- Self #12 » »
- « « Hong Kong #31
Inventiveness in landscape photography
Filed in Art - October 6, 2009I’ve been getting pretty jaded about the whole topic of landscape imagery – my photos, other people’s photos, paintings, watercolours…you name it. I’ve been feeling that the subject matter is too constraining. And, worse, maybe that all those people shooting sunsets or sloshing watercolour pigments around in front of lake views are right. The game might be to perfect a genre not to explore it.
Not my sort of thinking at all.
In the last twelve months I’ve deliberately looked at a lot of non-photographic flat art. Galleries great and not so great. Artists known and obscure. I’ve been struck by how narrow a view landscapists take of the world, and sucked in by these thoughts I’ve become unhappy with my own attempts.
So praise any deity that you wish for this photo by Christina Evans. A perfect reminder that landscape can be inventive and fun and still be representational. A great photo.
But, it has her shadow in it, the tree isn’t a third of the way in and and…
Ok, nice find Colin. I started finding landscapes boring a while ago too, even though I still take pictures of the landscape. Can’t explain it really.
Mike
October 6, 2009 @ 7:32 pm
Welcome back by the way. It seems a while since you posted.
October 6, 2009 @ 7:33 pm
For some it takes a lifetime to explore what others see as a narrow view. The path is beaten to death, we know. What we don’t know is what the others found following it.
October 6, 2009 @ 10:38 pm
Oh boy, this is a very interesting and complicate subject, here are my thoughts, and my comments probably don’t make any sense at all– Maybe you need to ask yourself: “What is landscape?” I live in a rural area far away from any metropolis, encircled by mountains, forests and rivers, so this is the landscape that surrounds me, but if I would live in a city my work would probably be influenced and stimulated by the urban landscape. For me it is basically like this – I see something and I press the shutter, there is never a thought about trying to achieve a new view, a clever never seen before composition of particular scenery regardless where it is located.
October 7, 2009 @ 2:15 am
I saw Christina’s photograph when it went up on stills & chuckled to myself. In a good way I might add. I’m with you on a lot of landscape photography, but then it’s never really been a creative motivation of mine.
October 7, 2009 @ 7:01 am
‘Oh boy, this is a very interesting and complicate subject, here are my thoughts, and my comments probably don’t make any sense at all– Maybe you need to ask yourself: “What is landscape?” I live in a rural area far away from any metropolis, encircled by mountains, forests and rivers, so this is the landscape that surrounds me, but if I would live in a city my work would probably be influenced and stimulated by the urban landscape. For me it is basically like this – I see something and I press the shutter, there is never a thought about trying to achieve a new view, a clever never seen before composition of particular scenery regardless where it is located.’
Peter sums some things up nicely above. Perhaps what is boring to me is the endless parade of ‘me too’ landscapes that are not (obviously) a result of the photographers own seeing, but of a desire to travel to new places to make ‘impressive’ images. My preferred photography is just of the things I find around me, where ever that happens to be. I live in (two!) semi rural locations and work in the city, but as stated in the past, lunchtime photography sucks, and so I photograph where I am. New and clever isn’t part of the intent.
Mike
October 7, 2009 @ 12:23 pm
Have you tried going with something a little more abstract, kind of frees up your mind to wander.
October 8, 2009 @ 5:01 am
Bob – not much interested in abstracts (unless you mean close details which some people call abstract). I don’t think photography is the right medium for them.
More on this topic in another post soon.
October 8, 2009 @ 8:20 am