What IS it about nature photography?

Emile....There is a place and an attitude like you're describing

that exists now, only it's in Brazil, in the State of Bahia, in the

Pelorinho. Bahia is where the slaves were first taken to South

America from Africa, where the religion and culture of slaves combined

with South American and European culture.

<p>

Bahia is the spiritual capital of Brazil, it's beautiful

exciting, colorful, as is the rest of Brazil. The culture and

religion of the Yoruba and the origins of Carnaval and masked ritual

came into and radiated out from Bahia.

<p>

The Pelorinho which is located in the downtown area of

Bahia is a hotbed of painters, poets, photographers, singers, and like

the rest of Bahia, has an INFINITE number of photo-ops. Bahia the

place, is as beautiful, and lyrical, and as spiritual as its people.

<p>

I went there for Carnaval one year instead of Rio, and spent my

first day and night in a wonderful hotel overlooking a quaint

lighthouse listening to the beat of Samba from trios electricos, mixed

in with James Brown, Marvin Gaye, and Miles Davis.

<p>

When Carnaval started, it all happened at once. The music, the

drums, everything, the whole town exploded all at once, and I felt the

music and it's vibration in my feet standing in my hotel room!

<p>

Brazil is 500 years old, Bahia has countless churches and

buildings and structures that old, that like the rest of Brazil have

to be seen to be beleived. The place, the people, the beaches, the

music, the air, they make you feel alive, and I always feel refreshed

when coming back from Brazil.

<p>

I'm not suggesting going off to Brazil looking for a pot of gold

at the end of the rainbow, that would be going there for the wrong

reason, because I think Chris Jordan is right about stuff right here

in front of all of us.

<p>

Emile is right to as the issues about a place and an attitude

conducive to growth, and Bahia is what you've described, and on that

basis, go there at some point in time, the only problem is that no

matter what, you'll never have enough film for what catches your eyes.

Before somebody brings up money, plenty of kids go, they get in

touch with somebody in Brazil over the web, there's always rooms for

rent.

<p>

One year that I went to Rio for Carnaval, I rode into town with

five kids who had rented a large apartment in Baja de Tijauca a

beautiful suburb of Rio, and they got that apartment for less than you

would pay to stay in a holiday inn here in the states.

<p>

How they got that apartment that cheap was amazing. They paid one

fifth of the total rent for the apartment and not individually. Their

bill for 8 days during Carnaval was $900.00, they each paid $180.00

for the apartment! Going to Brazil can be done on a skimpy budget

given enough time to make contacts and do reseach.

Anybody want to get instant feedback on Brazil online, go to

www.brazzil.com, it's an online magazine run by a Brazilian.

Emile & Jonathan,

<p>

Once you got to Brazil how could you resist Peru while you're in

the neighbourhood? A colleague just had a pretty successful

show with work from Chile and Patagonia (although Patagonia

seems pretty serious 'climber' territory.

<p>

Ah, to dream ... Walter

Here is an essay I wrote that is on my website that stresses my

thoughts on the matter.

<p>

Hometown Safaris

<p>

To what distances would you have to go, to find subject matter that

has the feel and flavor of exotic fair, of places on far in which to

photograph? As you pour over the many books and magazines loaded with

breath taking landscapes, interesting details, folklore, candids of

the natives, you wonder if you would ever be able to go there

yourself on an excursion of self discovery. Would you have to fly

half way around the world, a quarter, or any other fraction there of?

Remember, what seems exotic and unusual to the tourist, is common

place, every day to the locals. It all depends on your point of view.

<p>

If you keep a few common premises in mind that is true no matter

where you live in the world, you will be able to find rich subject

matter to photograph. These premise are, that there is only one sun

in the sky, that rises in the east and sets in the west, that there

are weather patterns, seasons, storms, no matter where you live in

the world. What it requires is the same for all great photographs, a

point of view, desire, discipline, hard work, careful planning, and

getting out of bed early enough to be at the location you want at

least one hour before sunrise and staying long past sunset.

<p>

Familiarity is key, by exploring your backyard, your state, the

parks, seashores, old buildings, historic sites, extensively and

repeatedly over the course of time, years, seasons, weather

conditions, keeping notes, mental or written, the landscape will

reveal itself to you. The point is, you have to be out there and in

position when those magical moments happen, because they can happen

at almost anytime, no matter where you live in the world. The more

times you visit a spot, the better your chances. You also have to be

ready to shoot and know how to interpret what you're seeing and

translate it into a finished, successful photograph that says what

you want to say.

