I travel to Alaska often, so thought I'd share mostly winter scenes. Comments welcome.

Alaskan melancholia


Alaska range


Small frozen creek


Eye of the forest

I like your photos because they convey the beauty of nature even in ordinary places.

I only have two, both RRS CF, a 23 and a 34L. Sorry!

When I do non-driving travel, I carry a 30L backpack. Then I use Kenesis Photo padded bags to pack 1 dx camera and 2 lenses (17-35 & 24-70; effective focal length of 25-105). This leaves plenty of room for accessories, windbreaker, water, snacks, etc. A tripod or monopod can be strapped onto the backpack.

Skyryder, I am also new to this forum, and I know an ad hominem attack on someone when I see it. Calling another member "illiterate" is out of line in my view. I'm here to read about and discuss photography, not personal attacks on others.

If your digital gear is Nikon, why not buy a Nikon F5 or F6 used and have both capabilities? Or do the same with whatever brand digital camera and lenses you have.

I have a similar good fortune. My front yard is a small field. Two days ago 38 Roosevelt elk passed through my yard, trimming the grass along the way. They were wild and free, having come from nearby state forest land. Had I photographed them I wouldn't have felt the need to disclose anything, except perhaps that they were in my yard and I was on my deck.

Agreed.

I meant, what is your opinion on disclosing.

I am not suggesting that staged, baited, or captive wildlife photography should not be done. I'm just saying that when we take wildlife photos that way it should be disclosed. I don't know what the numbers are, but I would guess that a good percentage of wildlife photos that are published are not truly wild. What is your opinion?

If the photo was credited to an individual photographer, then I think there should have been a caption indicating whether the animal was captive, taxidermied or wild. Some wildlife photographers state categorically that all their photos are of wildlife iin free natural settings. In that case I don't think a disclosure needs to be made for every photograph. One pro photographer I admire who does all his wildlife photography in the wild, and says so on his website, is Thomas Mangelsen.

I can believe that. We have cougars here in western Oregon, but in over 70 years I have never seen one, although I have seen fresh tracks. If anyone has photographed a cougar in the wild, I wouldn't be surprised if it was Thomas Mangelsen. I have no qualms about photographing such animals in captivity. My point in my earlier comment was that such photographers should be honest (i.e., ethical) with viewers and disclose that their shots were of animals in captivity.
oregonfrank

I am a new member and live in Oregon on the Coast. Greetings. My view is that photographers who publish or sell should disclose whether wildlife are photographed "captive," "baited," or "naturally wild." I say this because it is often much more difficult to find and shoot wildlife in a wild setting than it is do the same with fenced-in or baited-in wildlife.h

Admittedly this is a side-trip, but why do we use the term "cropped sensor camera" (yes, I use it too)? Thinking about it, it occurs to me that all sensor or film sizes are cropped in comparison to larger sensor or film sizes. I have both FX and DX cameras. The DX is cropped in comparison to the FX, and the FX is cropped in comparison to a medium format sensor, which is also cropped compared to a 4x5 view camera, etc. Wouldn't it be simpler to refer to the specific sensor(s) in question? Calling one sensor size "cropped" implies that the comparator sensor is not cropped. Both my cameras are "cropped" in comparison to ones with larger sensors.