United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service

Pacific Northwest

Research Station

General Technical

Report

PNW-GTR-526

March 2002

Photo Point 

Monitoring

Handbook:

Part A–Field

Procedures

Frederick C. Hall
Author

Frederick C. Hall was senior plant ecologist (now retired), U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest

Region, Natural Resources, P.O. Box 3623, Portland, OR 97208-

3623. This paper is published by the Pacific Northwest Research

Station in cooperation with the Pacific Northwest Region.

The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader

information and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of any product or service.
Photo Point 

Monitoring Handbook:

Part A–Field

Procedures

Frederick C. Hall

Part A contains pages 1–48

Published By:

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

Pacific Northwest Research Station

Portland, OR

General Technical Report PNW-GTR-526

March 2002
Abstract

Hall, Frederick C. 2001. Photo point monitoring handbook: 

part A—field procedures. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-526.

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Pacific Northwest Research Station. 48 p. 2 parts. 

This handbook describes quick, effective methods for documenting

change in vegetation and soil through repeat photography. It is

published in two parts: field procedures in part A and concepts

and office analysis in part B. Topics may be effects of logging,

change in wildlife habitat, livestock grazing impacts, or stream

channel reaction to land management. Land managers, foresters,

ranchers, wildlife biologists, and land owners may find this monitoring system useful. Part A discusses three critical elements:

(1) maps to find the sampling location and maps of the photo

monitoring layout; (2) documentation of the monitoring system

to include purpose, camera and film, weather, season, sampling

system, and equipment; and (3) precise replication in the repeat

photography. 

Keywords: Monitoring, photography.
Preface

This handbook is a synopsis of repeat photography principles

and photo point sampling from the publication Ground Based

Photographic Monitoring, PNW-GTR-503, which is based on 45

years of experience in repeat photography by the author. During

those years, many nuances were discovered that bear discussion and emphasis so that new users can avoid the pitfalls I ran

into. The terms should, must, do not, and will are used to help

users avoid problems and are not meant as rules. 
Contents

1 Introduction

1 Basics 

1 Photo Monitoring Objectives

7 Selecting an Area

8 Locating the Monitoring System

12 Relocating Photo Points

15 When to Photograph

18 Photograph Identification

18 Describing the Topic

18 General Photography

20 Concept

21 Equipment

23 Technique

24 Topic Photography

24 Concept

26 Equipment

26 Technique

33 Analysis of Change

33 Topic Description

34 Shrub Profile Photo Monitoring

34 Concept

34 Guidelines

35 Procedures

41 Equipment

41 Technique

43 Tree Cover Sampling

45 Concept

45 Equipment

46 Technique

49 Literature Cited
Introduction

Anyone interested in quick and effective documentation of change

in vegetation or soil through repeat photography will find this

handbook useful. Illustrations cover such topics as streamside

changes, riparian willow response to beavers, logging, livestock

use, and mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosa) kill of

lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia Englm.). People, such

as foresters, ranchers, wildlife biologists, and nature enthusiasts,

interested in natural resources can establish photo point monitoring (discussed here) to appraise changes (see part B) in natural

resources. No special skill or training is required other than some

knowledge of cameras. 

There is one essential criteria if repeat photography is used to

document change. Distance from camera to photo point must

remain the same (part B). For this reason, both the camera location and photo point require permanent markers. The system recommended is use of cheap fenceposts or steel stakes, usually 2

inch (1.2 cm) diameter concrete reinforcing bar. 

This field procedure handbook is divided into several parts: basic

foundations for photo monitoring, with discussions on objectives,

selecting an area, techniques for general photography, procedures for specific topic pictures, shrub profile monitoring, and tree

cover sampling. Use of forms in part B are illustrated.

Basics

The primary consideration in photo monitoring is an objective.

Ask yourself several questions: What is the topic of this photograph? Why do I want to take this picture? What am I trying to

show? What appeals to me? What will the picture demonstrate?

(Hedgecoe 1994, Johnson 1991). 

Photo Monitoring Objectives

Consider the five basic questions for any inquiry: why, where,

what, when, and how (Borman 1995, Nader and others 1995). 