<p>

One most recent example is the cover photograph on the 2002 Down the

Shore Lighthouse calendar of the Sandy Hook Lighthouse. This location

is about 20 minutes from my home in NJ. I used to work there summers

for the National Park Service during college and have gone there

many, many times with the intention of making publishable photographs

but never found such a rare and glorious site as: "A Rainbow in

December!"

<p>

It was a lazy dreary Sunday afternoon and I was looking for something

to do, so I decided to take a drive to "The Hook" and see what there

was to see. Fortunately, I decided to grab (but have not always done

so) my 4x5-view camera and bag. A cold front was coming through, it

was breezy and getting chilly. I scouted around the park for

possibilities, and settled on the "same o same o,"�the lighthouse.

Yaaaawwwnnn, I need some variety in my subjects, was running through

my mind. I set up, composed a few shots, but did not expose any film.

The sky was pretty much over cast and I thought of leaving to go to

Twin Lights Historic Site, 5 minutes away. But, I decided to stay,

thinking there would be no difference. Besides, I was just looking

for a little change of scenery to pass the time.

<p>

I broke down the camera, got in the car and waited, turned on some

classical music and did a little reading. After awhile, I looked to

the horizon, there was a break in the clouds coming. A window of

sunlight would soon open up. Still not expecting anything special, I

set up and waited and waited and�the first rays of sun hit the top of

the tower. A telephoto lens close up was good; a few frames shot off.

Then the sky over the lighthouse darkened and a few sprinkles hit the

camera, just be patient, I thought, and waited longer�.Then ... and

�.. THEN!... AND�.. THEN !!!!!!!!! WOW !!!!!!!!!!! THIS INCREDABLE

RAINBOW WAS FORMING�RIGHT OVER THE TOWER!!!!!! I started with a wide

angel shot, then changed lenses and moved closer. This rainbow was

incredible! It was just not going to quit! I was able to get off a

sequence of 3 different views before it was all over.

<p>

A moment in time like that is what I call a "Once in Eternity"

opportunity, when all the elements of time, weather and circumstance

come together and the landscape reveals its sublime glory. It has

about the same chances of happening again as there are of finding

identical snowflakes. Sure, there will be rainbows over Sandy Hook,

NJ in the future. But will they appear as intensely dramatic, will

they appear as a rarity in December, in winter, will they appear

right over the lighthouse, and most importantly, will a skillful

photographer be there to interpret it?

WOW! Some of you are extremely philisophical and poetic thinkers -

guess I must be a simpleton .....

<p>

I take photographs because I like to take photographs. Wheter they

are of my favorite subjects - Civil War Battlefields - or of some

interesting (to me) subject that happens to be in my own backyard. I

happen to live in the Detroit Metropolitan area, and as such, am in

very close proximity to some of the largest, and most modern

automotive manufacturing plants in the world. Additionally, there

are more than a few decaying artifacts of what was at one time, a

world-class manufacturing facility - for example, Henry Ford's

Highland Park plant where the world came a knockin' en masse for a

$5.00 daily wage .....

<p>

Only recently, have I discovered the beauty (to me) of these

behemoths, and will (as soon as I become halfway proficient with my

new Ebony RW45) go on "assignment". The client in this case (as it

is with every case in my situation) is myself. My involvement with

photography is a very personal one. I have never made a dime on any

photograph - although I may eventually considering what I spent

recently on my RW45 and Fujinon 90, 150, 240 & 300 mm lenses!

<p>

Regards - Bob

I used to work with a guy that thought it was stupid of me to enjoy

photography. He claimed that all the pictures had already been taken.

There was nothing left! He then went on to tell me he had always

wanted to be a writer. I didn't tell him to forget it because all the

words had been used before.

I have been published quite a few times. He hasn't. If what we are

doing isn't art, it sure is enjoyable. I enjoy being alone,

appreciating nature. Photography just gives me an excuse to go

roaming in the forest by myself. No, not everything I photograph

turns into a great piece of art. I enjoy it, what is wrong with that?

Chris, a lot what I feel are my best photographs have never been

published. A lot of my run of the mill photographs have been.

