Thanks to answers given to my previous questions on white balance and image stabilizer, due to which I could experiment all my photographs on recent tour. The answers were very helpful. Anyway, but there were few things which I could not understand on how to do. Something like, a beautiful landscape with cloud filled montains and half sunshine over the mountains. When you look through naked eyes, it looks so beautiful and you want that same picture to be captured in your snap. But somehow when looking through camera, you cannot get the same perfect picture in your snap. In snaps it looks ordinary.

So I was wondering, are there some good tips to capture the snaps as close as possible as you see through naked eyes. This is more often the far snaps taken from hill tops.

Please suggest on how do I approach to shoot such snaps.


3 Answers 3


Landscapes and Light

When it comes to landscapes, lighting is King. When I first started doing photography, I started with landscapes. My first few hundred shots were technically perfect, but artistically morbid. I had spent over a year reading about cameras, exposure, and all the various details about photography from a technical perspective, so I could make a good choice for my camera, and be able to use it effectively when I got it.

Oh, how naive I was. In any photography, but particularly landscape photography, lighting is one of, if not the most, important aspects. A beautiful landscape can look radically different in different lighting. There are various types of natural lighting that can illuminate a landscape scene, from your sunrise morning rays or sunset glow, to full, bright sunlight, to diffuse, overcast, flat lighting. To the human eye, a mountain scape during mid-day with some clouds moving over the peaks looks simply amazing! From an artistic standpoint, however, such a scene really is rather bland. Its a difficult, and often fine, line that a landscape photographer walks when trying to find a beautiful scene, both physically and artistically.

In the year and a half I've been photographing landscapes, I learned that one of the best ways to capture a good landscape scene is to wait for the right time. Mid-day landscapes in bright sunlight make difficult subjects. The lighting is strong and harsh, but there are often few shadows, the lighting is mostly white and rather uninteresting, and the depth of the scene can be difficult to gauge. In contrast, landscapes during sunrise or sunset often tend to be FAR more interesting. As the sun is rising or setting, you have a variety of colors lighting your scene. From yellows and oranges and reds, to the blue through red gradient of the sky. The angle of the sun during sunrise or sunset also casts much larger shadows, bringing shapes and depth to life. Clouds, especially if there are several layers, can bring an amazing and truly complex element of lighting and shadow to your scene at the extremes of the day.

Good lighting is key, and one of the most important aspects of landscape photography. The difficult part about landscape photography, however, is finding good light, and being at the right place at the right time to capture an amazing scene in that good light. This often requires a fairly considerable investment of time on the part of the photographer to scout out a good vantage point before taking a shot. During that mid-day sunlight, it is important to drive or hike around an area you find to be beautiful, and find scenes you think could make a great shot. When you find them, take some time, and try to visualize your shot as if it were lit by a sunrise or sunset. Take some time to compose the scene in your mind in a variety of ways, horizontal and vertical. "See" what could be, and try to "see" as your camera sees (i.e. put up your hands and frame the landscape to help you cut out what the camera won't capture; or take a piece of cardstock, and cut out a 4:3, or 3:2 rectangular opening and use that to frame your shots.) Previsualizing your landscape shots, and imagining what they might look like with proper lighting, can go a long way to helping you capture more intriguing, artistic landscapes.

Finally, scene contrast can play a big role in landscape photography. Cameras have limited "dynamic range" compared to our eyes. What may appear like a balanced scene to human eyes may be too bright in the highlights and too dark in the shadows for a camera to capture. There are a variety of ways to combat this, such as HDR or Exposure Fusion. When it comes to landscapes, however, particularly those that include clouds or water, bracketing shots (setting your camera up to snap a shot at your chosen settings, as well as one with less exposure and one with more exposure...three shots at different exposures) can introduce unwanted motion and ghosting into a blended final image. The ideal way to balance out lighting and contrast in a landscape scene is to use Graduated Neutral Density (GND) filters. A graduated ND filter is darkened in the first half, and gradually fades to fully clear on the other half. They often come in 4x5" or 4x6" sizes, and fit into a special filter mount that you hook onto the end of your lens. By sliding the GND filter up or down in the mount, you can darken extremely bright parts of a landscape scene (i.e. the sky.) This brings the total contrast, or dynamic range, of the scene into a range that the camera can capture in a single shot. Use of GND filters is a common practice amongst professional landscape photographers.

Poor Lighting

Here are some shots that I took very early on in my landscape photography career (they are from my first 700 shots with my Canon 450D, most of which were total throwaways.) They looked amazing to me at the time I took them, but ended up rather bland in the end, even after some considerable effort to make them look better. The primary cause of this was poor lighting: bright, midday sun that took away any shadows and shapes, or dull, diffuse light caused by an overcast sky that also took away any shadows and shapes.