Why—“Why” to monitor reveals the question or questions needing to be answered. Implementation monitoring asks if we did

what we said, effectiveness asks if it did what we wanted, and

validation asks if it is meeting the objectives. The “why” question

1
2

Figure 1—A ponderosa pine stand with pinegrass ground vegetation showing

effects of logging: undisturbed in 1981, 1982 after the first selection cut, and in

1989 after the second selection cut and precommercial thinning. These views,

with their dramatic differences, emphasize the need for permanent marking of

both camera locations and photo points. Exact picture reorientation uses the

“1M” of the meter board as the photographic center (also see fig. 18) and for

focusing the camera for best depth of field at the meter board. 
sets the stage for all other discussion. Is a proposed treatment

to be monitored (fig. 1)? Is animal distribution to be appraised?

Are things changing as a result of management decisions

(Borman 1995, Nader and others 1995)?

3

Figure 2—Filing system form “Camera Location and Photo Points” showing general photographs of Pole Camp taken from the witness stump: (A) the left landscape, and (B) the right landscape diagramed in figure 6. Note repeat of fenceposts 1 and 2 in both pictures. Fenceposts identify camera locations 1, 2 and 3

and photo points “D” for the dry meadow, “W” for the wet meadow, and “S” for

the streambank. Photo identification cards similar to figure 10, a form from part

B, appendix A, are at the bottom of each picture. The purpose of these photographs is twofold: to illustrate the general sampling area and to show location of

the photo monitoring layout. Used in conjunction with the map in figure 6, someone other than the original sampling crew could find and rephotograph this site. 
Where—“Where” to monitor depends on the “why.” How does

one select representative tracts, animal activity areas, treatment

sites, or particular kinds of treatments? How are number, size,

and location of activities, such as fire, logging, revegetation,

livestock grazing or flood, selected? Ask yourself, “Where is 

the best location that will answer my questions (fig. 2; Borman

1995, Nader and others 1995)?” Critical documents are a map

to locate the site and a site map to document all camera locations and photo points. 

What—“What” to monitor means selecting specific items (topics) on the tract to support the “why” questions: vegetation, soil,

streambanks (fig. 3), or animals. Ask yourself, “What are the

critical few items that must be documented? What is expected

to change? What will the picture demonstrate (Borman 1995,

Johnson 1991, Nader and others 1995)?” The “what” dictates

the sampling layout. 

4

Figure 3—A general photograph taken in 1997 at Pole Camp; the topic is streambank stability. This streambank photo point is taken upstream from camera location 2 (shown in fig. 2 and on the map in fig. 6). Fencepost 1 is camera location

1, fencepost 3 is camera location 3 looking downstream at photo point “S,” ”S” is

the photo point for the streambank, and fencepost ”W” is the photo point for the

wet meadow.
5

Figure 4—Pole Camp “W” (wet meadow) photo point showing three dates of

the same year. June 15 is before scheduled grazing, August 1 is at change in

rotation pastures, and October 1 is after grazing. This pasture was rested from

June 15 to August 1. October 1 illustrates the degree of livestock use on

Kentucky bluegrass at the meter board, on aquatic sedge behind the board,

and on willows. 
When—“When” to monitor supports the “why” and “what” questions. Does it encompass a year or years? one or more times 

a year (fig. 4)? specific dates? specific time(s) of day (Borman

1995, Nader and others 1995)? All are important with both animal and site monitoring. Scheduling when to photograph deals

with before and after treatment and how often thereafter.

Unplanned disturbances, such as fire or flood, pose special

problems. A monitoring protocol may have to be developed on

the spot during an event to establish photo points and define 

a followup schedule. 

How—“How” to monitor is determined by “what” as influenced

by “why” and “when.” It may encompass detailed protocols for

photographic procedures, which may be to obtain either qualitative data (estimates) or quantitative data (measured in the field

or measured from photographs). 

A simple question might deal with effects of livestock grazing 

on a riparian area: (1) Are streambanks being broken down? 

(2) Are riparian shrubs able to grow in both height and crown

spread? (3) Is there enough herbage remaining after grazing 

to trap sediments from flooding? (4) Is herbaceous vegetation

stable, improving, or deteriorating? 

