Ultimate Antarctica January 5–February 1, 2008

As a photographer known for his wildlife work, and as one who prides himself on obtaining tight close-ups and dramatic action sequences, I find it infinitely more challenging to make a meaningful landscape photo—one where a wildlife subject is part of a larger scene. You may find that difficult or easy to do depending on what you're accustomed to doing—for me, getting close, being patient and knowing what to expect and when to expect it is all fairly straightforward in my type of wildlife photography. And, while I always strive to make pleasing compositions in every one of my shots, whether an action sequence or a close-up, I find that doing so with frame-filling wildlife is fairly easy compared to shooting "the bigger" picture.

When I’m attempting to incorporate an animal within a larger scene, all sorts of design elements play a role in the composition. Simply zooming out for a wider field-of-view usually isn’t the answer. Often that results in a very weak image where any critic would ask, "Why didn’t you get any closer?" Good landscape images should speak for themselves, telling their own story with a tiny or reduced subject merely accenting the message the image conveys.

How exactly does one convey that message? First, one should ask, what are you trying to convey? What exactly is your message? Is it to show the expanse of an animal’s habitat, or the animal’s cryptic coloration, or is it simply to depict a landscape that needs a center of interest? There are no definitive answers to these questions, as circumstances, scenes and potential design elements will all play a role in shaping the composition.

Perhaps the easiest habitat image to make is one where the landscape alone supports the picture, and where a foreground element is not required. When a foreground element is added to these scenes—think of the shots where someone is posed with the obligatory red jacket—it may provide color, scale or a sense of depth. Unlike wildlife shots, however, images incorporating red-jacketed people demand an interesting background; otherwise, a viewer might fairly ask, "Why the heck is someone there?"

A wildlife habitat image may not necessarily be pretty or scenic. In fact, it may be just the opposite—harsh, bleak, arid, cold or just downright monotonous—but it’s where that animal lives and, as such, it’s where it should be shown. Now the question is, how do you make that kind of environment look interesting?

The answer lies in following basic compositional guidelines like the "Rule of Thirds" and "Power Points" for subject placement. Although these guidelines may not apply to every situation, and followed too religiously might lead to boring, repetitive compositions, they do work a lot of the time, and quite effectively, too. Let’s refresh ourselves on these two very basic compositional guidelines.

The Rule of Thirds implies dividing a rectangular frame into three equal horizontal and vertical divisions. Image elements can occupy all three subdivisions equally—think of the classic "water–land–sky" calendar shot—or the elements can be divided into one-third/two-third or two-third/one-third divisions.

By subdividing this rectangle, you’ll end up with four positions where the lines intersect. These are the approximate Points of Power where a center of interest can be effectively placed. That said, I’m not suggesting that every center of interest should be placed in a point of power. But it does work, and if you don’t have a better idea you rarely can go wrong by applying this rule. In fact, it is so effective that one can get locked into using this principle for every image. Accordingly, in some of our photo workshops we use "an effectively centered image" as one of the shooting assignments to counteract this trend.

While one could talk about this issue all day it might be more prudent to simply analyze a series of images that illustrate these points. Let’s look at the Rule of Thirds first. For this shot of a wild puma photographed in southern South America, my primary concern was capturing a full-frame image. With the plethora of tight close-ups of captive pumas about, I wanted to get as close to this wild cat as I could to get the largest image possible. However, when the cat moved to a more distant position I felt I obtained a stronger composition, one more balanced with the rest of the scene. The cat, as you see, was positioned in an upper left point of power.

The gorilla shot reflects similar concerns, and this time the great ape is positioned in the opposite diagonal’s point of power. Here other elements within the frame complemented the subject, with the tree trunks radiating from the center to the upper left and another limb framing the gorilla and extending off to the right.

Guanacos in Torres del Paine National Park, Chile, are the perfect complement to the grand mountain landscapes found there, and here I’ve offered three different treatments. The first is a more detailed study of a mother and baby that is almost centered, but you’ll note that the two heads and necks are located at an approximate power point, and the secondary center of interest, the mountain, is in another power point. Further, the division of space is roughly one-third foreground/two-thirds background and follows the Rule of Thirds fairly well.

In the second image I incorporated more background and I was concerned about maintaining a sense of balance. Skies and the tops of hills or mountains sometimes present compositional dilemmas: should the top of a mountain be included, and if not, how much of the mountain or how much sky should be? In this and the next example I’ve implied that the mountains are indeed huge as they extend upward and beyond the frames of the image.

The two lion examples illustrate the same compositional principle. In both, the foreground occupies roughly one-third of the frame with the lions positioned in similar power points, yet they illustrate entirely different concepts. The blue-sky lion indeed shows habitat—the wide-open grasslands of the Masai Mara—while the foggy lion conveys a mood.

The gnu herd is also a one-third/two-third image, balanced nicely by a line of gnus and the rainbow. The rain shadow on the right side of the cloud also complements the rainbow, while the gnu line serves as a nice anchor. And the tree in the middle? Not a problem for me, as I see it as the fulcrum of all the other image elements.

Sometimes the key to making a great shot is simply recognizing the potential that exists. The conditions for this zebra image were pretty abysmal—the Amboseli pan was hot, white dust and the light was low. However, by positioning so that I could shoot a silhouette, I balanced the foreground with another interesting image element—the acacia tree—and produced an image that tells a story. Silhouettes can be difficult, because black-on-black merges as a featureless blob, but here the dust in the air nicely accented the zebras’ shapes.

Subtlety can be effective as well, especially when combined with the basic compositional elements I just described. At first glance, one might overlook the leopard, but, once spotted, this image tells a real story by illustrating habitat while implying the leopard’s stealth. Again, the leopard is positioned in a point of power while the foreground, running at two opposing angles, occupies about two-thirds of the frame.

As all of these examples illustrate, you can make interesting "animals-in-habitat" images by simply following some basic rules. For all of us who usually go camera-hunting with the biggest telephoto in reach, I think you’ll find that these habitat shots will not only be a challenging new way to approach your subjects but will also prove to be very worthwhile additions to your portfolios.