When 100% Zoom Isn’t the Whole Story
|
Hello Reader! In a few days I’ll be headed to Death Valley again with my wife to see how van life works out for us! Should be an interesting experience and looking forward to the trip, maybe I’ll even catch some of the “super bloom”! With all the rain the area has had over the past several months, I should be able to find some blooms! Earlier this week I was reminded how differently we evaluate photos based on what we’re looking at. And that got me thinking. Looking at Photos vs Using PhotosEarlier this week I had some comments on some of my YouTube videos about noise in shadows on the Nikon Z7II compared to a Nikon Z6II. The commenter had valid points, but it reminded me of how I evaluate photos compared to how others might. I am not a pixel peeper. That doesn’t mean that I ignore sharpness from lenses, noise in the shadows, or dynamic range capability, or even resolution, but I don’t make decisions about the merit of a photograph at 100% zoom. All those things do matter. Wanting to use lenses that are sharp throughout the frame. Considering the amount of noise in the shadows for particular camera bodies. The quality of the image at higher ISO amounts. These are all valid considerations when choosing camera gear and selecting which photographs to edit and publish - whether online or in print. Evaluating images at 100% zoom or greater is not the only way to evaluate an image. First, 100% varies depending on the resolution of the image. 100% zoom for a 24MP file differs from, say, a 45MP file. We aren’t looking at the same things, even though the higher-resolution file can have a better overall output. There are other factors and variables at play for how our images are consumed, whether online or in print, than how they look at 100% zoom. When I consider an image for editing or release after editing, I consider many more things than how it looks at the pixel-by-pixel level. While technical soundness is certainly a consideration, it is not the only one. How is the composition? How is the light? Is it visually interesting at a glance? If the image is passing those factors, then I consider how is it going to be released? Is it just for social media? Is it going to a gallery on my website? Is it going to be printed? Slightly soft corners or a little noise in the shadows is rarely going to send an image to the cutting room floor. The reality is that as landscape photographers, some of our harshest critics are ourselves. It is easy to look super close at an image and look for technical imperfections, but our typical viewer of our work isn't looking at that. They are looking for whether the image is visually interesting, not whether every pixel in the image is technically perfect. They respond to light, color, composition, and feeling! It is good to understand the technical limitations of your gear and it is good to learn what your gear can and cannot do. But don’t lose sight of what our typical audience actually responds to. Know your tools, but don’t let them inhibit the sharing of your work. One Shot Left - Smoky Mountains Spring WorkshopThere’s just one spot remaining for the Great Smoky Mountains spring workshop in April. We’ll focus on thoughtful fieldwork, decision-making in changing conditions, and coming home with images you’re proud of, not just checking locations off a list. I co-lead this workshop with Michael Rung. I also have other workshops on the calendar throughout the year if the Smokies aren’t the right fit for you. Patreon - Behind the ScenesIf you enjoy these newsletters but want a little more behind-the-scenes content, I share additional material over on Patreon - including less polished thoughts, field reflections, and things I don’t always put on YouTube. There is a free tier if you just want to follow along.
Until the next newsletter! Know someone who might enjoy this? Please feel free to share this email with them. Jeffrey Tadlock |