These questions require selection of a sampling location, placement of enough photo points to answer each of the four questions, and establishment of camera locations to adequately

photograph each photo point. Try to select camera locations

that will photograph more than one photo point. Next, time or

times of year to do the photography must be specified, such as

just prior to animal use of the area, just after they leave, or fall

vegetation conditions. Will a riparian site be monitored for high

spring runoff? late season low flows? or during floods? Monitoring of stream flows vs. animal use probably will require 

different scheduling.

Recommendation—Write down the specific objectives and 

protocols for each photo monitoring project. Write them so that

someone other than the installer can understand the purpose,

can follow the protocols, and can become enthusiastic about 

the project. 

6
Selecting an Area

Selection of a monitoring area requires a great deal of professional expertise liberally mixed with artistic finesse. The purpose

for photographic monitoring is the most critical factor in considering where to monitor (Borman 1995, Nader and others 1995):

Where in the landscape is my topic of concern, and once at the

area, what kind of change do I want to document? In some cases,

“where” is straight forward; for example, documentation of logging impacts requires an area being logged (fig. 1), and effects

of beavers on a stream requires beaver dams. On the other

hand, documentation of impacts from livestock grazing requires

understanding livestock distribution plus knowing the location of

areas sensitive to grazing and the most critical season of use. 

Once in an area, the real decisions must be made. Determine

specifically what to monitor for change. Figure 2 shows two 

general views of Pole Camp in northeast Oregon where some

examples of photo monitoring are located. The purpose was to

document effects on a riparian area from livestock grazing. Pole 

Camp was selected because it was preferred by livestock. Specific

objectives were to evaluate grazing effects on streambanks (fig.

3); willow (Salix spp.) shrub utilization (fig. 3); differences in use

between Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L.) by the fencepost

on the right (1) and aquatic sedge (Carex aquatilis Wahlenb.) at

the fencepost in the left background (W). The topic in figure 3 is

streambank stability. 

Figure 1 is a different situation. The purpose for photo sampling

was to document effects of a two-stage overstory removal and

subsequent precommercial thinning on stand structure and

ground vegetation. The sale area determined the site. Stand

conditions of open ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Dougl. ex

Laws.) and clumped reproduction across an opening were chosen for the photo point. The opening was selected to avoid tree

crown encroachment between the camera location and photo

point and to appraise logging effects on livestock forage. It was

photographed before and after each entry to log. 

7
After appraising the area, establish the photo monitoring system as discussed below in “General Photography” and “Topic

Photography.” The sampling layout must be mapped as

described next.

Locating the Monitoring System

Assume that the person installing the monitoring program will

not be the one to find and rephotograph the area. Provide maps

and instructions accordingly. A local map showing roads and the

site locates Pole Camp, one of three locations for the Emigrant

Creek riparian study (fig. 5). 

After laying out the photography system, select a witness site 

to mark the area. Identify it with a permanent marker, such as 

an orange aluminum tag, and determine direction and measured

distance to camera locations, photo points, or both. Inscribe

these on the identification tag. Next map the camera locations

and photo points with directions and measured distances on the

filing system form “Photographic Site Description and Location”

(fig. 6), found in part B, appendix A. Note whether the direction 

8

Figure 5—USDA Forest Service ranger district map showing location of the

Button Meadow, Pole Camp, and Lower Emigrant riparian study sites. Road

numbers, mileage from road junctions, and directions to the witness sites are

given on the filing system form “Photographic Site Description and Location”

(fig. 6).
Figure 6—Filing system form “Photographic Site Description and Location”

showing the monitoring layout for Pole Camp. In the lower left corner is a reference to the junction of roads 43 and 4365 at 0.25 mile (0.4 km). Immediately

opposite the road turnout is a lodgepole pine witness stump 28 inches (71 cm)

in diameter. An aluminum tag, orange for visibility, is attached to the stump with

directions and distances to camera locations. An additional map, noted by the

square labeled “See detail attached,” is shown in figure 17. It documents triangulation of the streambank photo point “S.” Another note, “Shrub transect - see

attached,” refers to an installation in 1997, which is shown in figures 22, 23, 

and 25 dealing with shrub profile photo monitoring.

is taken in magnetic or true degrees by indicating either “M” 

or “T.” A 21-degree deviation in the Pacific Northwest must be

accounted for. Measure distances between the witness site,

camera locations, and photo points on the ground. Do not

attempt conversion to horizontal distance. 

