A couple of months ago, I asked whether photography can be considered a numbers game. My answer was yes – but not in the volume of photos you take. Instead, it’s how many times you go out and take photos in the first place. I experienced a great reminder of this recently.
Before I tell the story, I should say that – as a landscape photographer – it can be easy to fall into the pattern of thinking that landscape photography is a static genre. The clouds will change, and a tree may fall, but things don’t change very much fundamentally. Even if you miss a beautiful sunset, there will always be another.
But the reality is different. Landscape photography is filled with low-probability events to capture. A flash of lightning appears in the distance; an animal walks into the perfect spot in the frame; the Northern Lights reach much farther south than usual. (I hope some of you enjoyed that last one recently.) Even if some of these events will reoccur one day, the timescales involved may be too long to realistically photograph it again. Just like in street photography or wildlife photography, you may only get one bite at the apple.
These sorts of rare occurrences aren’t usually the type of thing you can plan for. But the more often that you go out and take pictures, the more often you’ll experience some of them. It’s simple math: the more you do, the more you see. I wouldn’t have been able to capture many of my favorite moments as a landscape photographer if I didn’t roll those dice and keep going out, sometimes even when I didn’t expect to get anything good.
Very recently, I experienced something that felt totally rare and unique as a landscape photographer and really hit this message home. I just returned from the beautiful country of Iceland – always one of my favorite places for landscape photography – testing a series of lenses for our next reviews. And while I spent most of the trip exploring less-traveled areas of the country, I also returned to few of my old favorite places. Chief among them was the Jokulsarlon glacier lagoon.
I’m sure that you’ve seen photos of this area before. In one direction, bright blocks of ice wash up on a black sand beach. In the other direction, a glacier looms over a massive lake dotted with icebergs. Jokulsarlon is a beautiful location for photography. But it also ranks among the most crowded and oft-photographed places in Iceland. Although I still love it both for the nature and for the photography, I don’t kid myself – at this point, it’s pretty touristy for my taste.
Given that, I only allocated one sunset there this time. But I do love Jokulsarlon at the end of the day, and you can’t go too wrong there photographically. Walking a little bit from the crowds still gives you some of the raw beauty that Iceland is known for, over-photographed though it may be.
But this day, I was in luck. After shooting at Jokulsarlon for about an hour, I was excited to see a rainbow suddenly form over the beach off to the northeast! The rainbow only lasted for a few minutes, but it was a really wonderful sight – easily enough to make me glad that I went out there for photography.
However, this moment alone wasn’t what inspired me to write this article. Of course the rainbow was an incredible sight, but thousands of people visit this beach every day. Given the erratic nature of Iceland’s weather, I’m sure that I’m hardly the first person to photograph a rainbow at Jokulsarlon.
But maybe I was the first person to photograph a rose there?
Let me elaborate. After the rainbow disappeared, and sunset began to wind down, the crowds dissipated – and I was thinking about following them. Although the light at blue hour was pretty nice, this was near the end of my trip, and I’d been camping for the previous week. Should I leave and get some sleep, or was it worth staying out for a little more photography? That was the question.
I’m always going to be glad that I chose to stick around. The photo that resulted might be my favorite from the entire trip. And it captures something that is too improbable to ever plan for: a rose made out of ice.
There’s no trickery going on here – no optical illusion or Photoshop. The ice in the foreground really was just a thin spindle supporting a larger piece of ice on top. How it stayed standing, I don’t know. But pair it with the reflection below, and it’s shaped just like a rose made of the most delicate ice. There’s even a petal off to the right.
I spent about a minute photographing this frozen flower, quickly trying different compositions, knowing that I was seeing something fleeting. Most of all, I positioned my camera so that the background behind the rose would be as bright and large as possible, helping it stand out more clearly. It was the most important subject in the photo by a mile, so of course I wanted it to shine.
After I took a few photos, inevitably, the top of the rose fell into the glacial waters. The scene was gone. If anything, I’m surprised it lasted as long as it did. The improbable structure had every right to disappear before I had time to set up my photo, but somehow, it stuck around for a little bit. I was left in awe of the ephemeral beauty that I had just seen and had the chance to photograph.