Publishers don't seem to want anything different from what is and has

been successful in the past. I'll admit it, I have been guilty of not

making a photograph I felt I wanted to. I'd tell myself that it

wouldn't sell anyway so why bother. I had forgotten why I had gotten

involved in photography in the first place. Due to the annoyance of

dealing with publishers and everyone else that seemed to want

something for nothing, I gave up on photography completely for

several years. I have started again just recently. This time, it is

just for me. I may never try to sell anything again. Chris, don't

judge others if we don't meet your standards of what you feel a

photographer should be. If it makes us happy, isn't that what

matters? Some people enjoy climbing mountains. Is that wrong because

they don't come away from a mountain as an artist? They had fun doing

it!

Walter....For years I had listened to the 'Girl from Ipanema',

and had loved 'Black Orpheous' the first time I saw it, but for years

I said, I don't know anything about Brazil, and its 5,600 miles away.

One particular year I just said to myself, I don't know anybody

there, but I'm going. One of the best decisions of my life, once you

go, you never stop going.

<p>

I've gotten into these 'to be or not to be' discussions around

here, and some 'butt ugly' discussions which I thouroughly dislike,

but what I like about Brazil is what I really like about life, living

simply, doing what you'd like to do, and having as many laughs as you

can while you're.

<p>

There is love and hate and poverty in Brazil, but not a lot of

mean spiritness, deviousness, or peoples with chips on their

shoulders. Most Brazilians are looking for a smile, a joke, a laugh,

and they just live life without a lot of 'moodyness', 'depression',

and 'soul searching'. Most Brazilians are good natured, friendly, and

will split their last beer with you.

<p>

They smile and laugh and 'good nature' their way through life,

and its infectous. I know people who went to Brazil and didn't come

back, they were so mind blown by the place. There certainly is

poverty, it isn't club med, but there is a spirit there strength there

despite what they don't have. People will make do with whatever they

have.

<p>

There is only the rich and the poor, and not really a middle

class in Brazil, which is why Carnaval is so big in Brazil, because

during Carnaval you are equal with everyone else no matter what you do

or have. During Carnaval you're judged on whether you can smile or

laugh, and after being around all the high spirits you feel your feet

lifting a couple of inches off the ground.

<p>

But don't ge me wrong, anytime you go is the right time, and I'm

suggesting that it's a good destination for anybody to check out how

to really live no matter what your problems or dilemmas. Life is so

simple in Brazil, and that's its attraction, it's too hot to go around

grumpy, mean, hating yourself or others.

<p>

It's just not good for the soul, it's photo-op heavan. There are

Afro-Brazilians who are as black as the ace of spades with blue and

green and hazel eyes, blonde hair, every type of shade and color and

mix you can imagine. There is a large German community, the biggest

population of Japanese outside of Japan are located in Brazil.

Classic cars that have been long gone here, are still put-putting

around some parts of Brazil.

<p>

Here in the west coast of the states a lot of people walk around

with that 'leave me the hell alone' look, you don't have that in South

America and Brazil, people will walk up to and start talking to you

like they've known you for twenty years. If you're lost, have trouble

making change, need help, a brazilian will likely show up with asking,

and help you.

<p>

I love the place, because people there know how to live and enjoy

life, period. I go every chance I get, because of how good it makes

me feel, and because its exotic and photogenic everywhere. I just

think you can get too serious about life, myself included, and I

recommend traveling to South America on how to get back in touch with

just enjoying life.

<p>

Walter...I hope I can live long enough to see all of South

America and it's people and places.

There is a difference between stealing beauty and creating it. When

photographers learn to create beauty rather than steal it, they

become true artists. Until then, they are just a bunch of wannabes.

<p>

-John

One of my favorite comments about photography, which I think could be

said in response to your statements, was made by John

Szarkowski. "The simplicity of photography lies in the fact that it

is very easy to make a picture. The staggering complexity of it lies

in the fact that a thousand other pictures of the same subject would

have been equally easy." I've always liked that. As applied to your

statements about everyone doing the same thing, what Mr. Szarkowski's

statement means to me is that everyone isn't doing the same thing and

in factit's virtually impossible for everyone to do the same thing

even if he or she tried. I could plant my tripod exactly where Ansel

Adams planted his for one of his great photographs and I could make

literally thousands of photographs that were different from his and

from each other, just from that one spot.

In response to Wes, I am lucky, for I still make photographs of the

things that interest me and then see if any of them are worth

something to others.