9
Fenceposts or stakes—Monitoring, by definition, means

repeated observation; therefore, all camera locations and photo

points must be permanently marked. The recommended method

is stamped metal fenceposts shown in figures 2 and 3. In 2000,

these cost about $2.75 each for a 5-foot (1.5-m) post. Stamped

metal has several advantages over strong T-bar posts: they are

flimsy and will bend if driven over by a vehicle or run into by an

animal; they will bend flat and remain in the ground to mark the

spot; they resist theft because they are just as difficult to pull

out as a good fencepost but are not worth the trouble; and they

are easy to carry and pound. The primary advantage of flimsy

fenceposts is their visibility, as seen in figures 2 and 3. If visibility is not desired, steel rebar stakes are a choice but require a

metal detector for relocation (White’s Electronics, Inc. 1996). 

Steel stakes, preferably concrete reenforcing bar (rebar) have

been used and may be required for shallow soils, areas that will

be disturbed, or locations where fenceposts may be obtrusive. 

If disturbance or shallow soils prevents the use of fenceposts,

stakes should be driven flush with the ground. If left a few inches

above the ground, stakes will damage tires, hooves, or feet. They

are always difficult to find. When driven flush with the ground,

they require a metal detector for relocation (White’s Electronics,

Inc. 1996), but even then, the stakes must be of some mass for

detection with a simple, $250 machine. Angle iron should be 1

inch (2.5 cm) on the angle and at least 12 inches (30 cm) long.

Cement reenforcing bar should be at least a inch (1 cm) in

diameter and at least 12 inches (30 cm) long. Shorter lengths

may be needed for shallow soils.

Distance from camera to photo point—One overriding 

consideration in photo monitoring is to use the same distance

between the camera location and photo point for all subsequent

photography of that sample. Any analysis of change depicted in

the photographs can be made only when the distance remains

the same (part B). Therefore, always measure the distance

from camera location to photo point and mark with steel fenceposts or stakes. 

10
11

Figure 7—A site locator fieldbook is my system for finding camera locations

and photo points. It is a pocket-sized set of photographs and directions mounted on cardboard (file separator thickness). (A) The left landscape view of the

sampling area at Pole Camp shown in figure 2. (A) also locates camera locations 1, 2, and 3. Camera location 1 has two photo points: “D” is Pole Camp

dry meadow and “W” is Pole Camp wet meadow (figs. 2 and 6). (B) The upstream photo point taken from camera location (2) to “S” (illustrated in fig. 3). 

A map of this area is shown in figure 6.
12

A fixed distance for all photo monitoring is not required. It may

differ from one photo point to another. Camera format also may

change, such as first pictures with a 50mm lens and next pictures with a 35mm lens, but distance must remain the same. It

can remain the same in repeat photography only if permanently

marked. 

Site locator fieldbook—A photo monitoring fieldbook is recommended for carrying the original photos and some intervening

photographs into the field (fig. 7). If previous photographs were

done by different people, you may discover some disorientation

of subsequent views. For that reason, a copy of the original

photograph is very important. Rephotograph from the original

and not from any misoriented intervening views. 

My system for Pole Camp is depicted in figure 7. Figure 7A is 

a landscape view of the Pole Camp flood plain from the witness

site that identifies camera locations and some photo points. 

It locates the left of two flood-plain scenes, both shown in figure 2 (and mapped in fig. 6). Figure 7B is a view from camera

location 2 to photo point “S” on the streambank, the scene in 

figure 3.

The pocket-size booklet has a picture from each witness site 

to each camera location and photo point and includes directions

from the witness site to camera location and orientation of the

photo point. 

Once at the area, review the photographs for changes in vegetation. Next, note the number of years since the last photograph,

particularly if it was taken more than 3 years previous. The purpose is to evaluate change in the vegetation that might make

previous photographs difficult to interpret (fig.1).

