Nebraska series

I was there for just 2 days of a 3 day shoot. The plan was to shoot the Sandhill Crane migration. We worked along the Platte River near Kearney.

I'm afraid that it didn't go that well. The birds were very distant and skittish. Also, the landscape in which they're found is bleak because of the time of year. Great for briders, but not photographers. Bosque del Apache in New mexico is a much better venue for cranes and birds in general because of the lovely surrounding landscape and great south western light. The wirldlife reserve there is also much more amendable to doing photography than the Platte River which only has a few public access points.

We had good light, but all in all nothing special came of it. Lots of frames shot but no "keepers". This sometimes happens when doing wildlife work.

We then drove up to the Sandhill region in the northern part of the state, but found it to not be terribly interesting from a photographic point of view.

After that we headed up to South Dakota and spent an sunset and sunrise in Badlands NP which we really enjoyed, but again which didn't produce any really worthwhile shots.

Of course we shot along the way, driving though a lot of NB and SD countryside. We didn't take any Interstates, instead sticking to the more interesting back roads.

Three shooting days, about 1,500 frames with 3 different cameras (1Ds, Mark II and Pro 1) and nothing of publication quality. This sometimes happens.

As for NB, it looks very much like Ontario, where I live. Mostly flat, some rolling hills, lots of farms.

Michael

[John Camp]

Interesting comment about shooting in Nebraska and the Dakotas, because its so reflective of differing tastes -- I like that area (specifically the Platte) and its landscape. I also find the Missouri River valley in the Dakotas to be fascinating. I specifically like the bleakness; you get photographs that look like minimalist paintings: two colors, blue and black, or blue and grey, or blue and green or blue and gold. I've monitored this site for a long time because it helped on technical and handling issues (digital outdoors, when a lot of other sites seemed mostly concerned with studio shooting). I havent said much because I've been mostly trying to make the transition to digital, and have been digesting. But here's a question: Is Michael (and the rest of you, for that matter) a landscape, nature or travel photographer? Do you see differences?

JC

[Brad B]

It is interesting to see one of the biggest names in digital photography web sites has visited my humble home state. I've been interested in photography only for less than a year and have yet had a chance to get out to what are supposed to be some pretty beautiful landscape/wildlife areas in central and western Nebraska (I live in Omaha). I have promised myself to get out to some of the locations of a nationally renowned photographer who is based here in Nebraska (http://www.michaelforsberg.com/) because I am greatly inspired by his work. I'm just curious to know specifically where Michael went to shoot. I'm not sure where I can find a gallery of images from his trip, however, because Nebraska is unlisted in his shooting locations. Can anyone (or Michael, if he views this forum) can give me some details on where he shot and his impressions of the locations he shot at. Thanks so much!

[Lee]

Brad, another of Nebraska's native sons, whom I met some twenty years ago, is Tom Mangelson.  If you've not been to one of his Images of Nature galleries, you have a real treat in store for yourself.  


Lee