<p>

For Chirs, I understand what you are saying, nature photography seems

to be the overwhelming use for "artistic" phtography. But if we look

close at that premise, I think that seems to be the case because most

photo publications dedicate a large portion of content to the genre.

The general public excepts landscape and nature as the most popular

use of the medium because of the packaging of Ansel Adams and to a

lesser extent Weston. If you want a reproduction of a photograph in

poster form what do people see? Adam's Moonrise, Half Dome, Clearing

Winter Storm, Aspens etc. I don't see to many Ralph Gibson, Robert

Frank, Eugene Smith, Brett Weston, Robert Adams, Winnogard, Evans,

White, Siskind, Clark, Bullock, Heinecken, Brandt posters and

calanders.

<p>

There are those who are pushing the boundries or at least exploring

other genres. Most of it goes on with other formats, I think Large

Format has become synonomous with landscape for a lot of people.

That is why I first purchased a LF. But I think those who are

dedicated to improving thier craft explore many other avenues of

expression. To Steve Simmons credit, he presents quite a few in View

Camera. But I know people upon learning that a print I made of old

cars from the 40s placed along a river bank for erosion control was

made with an 8x10 change the conversation from the content and

compostion of the print to "why waste an 8x10 tranny, couldn't you

have gotten it with 35mm?"

Photography or Art?

<p>

Although I am a painter and photographer I have great difficulty

defining what is, and what is not 'Art'. The following are my

personal observations and definately not a difinitive answer to the

question.

<p>

When I am wearing my photographer's hat (not wide brimmed or

literally you understand!) most of my work is nature and horticulture

and although I take great pains to achieve a pleasing composition,

with good lighting and a technically competent photograph, I would

not describe the result as 'Art'. They are photographs pure and

simple.

<p>

When wearing my artist's smock (again not literally, please believe

me!) the paintings I produce are very personal statements exhibited

in art galleries and as such I would not argue if they were described

as 'Art'. "Works of Art" suggest that they are of great importance

which thank God is not for me to decide!

<p>

However, if still wearing the smock I decide not to use oil or water

colours and choose to use photographic media to produce an artwork

and subsequently exhibit the result in an art gallery, again I would

have no objection if the result was described as 'Art'.

<p>

When I do a search on the web, for 'Art Photography' most of the

results turn out to be large format scenic or nude photographs, a lot

of which are in black and white.

<p>

Is a photograph taken with a large format camera 'Art'?

<p>

Is a photograph of a nude 'Art'?

<p>

Is a scenic photograph 'Art'?

<p>

Is a black and white photograph 'Art'?

<p>

My answer to all the above.... probably not.

<p>

However, I have seen photographs taken on various formats, in colour

and in black in white, of scenes, nudes and all manner of subjects

that I would not hesitate to describe as 'Works of Art'! Photographs

of great importance.

Chris,

I feel you were trying to bring forth a sincere discussion in regards

to the landscape as art and subject matter in photography. I will

try to keep my comments brief as I could ramble on and on about this

since it is a topic close to my heart.

Firstly, you seem to have come to the conclusion (if I understand

your statements correctly) that many individuals are photographing

pristine landscapes in a similar fashion, style, technique etc.

Because so many are out there doing it, and have done it for years

and years it should no longer be considered as an artistic subject.