Grand Tetons
Poor Lighting #1: Grand Tetons in bright, midday sunlight.
Effect: Awesome mountains and sky, really boring scene...no shadows, white light.

Lower Yellowstone Falls
Poor Lighting #2: Lower Yellowstone Falls in diffuse light.
Effect: Truly amazing scene of a 300+ foot waterfall in Yellowstone, but still rather boring without any shadows or more colorful lighting.

Good Lighting

Here are some of my more recent shots. Still nothing to truly "wow" people, like some professional landscape photographers, but certainly more interesting than my first few images. These scenes take into account lighting, better composition, and time of day:

Rocky Mountains Front Range
Good Lighting #1: The Front Range of the Rocky Mountains, CO. Lit by the afternoon sun streaming through a building storm.
Effect: This shot is one of the more intriguing shots I've taken that included sunlight streaming through the clouds. I thought the lighting was pretty interesting and very colorful.

Longs Peak
Good Lighting #2: Longs Peak, in Rocky Mountain National Park, CO. Lit by morning sunlight.
Effect: Got up at 4:30am this day, headed up to RMNP, and waited for the sun to rise. This shot was taken just before 7:00am, as the first rays of sunlight struk Longs Peak. The plays of direct light, ambient light, and shadow make this shot more interesting than, say, the original Grand Tetons photograph I took a year and a half ago.

Hallette Peak
Good Lighting #3: Hallette Peak, in Rocky Mountain National Park, CO. Lit by morning sunlight.
Effect: Shot on the same outing as the Longs Peak photograph, this shot was taken shortly after 7:00am. The first few rays of sunlight have faded, and the early morning red glow is gone, but the scene with Bear Lake in the foreground, and Hallette Peak in the background, made for an interesting composition. The lighting is still interesting, with the stones in the water in near total shadow, while the mountain is lit with some interesting shadow.

Fantastic Lighting

I am a mere novice when it comes to landscape photography. My artistic talents are infantile, as I've only relatively recently learned how to find and capture better lighting. I am not a professional photographer, so most of my time is spent working my day job. Here are some shots from true professional landscape photographers that show what truly fantastic lighting is:

Marc Adamas
Scene: Crater Lake, Winter
Copyright Marc Adamas

Michael Anderson
Scene: Moraine Lake, Banff National Park
Copyright Michael Anderson

Jack Brauer
Scene: Bells Reflection Elk Mountains, Colorado
Copyright Jack Brauer

  • \$\begingroup\$ Wow, Those photographs are awesome. Well, If you consider yourself novice, then I am not even in the picture. ;). Well seriously this is inspiring me to start taking this photography seriously. I really would love to have such photographs in my collection. \$\endgroup\$ Oct 25, 2010 at 16:55
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Thanks for the compliments. :) Keep in mind, the last three are from some of my favorite landscape photographers, they are not my own. You can see a marked difference between a pro's photographs and my own. ;) One thing I really can't stress enough is to use Graduated ND filters. Before I got a Lee Foundation kit and some lee hard and soft grad ND's, I had a real hard time with landscapes. GND filters are an essential component of any landscape photographers kit. \$\endgroup\$
    – jrista
    Oct 25, 2010 at 21:50
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ One other comment, I guess. There are some key but perhaps subtle differences between the "Poor" shots and the "Good" shots. Examine those images closely to fully understand the differences. The first couple look nice at first glance, but after a little scrutiny, they start to look really "flat" due to the direct and rather uninteresting lighting. \$\endgroup\$
    – jrista
    Oct 26, 2010 at 22:50

The reason images, particularly landscapes always look that little bit better to our eyes is that the human visual system has a much greater dynamic range that you get from a typical camera. This dynamic range enables you to see detail in both the brightest parts of the sky and the darkest parts of the terrain.

The good n ews is you can simulate this dynamic range by taking multiple exposures of different brightnesses and combining them on your computer, and tone-mapping or blending them into a single image. It can be tricky to get good realistic results this way but fortunately there's a ton of resources if you Google "HDR".


There are two things to think about here -- capturing the image, and viewing the image.

Capturing the image is all about getting the composition and exposure right. For composition, things like the rule of thirds (divide the frame into nine, and place items of interest where the virtual portions intersect); having elements (such as a stream) draw your eye through a landscape.

Exposure comes with practice, but your camera is good at this. I find that some cameras can over expose an image, and my big tip here is to learn how to trick your camera's meter - sometimes using exposure compensation, sometimes by pointing at the area you'd like being exposed correctly, and using a exposure lock (your camera's manual should be able to give you the exact steps for this).

I think that how an image is viewed makes a big difference and just as important as how well the image was captured. Landscapes are often impressive in person due to the vastness of the scene; viewing it back on a monitor won't have the same effect, so my next tip here is to have faith in your images that look "good" on screen, and get the printed big -- often, this will make a "good landscape" bring back some of the awesomeness of the original scene and give you a "great image".


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.