Outdoor Photographer April 2010 Cover

Outdoor Photographer April 2010 Cover

My image “Racetrack Sunset” will be the April cover photo of Outdoor Photographer! The Racetrack is a seasonally dry lake located in the northern part of Death Valley National Park and is famous for its moving rocks. With the right combination of rain and wind, the rocks move slowly across the surface of the playa, leaving a track as they go. I photographed this amazing rock at sunset during my first visit to the Racetrack in January 2006. I was enthralled with the unusual arc that it had created as it was moving. This rock was still in the same location during my recent Death Valley National Park Tour.

Be social and share.

30 thoughts on “Outdoor Photographer April 2010 Cover

  1. Congratulations on another magazine cover Jon!

    Scott
    http://underpressurephoto.com

  2. Very nice work Jon. Keep chasing your goals. Good things will come your way.

  3. Definitely worthy of a cover. Beautiful work Jon.

  4. I still think that it is funny that they intentionally flipped the image, but I am not complaining!

  5. Congratulations Jon – that is great news!

  6. Very Nice! Conga rats. 🙂 Can’t wait to see it.

  7. Congrats Jon. Looks like some interesting topics in the magazine.

  8. Congrats John. You are on a roll it seems.

  9. Congrats Jon!! Way to go!

  10. Oh Wow! Congratulations, Jon! I can’t wait to see the magazine when it shows up. Keep up the great work as usual.

  11. I’d actually call it seasonally WET since it spends most of the year being dry 😉 Congrats, Jon.

  12. Congratulations Jon!

  13. Love it! Good Job.

  14. Congratulations Jon! You rock!

  15. Kudos to you Jon! Great photo…. beautiful cover!

  16. Awesome Jon! Well deserved!

  17. Wow! They are stepping out. Not their usual hackneyed landscape shot. Good for you!

  18. Congrats for the OP cover! Do you have images inside as well?

  19. Congrats, Jon. I think my last OP cover was 10 yrs ago!

  20. This is awesome! Congrats!

    Oh, and thanks for the science experiment. I was sitting here thinking – shoot, I don’t know anything about how those are formed and before I ask Jon (how are these formed?), I better “surf” to see if there’s some easy explanation that would make me look incredibly stupid.

    I’m very happy to find out that no one has ever seen these move (which is wild!) and they’re not entirely sure how these are formed (which is cool). I’d say the best content I’ve found are: http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/OddPics/Playa.html and http://geosun.sjsu.edu/paula/rtp/intro.html. Very interesting stuff. Looks like Death Valley is a must at some point!!

  21. Congratulations!! Love shots from this place and I like the depth to yours especially!!

  22. Nice work Jon!
    Gotta love magazine editors, your imagery, albeit flipped, worked perfect for their copy.

  23. Congrats, but yes, I see the flip that the magazine did. They should not do that without your permission.

    Patrick

  24. What’s up with the mismatched sun angles?

    The OP editors really did a number on your picture. The foreground and background shadows are completely out of kilter. Looking at the image in your gallery, it seems they flipped ONLY the foreground. DOH!

  25. Patrick & Greg,

    Thanks for leaving your comments. I would have preferred that OP left my image along, however, I am use to the publishing world asking to crop & flip my images after 10 years as a full-time pro. I was OK with them asking me to flip the image to fit their type, however, I did not realize that they were only going to flip the bottom part of the image. Oh, well, it’s not exactly like I did it. They should have stated what they did in the description. I am glad that I did not stage a wolf jumping over a fence & try to claim that was a natural shot!

  26. LOL, I’m sure you’ve ‘seen it all.’

    A simple horizontal flip wouldn’t bug me too much, but hacking and pasting to create an obviously manipulated image would IRK me no end! The average reader may well look at the impossible shadows and conclude that the photographer just ‘chopped’ an image together from bits and pieces floating about on his hard drive. IMO, once a photographer is ‘caught’ doing something so blatant, his/her entire body of work is instantly called into question and degraded. Not good! “SUE ‘EM! SUE ‘EM FOR EVERYTHING!!” 🙂

    The OP guys seem to have a habit of ‘forgetting’ to note that an image is not entirely natural. Last year, Alan Wolfe submitted a clearly ‘impossible’ Arch + Moon cover shot. He explained that it was a double exposure, but the editors neglected to print this info. OP and Wolff both caught some flack for that one.

    PS – Nice shot! 🙂

  27. Greg,

    Thanks again for taking the time to comment. I am going to do a blog post about this issue. Not today, because I have a standing-room-only presentation to give tonight, but tomorrow.

    I doubt that very few people are going to criticize the quality & authenticity of my photography. I’ve advocated the highest standards in my work since I began. Those that are going to question my ethics are not potential customers or clients, anyway.

    It will be interesting to get Chris from OP’s response. Also, it is Art Wolfe. He is a friend of mine. I’ve called his office for his input, too.

    I really like my image, but would have preferred they not mess with it, but they did. Clearly, they should have said something in the caption info on page 9.

    Best wishes!

  28. Thanks for the feedback!
    As you know, there’s a raging discussion over on the Fred Miranda landscape forum. We’d all be interested to hear what the OP guys have to say.

    Sorry to pester.

    Best wishes.

    -Greg

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *