Photographing glaciers in black and white

[Steve Goldstein]

Color images of glaciers show that they actually contain a lot of blue. So for black-and-white I imagine I’d want at least a yellow filter to get decent contrast in the image. Can anyone share their experiences with this? Next year’s trip* will very likely be a once-in-a-lifetime thing so I’d like to improve my odds of getting some keeper images.

There aren’t glaciers anywhere near where I live so I’ve no chance to do my own testing.

*Svalbard Islands

[Vaughn]

It may not make a significant difference, hopefully someone with experience will lend a hand. This is from 40 years ago -- don't remember a lot of blue. no filter

[Andrew O'Neill]

It may not make a significant difference, hopefully someone with experience will lend a hand. This is from 40 years ago -- don't remember a lot of blue. no filter

Great example. That's why I never used anything stronger than a #8. I shot on HP5 and TMAX. TMAX blues were darker than HP5, unfiltered. I preferred HP5. What film was that, Vaughn?

[Drew Wiley]

Depends how much texture you want to bring out, and whether the sky is clear or not. If you want tiny ice crystals to sparkle, and the sky is blue, all those little micro-shadows comprising texture will also be bluish, so a red filter will accentuate the texture more than orange, orange more than yellow, etc. A med green filter is also worth carrying. Now as per the blue hue of compressed ice, along with the turquoise flavor of glacial melt ponds, it again depends whether you want to deepen or lighten these in relation to surrounding parts of the subject. Just carry a set of different filters and view through them until you have the experience to just grab the best one for the specific situation. But I really wouldn't select HP5 film for something like glaciers, which can have tremendous contrast range between shadows or dark rocks and glistening ice surfaces. TMY400 with its considerably longer straight line would be preferable. Because I am still carrying heavy loads in the mountains at a somewhat advanced age, I try to keep gear to a practical minimum, but generally always carry a 25 red filter, a 22 orange, and a Hoya X1 medium true green. I've done so many LF ice shots in both color and black and white that I doubt I could count em. Make sure your tripod has spike feet so it doesn't slip (plus traction spikes for your own boots, if you're actually onto the ice).

[Vaughn]

TMax100, 4x5. I rarely used a yellow filter with it for that reason -- I do not like dark skies unless the image really calls for it. In fact my greatest use of a yellow filter is this time of year to brighten Fall's yellow leaves under the redwoods.

Two more images -- Looking across the glacier of the previous image (4x5, silver gelatin, TMax100) -- and an example of the skies I usually go for (platinum print, 8x10 FP4+).

[Doremus Scudder]

How much blue you see in glaciers depends on the amount of reflected vs. transmitted light. Like liquid water, ice absorbs the red end of the spectrum for light passing through it. Anyway, you should be able to see the blue, so spot meter through your filters to get some idea of contrast/separation and shoot one shot without filtration and one with when in doubt. You can check out my glacier photos on my website if you're interested. FWIW, I don't remember using a lot of filtration for any of the glacier shots I've done.

Best,

Doremus

[Two23]

Living in South Dakota, I use these:
https://www.backcountry.com/kahtoola...ozOmNyYW1wb25z

If needing something more aggressive, I would probably get these if no serious climbing is involved:
https://www.backcountry.com/hillsoun...oxOmNyYW1wb25z


As for filters, they don't weigh much. Take a selection and check the effect at the scene. My standard set is: red, orange, green, plus assorted ND.



Kent in SD

[Chester McCheeserton]

Didn't use a filter, I never do, but also planned to print digitally so I could easily add contrast where needed in photoshop. The couple of times I was on glaciers was with guides and those spike things over your shoes.
I would think that maybe working quickly might be more important than fiddling with filters but that's just me. The spiked tripod feet helped. Think this was tri-x

[Drew Wiley]

Just don't try going very far on an actual glacier with those kinds of glorified tennis shoes, Kent. I won't even allow someone to hike into the Sierras with me if they wear those kinds of things. Two inches of snow and you're stuck, facing frostbite. Just this past month one of my regular hiking partners had to rescue a couple in the mountains who would have died being under-equipped like that if he didn't come along. But no glacier guide is going to let you do that anyway, at least if they take you near a crevasse zone. They typically provide loaner boots, ropes, etc. Lots of people on formal tours photograph glaciers from a safe distance anyway. Things like ice axes and crampons take training and experience anyway, or one can get hurt. These modern traction gadgets for more ordinary footwear seems like quite a convenience for incidental ice, kinda like snow-tires for people. But apparently some of them aren't very well made. Real crampons require a very stiff true mountain boot, and they are sized, though slightly adjustable. I have relatively small feet - around 8-1/2. My nephew once bought me an especially nice set of heavy-duty crampons for my birthday, but they were size 12. Guess what size his foot is! And he was planning to ice climb that weekend. So it goes.

[Alan Klein]

Just don't try going very far on an actual glacier with those kinds of glorified tennis shoes, Kent. I won't even allow someone to hike into the Sierras with me if they wear those kinds of things. Two inches of snow and you're stuck, facing frostbite. Just this past month one of my regular hiking partners had to rescue a couple in the mountains who would have died being under-equipped like that if he didn't come along. But no glacier guide is going to let you do that anyway, at least if they take you near a crevasse zone. They typically provide loaner boots, ropes, etc. Lots of people on formal tours photograph glaciers from a safe distance anyway. Things like ice axes and crampons take training and experience anyway, or one can get hurt. These modern traction gadgets for more ordinary footwear seems like quite a convenience for incidental ice, kinda like snow-tires for people. But apparently some of them aren't very well made. Real crampons require a very stiff true mountain boot, and they are sized, though slightly adjustable. I have relatively small feet - around 8-1/2. My nephew once bought me an especially nice set of heavy-duty crampons for my birthday, but they were size 12. Guess what size his foot is! And he was planning to ice climb that weekend. So it goes.

Pretty wily of him.