You seem to think this somehow invalidates such images as having

artistic value and can only be thought of as "pretty" pictures. I

do agree with you that there are many seemingly similar and

repetitive images of landscapes, but the same can be said of most any

photographic subject, be it portraits, still life, nudes, street

photography etc. I personally don't seek out the exact same places

other photographers have been to but even if I do wind up in

Yosemite, which is A. Adams territory it does not mean I can not and

should not photograph there. Chris, you state that people are

missing the whole point of art but I disagree. Just because a

photographic image does not break some new ground showing us the

world in a new light in which hasn't been done before does not

invalidate it as art. Personally, I do differentiate the various

landscape images out there, for I don't view everyone as a successful

one. But when I see landscape images which employ good composition,

interesting lighting, color if not b/w and is skillfully crafted I am

often finding myself drawn into it. Part of the reason is because I

think art is in the eye of the beholder. What one sees as art,

another may see as garbage. Art can be pretty or gritty, it can be

of familiar subjects or seldom seen ones, it can come in all sorts of

shapes and forms. If you find these landscape images as inartistic,

it might be because you just don't relate to the subject. When I

lived in the city of Chicago and attended college there I took some

photography courses and found my choice of subject matter, the

landscape, in the minority. I felt I wasn't taken seriously because

I wasn't trying to "push the envelope" in my choice of subject. I

truly believe these individuals who looked down on me simply couldn�t

relate to the images I took because they were so distant from the

subject. They were city dwellers who were only interested in the

doings of other people in the city. This is fine, but it doesn't

mean anything outside that couldn't and shouldn't be considered as

art. The natural landscape has become a lifelong love for me. I

found myself taking vacations to various national parks and

wilderness areas, going to state parks and driving for hours on the

weekends trying to find places that haven't become farmland or paved

over with most of the natural processes and other living things being

wiped out. (Although I did and do at times photograph such things.)

This love of the natural world has brought me to the Pacific

Northwest so I can live closer to such places and have more access to

them. I did try photographing in my "back yard", for Chicago is a

large city with much to offer. But over and over I found myself

going back to the more natural landscape as subject matter. I can't

speak for other photographers but for me it is simply a love of the

land and a connection I feel in my inner core to the land when out

there photographing away from the noise and fast pace of urban life.

It satisfies a yearn to try to be more in tune with this planet we

call home.

Chris, instead of telling people that they should abandon landscapes

as subject matter, maybe start a discussion on how to make it more

relevant to others, how to expand on it's interpretation

photographically and how to keep it a serious subject matter which I

think it is and really deserves. And for those interested in this

one place to start, if you can find a copy is with a book called

Between Home and Heaven. Contemporary American Landscape

Photography. published in 1992.

Best regards,

Saulius Eidukas (Portland, OR)

Really their is a old saying...

<p>

"there is nothing new under the sun"

<p>

If you look into such things as Jazz they still play the same old

things these days as when they started out many years ago. Nothing

really has changed except the gear they play it on.

<p>

I'm from Australia and yes we have the same thing happening here,

1,000,000 pics of Ayres Rock. but theior is still a sense of calmness

around that rock, the light is different everytime, the seasons bring

different looks, eg Spring with lots of rain bring the wildflowers etc

etc.

<p>

And the general public still like looking at the same well know areas.

<p>

If I ever get to America i'll be in those well known spots not to copy

someone elses image but to create my own and really that is art. It

maybe the same scene but we all see it different. And that's what makes

one artist different than the next

I would just like to THANKS all the contributors and Chris for this

excellent discussion. No nuts and bolts, just good creative input.

Though I think the gentleman with the new Ebony camera should not

wait until he becomes proficient before exploring his favorite

location. Photographers should just go out and quite beating around

the bush. Either just take your new camera right out into the field

and work with it, or take what you are proficient at go work with

that equipment. DOn't waste time! Photography is time.

<p>

For me, photogaphy is proactive, get out there and expose film, you

see something that strikes you, don't stand there and try to do a

self Freudian analization as to why. Just shot the damn thing the

best way you can. Then develope it and print what you want. If you

accomplish what you set out to do, GREAT, analyze why! If you failed,

so what, analyze why. No one has to see your failures but you, and

only as long as they stay out of the garbage can. Or maybe you do

have something good and you just do not realize it yet. Then file it

away and look at it in a month or a year or two. You may then

discover you do have something worth while to print.

<p>

My feeling is, if you cannot find interesting subject matter to

inturpret in your own backyard, then chances are you will have

trouble in somebody elses.

I have the impression that many large format photographers are in fact

in love with their equipment, and that taking photographs is merely a

celebration of this love. Which easily leads to calendar photography.

Nobody marries a woman they DON'T like, nobody wears clothes they

DON'T like, nobody paints with brushes they DON'T like, and nobody

keeps a camera that they can't stand.

<p>

I am unabashedly and insanely in love with my 810MII, and if they

could graft a butt onto my camera, my wife would be in serious

trouble. If somebody picked some of my work to put on a Calender I

would feel fortunate as hell.

