density filter (not to be confused with the graduated neutral density filter). My polarizer doubles as a 2 stop ND filter. In the image of Horseshoe Falls in Tasmania, the polarizer has cut reflections off the wet rocks and removed glare from the water. The reduction in light allowed a long shutter speed of 20 seconds.
Ugly skies
While the darkening effect on blue skies is often attractive, over-polarization can result in an almost black sky. This is more likely at high altitudes and snow scenes. The undesirable two-toned sky has already been mentioned. It appears when the polarizer effect is unable to cover the entire sky. The risk of this happening is highest in wide-angle landscape shots with wide expanses of blue sky. When faced with this situation, always pay close attention to the effect of the polarizer on the sky through the viewfinder. In overcast conditions this is much less noticeable. Vertical compositions contain narrower amounts of sky so the risk of uneven polarization is smaller. The two images below are of the iconic Peyto Lake in Canada. The polarizer has reduced glare off the rocks and lake, allowing the unusual colour of the water to be maximized. Despite being aware of the potential problem of uneven skies at the time, there is some slight darkening in the top middle section. Note that in the vertical composition, the polarizer effect has covered the whole sky. The filtration has increased contrast in both versions so the clouds really stand out against the deep blue sky.
Slower shutter speeds
In most cases the 2 stop reduction in speed is a disadvantage: you will have to either work with slower shutter speeds or increase ISO (and thereby noise) to compensate. On the other hand, where there is flowing water, being able to shoot longer exposures enables a more creative approach. A polarizer is often needed to give slow enough shutter speeds to achieve the silky flowing water effect.
Vignetting
There are two types of vignetting and both can occur with polarizer use. I like to describe them as internal or external. Internal vignetting is caused by light fall off at the edges of the camera sensor. It appears to affect full-frame cameras at wide-angles focal lengths the most. This phenomenon is accentuated by the use of polarizers. External vignetting is caused by the filter itself being visible in the image. This results from the use of a non slim-line polarizer on a wide-angle lens and manifests as small blackened areas at the corners. For this reason I recommend buying slim-line filters which solves the problem.
This one is more of a luxury item. It is made by Singh-Ray and as the name suggests combines a warming filter with a polarizer. It adds only about a stop to exposures and tends to cause less of the blue cast (most noticeable in shadows) than a standard polarizer. As it has a 1 stop advantage over the normal filter, it can mean the difference between being able to handhold a shot or not. If you do not need the extra speed, the warming effect can easily be achieved with post-capture processing.
Kah Kit Yoong is a self-taught Melbourne-based nature and travel photographer who is always in search of the perfect light to suit his subjects. He took his first snap with an SLR almost three years ago then developed his skills photographing the wild landscapes of Tasmania. In addition to his fascination with historic Italian towns his travels have taken him to New Zealand, France, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, Switzerland, Austria , China and most recently, the Canadian Rockies. Kah Kit’s work has been published in Popular Photography, the ANZANG Nature and Landscape Photographer of the Year 4th collection yearbook and various Canon publications.
More of Kah Kit's work can be found at Magic Hour Travelscapes
Comments on TPN travel photography articles? Please feel free to send them to editor@travelphotographers.net. We would be pleased to hear from you!