Things like this aren’t possible to plan for, not at all. It doesn’t matter how good of a photographer you are. There’s no way to conjure these moments except by going out more often.
My hope with this article is simply to inspire you to go out and photograph more often. Although I’ve approached it from the perspective of a landscape photographer, what I wrote applies to any type of photography – even more so if your subjects are fast-paced and constantly changing. I’m convinced that many of the best street photos taken by Henri Cartier-Bresson or Vivian Maier exist not just because of their skill, but also because of how many times they simply went out there and took pictures. And no genre of photography is an exception.
As photographers, there are many things pulling our attention in different directions – camera equipment, settings, and even the creative side of things. But the most important part of photography is just taking photos. Go out more often, and you’ll run into the most amazing little moments to photograph. I think you’ll always be glad you made that choice.
Nice article. Beyond having more opportunities for good light, it’s perhaps equally important to have more opportunities for light and scenes that resonate with you. Sometimes just the right conditions are present to make a scene truly have an emotional impact on you, and I’ve always found the resulting photographs to be a level above mere good light. In fact, I’ve often been in situations where the light seems good but the magic is not quite there. That’s one reason I like your ice rose landscape a lot — because it has a lot of you in it.
It also proves that you can take great pictures with a sub-$1000 kit. I tend to buy lots of new gear before vacation only to bring a two bodies/zoom lenses kit, and I will try to make it as light as possible. Then I’d come home thinking a lens like the Z 12-28mm is all I need (but still won’t sell all my other lenses, in case I’d need them one day).
I’m not one to talk given the sheer mass of camera equipment I brought to Iceland (five different systems, albeit mostly for lens testing purposes). But this is my favorite image that I got on the trip, if not one of my favorites of the last several years, and was taken with one of the cheapest available cameras. There’s not much correlation between my favorite photos and how expensive the camera was that I carried.
Your last landscape (the third one) is indeed something else! Within a grand setting, you’ve captured a unique fleeting moment where an ice cat was admiring the single ice rose at sundown.
Thank you so much, and now I see the cat too! A little kitchen scene in a grand landscape.
We tend to overcomplicate things in life & photography is the same. I was lucky enough to be in Victoria’s southern most spot in May for the large southern lights show on my second night there. Recently I photographed the southern lights at Horse Head Rock at wallaga lake, NSW on my first night there. A very popular spot for landscape photographers, not only did I have a strong southern lights there but the tide was low which made it possible & the large moon lit up the foreground. Although a popular spot this is possibly quite a rare set of photos that I walked away with. Not because I’m a highly skilled photographer, simply that I’m fortunate that I get to travel a lot with my camera & when I do I’m out every sunrise/sunset (and always keeping a eye on the weather during the day while I’m out exploring)
That sounds like a lovely experience, James. I’m glad that you got the chance to see the aurora. I saw it for the first time earlier this year, albeit faintly – barely with the naked eye. One day I hope it see it more substantially.
Beautiful captures
Bill Garrett’s mantra: “f8 and Be There”
thephotosociety.org/bill-…reciation/
A great mantra even though I’m an f/11 kind of guy 🤣
Very nice report, thank you very much for that. Yes, I can absolutely sympathize with that. I’m also a passionate landscape photographer and often go to the same places and every time it’s completely different. I especially like to photograph sunrises and sunsets. You have a completely different picture every time. As you say, luck is always part of it. I always say you have to be in the right place at the right time with the right equipment. Unfortunately, this doesn’t happen that often, but when it does, it’s worth it and I already had tears in my eyes because it was so beautiful. Here is an example where everything worked out perfectly.
www.flickr.com/photo…0305076427
Thank you Chris, what a lovely sunrise and well-captured! I’ll put it this way, I’ve never taken a totally identical landscape photo on two different days. Even going out to the same place at the same time. That alone argues for going out as much as possible.
