Why Landscape Photographers Should Rethink the Exposure Triangle

The exposure triangle is practically gospel that just about every new photographer needs to master, but there is more to it than simply varying shutter speed, aperture, and ISO to create a balanced exposure. This helpful video tutorial features an experienced landscape photographer discussing how to properly approach the exposure triangle to ensure you can make photos that are both technically and creatively satisfying. 

Coming to you from Christian Irmler - Landscape Photography, this great video tutorial discusses the idea of turning the exposure triangle into a “triangle of styles.” The idea is to uncouple style and exposure so your creative vision is not inadvertently cast aside by the goal of getting a technically correct exposure. Creative vision should dictate the technical exposure, as there are many different ways to represent the same scene, and each of those will require a different combination of shutter speed, aperture, and ISO and often, different total exposures. Learning to approach the process in this manner will help you gain far more creative control over images. Check out the video above for the full rundown from Irmler. 

And if you really want to dive into landscape photography, check out "Photographing The World 1: Landscape Photography and Post-Processing with Elia Locardi."

Alex Cooke's picture

Alex Cooke is a Cleveland-based portrait, events, and landscape photographer. He holds an M.S. in Applied Mathematics and a doctorate in Music Composition. He is also an avid equestrian.

Log in or register to post comments
12 Comments

Technically, it is not an "exposure triangle" because only shutter speed and aperture actually affect how much light the medium is exposed to. ISO is a matter of sensitivity, not exposure. Just wanted to clear this up in case there are those who haven't hear the term corrected yet. And yes, precise semantics really are of the utmost importance whenever photography is discussed.

Dont be fooled by people trying to tell you otherwise. In the film days, ASA ( American Standards Association) was used to....DISCERN THE SPEED IN WHICH FILM RESPONDS TO LIGHT. When digital popped in, ISO replaced the nomenclature of ASA, but it dod NOT replace its meaning. It, indeed DOES mean exactly what you say it does. Have no idea why some people think otherwise. Thank you sir.

ISO replaced ASA and DIN film speeds in 1974, well before digital cameras existed. Digital ISO was created to standardize sensitivity across all xameras, justvas ASA was. Prior to this, electronic cameras -- for video, not stills or cinema -- had an unsoecified base sensitivity and a gain control, measured in dB. This made it essentially imposdible to match ecposure between muktiple different cameras or use external metering, at least without careful calibration.

Early on the ISO specified several methods for calibrating a digital cameras to a specific base ISO rating. Those were depricated long ago, and pretty much every camera maker uses the aame method today. In fact, it's required by law in Japan.

Yes, I am well aware of when ISO came out. I was 22 at the time. ISO as used to day needs a reference point for measuring how fast the sensor reacts to light. I know it's digital, but sensors still need to respond to light in the appropriate fashion. If all things regarding photography must relate to the process of taking photos, whether digital or film, then the actions of the cameras themselves must transfer over from film to digital work. Shutter speed is still known as shutter speed, aperture is still known as aperture, speed in which sensor/ film responds to light must also have a reference. ISO can be explained anyway one wants it to, but it has its use in the triangle of properly exposed images. State how you will, it does the same thing that ASA/DIN/ISO did (does) with film.
Example...you have a digital camera and want to take a photo. If using it on Manual mode you would set your aperture where you'd like, set the shutter speed and ghen look at the ISO. What does the ISO tell you? It tells you how fast the senosor will respond to the light. How does the sensor show you that info? By the ISO. Same as in the film days. Something...some...thing must measure the light and give it qualification. That 'thing' is the sensor. The way it shows you the info is via...ISO.

Sorry, I responded to the wrong person... you're arguing the same I was, the fact the digital ISO works exacty like chemical ISO to the photographer. The implementation detail, electronic gain vs silver halide crystal size, does not matter.

Shutter speed - no such thing. It is exposure time.

There is absolutely such a thing as shutter speed. The speed at which the shutter opens and closes again is the same as exposure time. In fact, it determines exposure time. Don't be a jerk.

I am always willing to learn.

Is there any documentation that actually states/shows how the speed of the shutter is the same as exposure time? Maybe even a Youtube video?

To my knowledge, the shutter is, say a "curtain". The curtain opens when the shutter button is pressed (disregarding delayed openings). After the exposure time, the curtain closes.

So, if one sets the exposure time to 1/250 of a second or 5 minutes or whatever, where does "shutter speed" come into it?

Is there a shutter speed in Bulb mode?

To my thinking, it is exposure TIME. Time does not have a speed value.

But as I wrote at the top, if you have actual scientific proof that it is shutter speed, by all means point me to that article or video.

Thank you.

You're trying to sound nice, but you are being difficult and demanding because you are speaking as if the only acceptable thing is "scientific proof". Each human has logic and reason that we can use ourselves. No need to refer to some other human's logic and reason when I have my own.

All you need is a knowledge of what words and terms mean. The time that the shutter is open, allowing light to shine onto the recording medium, is what we call shutter speed. This is the definition of "shutter speed" in photography, and it has been so for decades and decades.

"Shutter speed" is a term, the meaning of which is different than the meaning of each of the words if taken individually. Words have definitions, and terms have definitions. They are often not interchangeable.

I could show you many articles and videos in which "shutter speed" is used to refer to the amount of time that a shutter remains open. But is there really a point to doing so? We all know that this is what the term "shutter speed" means, so why do you ask me to show you "proof" of something that is already so universally known and accepted?

And only a real jerk would take what I just said in that last paragraph and turn it around and use it against me regarding the exception I take to the use of the term "exposure triangle". That's way too easy and obvious for someone to do, and shows no cleverness or intelligence whatsoever.

Fair enough but if precise semantics are your objective then your comment linking ISO with sensitivity needs to be corrected. That specific relationship has been debunked on this platform by multiple experts in the past year or so and I believe the collective wisdom these days is that increasing ISO amplifies gain, it does not increase or decrease sensitivity.

Base ISO matches your camera's 0dB sensitvity to that of all other cameras and films by using the ISO scale as common ground. ISO adjustments physically adjust gain on a programmable gain amplifier that sits in from of the ADC(s) on your sensor, providing a standard scale rather than a dB number. At least until a point. Some cameras have extended ISO, which may be digital "gain". It behaves like film sensitivity because your photodiides probably have a wider dynamic range than the 12- or 14- bit resokution of your ADC.

Some cameras are so-calked ISO invarient, meaning there's no PGA and all settings are pure software. This of course means that each doubling of ISO cuts out a bit of volor resolution and sort of implies your photodiode array's dynamic range precisely matches your ADC resolution or you're leaving behind some DR at higher ISOs. Of course, for consumer all JPEG shooting, probably not a problem.

Thank you for the correction and clarification.