Relocating Photo Points

If camera locations and photo points were not marked, they may

be approximated by the following triangulation procedure. Align

items in the original photograph as shown in figure 8A. Start in

the center of the photograph to orient the direction of the picture

and draw line 1 on the photo, the photo point direction. Then, for

Text continues on page 15.
13

Figure 8—Photograph reorientation uses a black-and-white photo on which a

triangulation system is diagramed. A center line (1) is established on the original

photograph (A) for direction. The center line is identified by position of trees in

the background and framing the picture with trees in the foreground. Then positions of items 2 and 3 at the sides of the picture are used to triangulate the

camera location. Looking to the right, note the position of trees at arrow 2 while

also looking left for tree positions at arrow 3. For (B), the photographer moves

forward and backward along the center line until items at arrow 2 and arrow 3

are aligned. Try to include some unusual object in the photograph, such as the

pair of stumps in the lower right corner. Photograph (A) is preunderburn condition and (B) is postburn and salvage of killed trees. In (B), note the missing

trees at arrows “a” and “b,” and a burned-out stump at arrow “c.” 
14

Figure 9—Relocation of a historical photograph taken in 1914 of Branson

Creek, Wallowa County, Oregon. Skovlin and Thomas (1995, p. 22-23) took the

bottom view in 1992. On a copy of the original (1914) photo, mark orientation

lines. “A” identifies the centerline orientation. Then choose objects on the edges

of the picture, such as “B” and “C,” to triangulate location of the original camera.

Once centered on the original photograph, move forward or backward until the

angles of B and C are similar to the original photograph. Slight differences in

orientation lines between 1914 and 1992 suggest that in 1992, the camera was

a few yards left of the original location. The usefulness of black-and-white photographs is illustrated here by being able to draw triangulation lines directly on 

a copy of the 1914 picture.
the camera location, find items on the sides of the picture, shown

by arrows 2 and 3, to triangulate the location. The items are distances between trees. Move forward or backward along line 1 (fig.

8B) to repeat the distances shown at 2 and 3. This is the camera

location and photo point direction. Mark the camera location with

a fencepost and add a meter board (photo point) location 25 to

35 feet (8 to 10 m) distant. 

Figure 9 applies this triangulation concept to relocation of landscape photographs.

If major vegetation manipulation has occurred as shown in 

figure 1, relocation may be very difficult. 

When to Photograph

When to photograph is usually determined by the activity being

monitored. Pole Camp, for example, is part of a study evaluating

effects of cattle grazing on a riparian area. Figure 3 illustrates

one topic of concern, streambank stability. Photographs have

been taken three times per year to correspond with livestock

activity: June 15 just before grazing, August 1 as cattle change

pastures, and October 1 after animals leave the allotment (fig. 4).

This three-season monitoring is repeated every year. 

Figure 1 illustrates a very different monitoring schedule. Photographs were planned for the first week in August as an index to

appraise vegetation development. They were taken just before

logging and in each of the two seasons after cutting to document

rapid changes in ground vegetation. Then a 5-year rephotography cycle was established to follow slower changes in both stand

structure and ground vegetation. The routine was repeated with

the second logging and the precommercial thinning. 

If vegetation is a primary topic, consider establishing a fixed 

date or dates for rephotography. Established dates have several

advantages: (1) they set a consistent reference point to evaluate

seasonal differences in plant phenological development, (2) they

provide a consistent reference for comparing change over several years, and (3) they establish a consistent time interval over

which change is documented. 

15

Text continues on page 18.
Figure 10—An example of a photograph identification card to be placed in the camera

view (fig. 2). This has been reduced to 60 percent of its original size. Part B, appendix

A has blank forms that can be reproduced onto dark blue paper. The best paper colors are Hammermill Brite Hue Blue or Georgia Pacific Papers Hots Blue. Light colored paper, common in the office environment, bleaches out under direct sun and

should not be used. 
17

Figure 11—Filing system form “Photo Points and Close Photos” documenting a

ponderosa pine/elk sedge community. This area had not been previously logged

and had only sporadic sheep use because water was 1.5 miles (2.4 km) distant.