You are right, Spencer. That is a stunning photograph. And so many components make it so. There is the rose, which is amazing, and the pink blush in the water. There are also the contrasting darks and lights, the ripples in the water, the rock and ice structures, the time of day. And let’s not forget the photographer. Well done!
Thank you so much, Elaine! Your comment means a lot and I’m glad that you enjoyed the image.
Great shot from a great place! And yes, indeed, getting out there is the first step towards finding something good (or magical).
Thank you! You know what, I’ve never found any good landscapes, let alone magical sitting around at home 🤣
Young photographers don’t need to go anywhere, they can just type into a prompt what they want and start to build a portfolio of fake images, know one will know the difference.
Besides, wasn’t it Adobe that said just skip the photo shoot?
Maybe you’re right that no one would know the difference, but I won’t let that keep me from enjoying things. I do photography for the love of it and for personal artistic expression, and an AI can’t touch that.
Don’t let the cynicism get to you. You and I will know what’s real when we photograph it. And almost everytime I show someone a photo that’s different from the ordinary they inevitably ask, “Is that what it really looked like, or did you just process it?” And I’m always happy and smile when I can say, “Yes, it really did look like that!”
> Young photographers don’t need to go anywhere, they can just type into a prompt what they want and start to build a portfolio of fake images, know one will know the difference.
1. First, AI-generated images still look exceptionally fake. So your statement is already false.
2. Even if it gets to the point that the photos will look so realistic that others will not be able to tell — the *photographer* will know the difference. And what that means is that that person will be purporting themselves to be what they are not, and that’s obvious a mile away.
The fact is, the entire point of reading articles like this is because Spencer wrote them, and he’s an actual person. The whole point of art is to get to know another’s experiences and impressions and emotions through the art.
In my opinion, if the hypothetical “young photographer” is so deluded into thinking that they are doing anything of value by creating a portfolio of AI images, then they are as fake as the soulless machine they used for those images.
Finally, I think it’s rather ill-mannered to write a tangential hijacking remark that in its essence has nothing to do with what Spencer wrote, when he is talking about the joy of experiencing and transmitting the actual real world through his imagery. And that is regardless of whether you meant it as a joke, tongue-in-cheek, or at face value.
Next time, if you don’t want to ascend to the heights of ridiculousness, you should consider saying something nice, constructive, and relevant, or saying nothing at all.
And YOUR comment is exactly the reason I come here so infrequently, along with waiting several days to see your comment and then a couple more for someone to reply. Maybe that’s the point: to ridicule people you disagree with in the hope they’ll go away. Then when the only ones left are zombies, you’ll never have to think outside your box!
Let me explain something. Ridicule is making fun of someone using dismissive language and targeting a person, not pointing out rude behaviour. There is a difference.
And frankly, I think people should still use some manners in what they say, even on the pseudo-anonymous internet. If Spencer had given a talk along the lines of this article at a photo club, and then someone had responded as PixelMakerPro had, then I believe most people would find it out of line.
Let me explain something… his comment was off-topic, but not rude.
Thank you, Jason, for both addressing the content of the comment and for supporting better manners than are all too common on the internet.
Some would be put out because they weren’t positioned where they could see a flush of pink in the ‘bloom’ – but I’m with you – Enjoy stuff when it’s offered.
One to treasure!
Thanks David! I don’t think there was a spot I could have stood that would have put the pink color behind the ice, at least without blocking the illusion. But I do think that the pink area of the sky contributes a little to the balance of the photo. A rose-shaped piece of ice opposite a rose-colored cloud.
I’m not a fan of over-processing photos, but that one could have used a little help calling attention to the rose. Nothing led me to it and the photo, as a whole, wasn’t interesting enough to spend the time to find it on my own. I’m sure it would have been a lot better in a print.
That’s fair, not everyone is going to see it the same way. The larger that you view the image, and especially in a print, the clearer that that it tends to get. On desktop, it works best if you click the image to view it a little larger.
Although even then, whether you connect with the image or not is very personal. The small size and subtlety are part of what I love about the subject. But equally, I see how you could wish it were more prominent and drew more attention from the start.
Definitely better blown up.