The general view is followed by pictures to the left and right of the meter board.

The concept is to show both a general view and a pair of closeups to document

change. Figure 18 illustrates what happened in this view after logging and 18

years later. Species noted are: CAGE (Carex geyeri Boot.), PONE (Poa nervosa

(Hook.) Vasey), CARO (Carex rossii Boot.), and FRVI (Fragaria virginiana

Duchesne).
Photograph Identification

Each photograph should be identified by site name, photograph

number, and date. Figure 10 is an example for use with general

or topic photographs (fig. 2). A critical factor is identifying negatives for color or black-and-white pictures or digital images. The

borders of slides can be written on, but there is no similar place

to identify negatives or digital memory card images. Placing a

photo identification card in each picture assures a permanent

record on the negative or image. This—negative identification—

has been one of my biggest problems. Part B, appendix A, 

contains blank photo identification forms (“Camera-Photo” and

“Shrub Photo Sampling”), which can be copied onto medium 

blue colored paper.

Paper color is the next consideration. Plain white or light colors,

common in the office environment, are not suitable because they

are too light in color and will bleach out when photographed. 

The recommended paper color is either Hammermill Brite Hue

Blue or Georgia Pacific Papers Hots Blue (part B, app. A). Tests

have shown these darker blue hues to be superior to other

intense colors such as green and yellow. 

Describing the Topic

Describe what is in the photographed scene. Include plant

species, ground conditions, disturbances, or any other pertinent

item. Part B, appendix A, contains forms having provision for

recording these notes. For example, the filing system form

“Camera Location and Photo Points” is shown in figure 2 with

two views of Pole Camp and brief comments about each photo.

And figure 11 is the “Photo Points and Close Photos” form for 

a general view and two closeup photographs of a ponderosa

pine/elk sedge (Carex geyeri Boot.) plant community in undisturbed condition. Canopy cover estimates of dominant species

are recorded in each closeup photo. Other topic description

forms are discussed below in “Shrub Profile Photo Monitoring”

and “Tree Cover Sampling.” The forms are available in part B,

appendix A.

General Photography

General photographs document a scene rather than a specific

topic marked by a meter board. They are similar to landscape

pictures in that they may not contain a size control board (meter

18
board) on which to focus the camera and orient subsequent

photographs. A photo usually covers an area of 2 to 20 acres

(0.8 to 8 ha) and distances of 50 to 200 yards (40 to 180 m)

(figs. 12 to 15).

19

Figure 12—Filing system form “Photographic Site Description and Location”

with a map to locate camera locations and photo points to document the affects

of mountain pine beetle on lodgepole pine. Two camera locations are shown.

Figures 13 to 15 are from camera location 1 and show photo points 1A and 1B.
Figure 13—Filing system form “Camera Location and Photo Points” documenting stand conditions in 1977, one year after mountain pine beetle attack on

lodgepole pine. The needle color on trees killed in the first year changed from

green to dark red (not visible here). Compare to figures 14 and 15. Photo orientation used the road center line. 

20

Concept

In many cases, general photographs document a scene in

which a meter board cannot be placed to orient and focus the

camera. One use of general photographs is shown in figure 2.

Filing system form “Camera Location and Photo Points” is used

in two pictures of Pole Camp where fenceposts marking camera

locations and photo points may be identified. Another use is

illustrated in figures 13 to 15, which document effects of mountain pine beetle attacks on lodgepole pine. 
Figure 14—Stand conditions in 1978, 2 years after beetle attack in 1976. Photo

point “A” has 90 percent kill and massive standing dead fuel. Photo point “B”

was salvaged the winter of 1977-78. 

21

Equipment

The following equipment is needed:

1. Camera or cameras for different film, or digital camera.

2. Photograph identification form “Camera-Photo” from part B, 

appendix A (fig. 10).

3. Clipboard and its support for holding the photo identification 

sheets (part B, app. B).

4. Compass and 100-foot (30-m) measuring tape.

5. Previous photographs for orientation of the camera.
6. Filing system forms “Photographic Site Description and

Location” (figs. 6 and 12) and “Camera Location and Photo

Points” (figs. 2 and 13-15) from part B, appendix A.

7. Fenceposts and steel stakes sufficient for the number of

camera locations desired. Include a pounder. 

8. A tripod to use for camera reorientation.

22

Figure 15—Stand conditions in 1991, 14 years after beetle attack and 13 growing seasons since figure 13. Photo point “A” shows most dominant trees are

down, which creates severe burn conditions at ground level. Photo point “B”

illustrates natural regeneration height growth. Orientation of repeat general photography without a meter board requires skill and a set of orientation pictures

similar to those in figure 7.
Technique

Select a scene that will meet your monitoring objectives.

Describe it, including plant species, ground cover items, disturbance, or whatever the topic of the photograph is by using the

filing system form “Camera Location and Photo Points.”

Photograph the scene.

Make maps of the location and layout of the scene on the filing

system form “Photographic Site Description and Location” (figs.

6 and 12). In figure 6, the two photos from figure 2 are labeled

“Pan Left” and “Pan Right.” 

Reorientation—Reorientation of subsequent pictures is a major

concern due to lack of a meter board. Identification of key items

in each view will be needed. In figure 6, for example, the tall

tree in the right background of picture (A) is the same tree as in

the left background of picture (B). Panoramic views, such as figure 6, always should include about 10 percent overlap between

photographs.

Systems used for landscape photo reorientation (discussion 

at fig. 8) are of major help. On a black-and-white copy of the

scene, mark reorientation items as shown in figures 8 and 9.

With the camera mounted on a tripod, compare the picture in

hand with the scene through the camera. Orient the camera

accordingly. 

Figure 7 illustrates a site locator fieldbook for rephotographing

general views. It has 3- by 5-inch (7.5- by 12.5-cm) photographs mounted on 5- by 5-inch (12.5- by 12.5-cm) cardboard.

Instructions are given under each picture for its location and 

orientation. These fit into a vest pocket for use in the field.

Figure 3 is a recent picture of figure 7B.

Example—Figures 13 to 15 illustrate general photography 

documenting effects of mountain pine beetle on lodgepole pine

along highway 244 in the Blue Mountains of eastern Oregon.

Figure 12 is filing system form “Photographic Site Description

and Location” mapping two camera locations. Camera location

1 has two photo points (figs. 13 to 15) and camera location 2

has three photo points. Monitoring started in 1976 when beetles

first attacked the stands.

23
Figures 13 to 15 show the use of filing system form “Camera

Location and Photo Points” to document beetle effects over a

14-year period. Figure 13 depicts second-year effects of beetle

attack where trees killed the first year have started to drop their

needles. Figure 14 is the third year after attack and shows massive standing fuel (14A) and salvage (14B). Figure 15, 14 years

after initial attack and 13 growing seasons after figure 13, illustrates tree fall (15A) and growth of natural regeneration (15B).

Topic Photography

Topic photography narrows the subject from a general view to 

a specific item of interest. It adds a meter board, or other size

control object, to identify the photographic topic (figs. 1, 3, 4,

and 11). 

Concept

We will assume monitoring objectives have been established 

as discussed in “Basics.” A meter board, or other size control

board, is placed at the selected topic for several reasons: to (1)

identify the item being monitored for change; (2) establish a

camera orientation reference point for subsequent photography;

(3) set up a constant size-reference by which change can be

documented, for example by grid analysis; and (4) provide a

point on which to focus the camera for optimum depth of field. 

Figure 3 illustrates identification of a very specific topic, streambank stability. Figure 1 deals with a general view limited to area

around the meter board; the topic is effect of logging and precommercial thinning on stand structure and ground vegetation.

Purpose of topic monitoring is the primary factor in selecting a

monitoring layout.

The effect of distance from the camera to the meter board to

emphasize a topic is shown in figure 16. The topic in 16A is a

transect for nested frequency, in 16B it is density of grass and

big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata Nutt.), and in 16C it is species

density and use (none in this case). Select a camera-to-photopoint distance that best depicts what you want to emphasize.

Remember that once the distance is established, it must

remain fixed.

24