Yes Jon, nobody would bear with the hell of working with a LF camera if not in love with the tools. Any skilled

craftsman likes his tools and if you look at the life of some great photographers, they were very aware of their

cameras and techniques. A.A. is the perfect example. He played of his camera like he played piano. Of course,

if the tools are an important part in the process of expressing ones skills and creativity, the tools alone do not

make the craftsman and there are certainly some out there who like the cameras more than what can be

accomplished with them. Nothing wrong! Some collect cars, other collect cameras! But getting caught in

worshipping gear is certainly a risk for any serious photographer and can divert from the pursut of ones vision

and become a trap. My good friend and Master Emil Salek used to hammer this to me: "Paul, get rid of all your

lenses (or give them to me) and keep only one. Then get the most of that one lens until you master the sense

of composition, shapes and volumes. Throw away your crutches and face the world with your own vision. Make

photographs that are yours and not so and so's!" I must admit that even if I didn't like it at first, his words

made sense! (If you'd like to know, I did not give my lenses to him... Oh, just one! which did not suit my shooting

style anyway. Maybe I should have ;-)

I did not ask Paul to give me his lenses! I already have hem all! But

I see that Paul would like to involve me in the discussion. Well, I

am at this very moment bitching on my Calumet C1 because it has no

depth of field at the 2:1 ratio (like any 8x10 in general), which I

would badly need to shoot that beautiful close up that I can see on

my GG and I first have to get that shot before I come back here. I

also sometimes say that it is more important to practice than to talk.

Paul if you have any other lenses that do not suit your style I will

be glad to help you and take them..:-)).

<p>

Seriously now, is it really in love with the gear or in love with the

big negative? For myself I'm really not that much in love with

equipment. Although I do belive to get the best available I can

afford simply because there is nothing like having the right tool for

the job, I really do not mind if I own an Ebony or a Gandolfi, I

think with both you can make beautiful prints. I think most LF

photographers are still in awe of the big beautiful negative and the

tonality and texture they can exhibit.

Calendar Photography? I doubt AA had calendars in mind when he was

shooting. But his calendar is probably one of the most popular. I buy

one every year, inspite of the many complimentary calendars I get

from buying publishers. Shooting for calendars is like shooting for a

commercial client, it pays the bills.

Yes Paul....I know better, but like my beautiful wife, this

camera was one of the few things I've gotten that was even better

having, than getting.

This is a long thread, but interesting. I'll read the rest of the

answers later but.......Had a fabulous time in Death Valley today with

the 5X7 and the 8X10. Made about 12 images just like you described

except probably not as good as a whole bunch of other folks might do!

I had a fabulous time! Ebem if I ripped the film out of the holders

and threw it away. I enjoy the process enough, just being there and

doing them that I'm "Paid in full."

<p>

This is something I've given a lot of thought to though. And I know

you're basically right. And it's getting worse not better with the

whole digital thing. At least they can put a show of Ansul's stuff

together and say well this is the same but different. With digital

they'll really all be the same!! Perfectly the same, and samely

perfect! So what do we do?? I recall a couple of years ago wanting

to know what some judges comments were on a submission for a grant.

It was the same predictable "nice, but doesn't push the envelope..."

<p>

Then on the other hand I've frequented galleries where the "avant

guarde" are pushing the envelope. Sorry, I'm not gonna make pictures

of a person that has both female breasts and a penis. And a whole lot

of other stuff that is even more wierd than that.

<p>

So what to do? What I want, mostly, whether there's any market or

reception or not! People are still buying "Box-Car Willie" at K-Mart

aren't they. In fact, though the thought is awful, whoever owns that

crap is making a lot more money on it than most jazz piano players.

That doesn't make it good, it just establishes there are other markets

than "leading edge." I don't really want to be the "Box-Car Willie"

of photographers, but I don't care to push the envelope out beyond

disgusting and vile just to push the envelope.

<p>

Now I'll go back and finish reading all the other posts! Thanks for

the good topic. I also get tired of "which side do the notches go on

when you load these things?"

Rob

<p>

Don't be certain about what was on Ansel's mind when he was

shooting. Throughout the period he was shooting his best stuff

(pre-Hasselblad and pre-circa 1952) Ansel was shooting much

of his stuff on commercial assignment for Yosemite Curry

Company, Arizona Highways etc. Then, of course, there were his

great propoganda photos he did with Dorothea Lange which

were dropped over Japanese territory from military aircraft.

<p>

A point that is often lost when considering the legacy of many of

the 'past masters', and 'present-day masters' for that matter, is

that were (are) WORKING photographers.

<p>

Cheers, ... Walter

I found the answer from Saulius Eidukas to be the most interesting. I

think that everybody is an artist if he loves what he is doing. Art for

me is a way of looking, and seeing the world. Some of us can see it in

a new way - they are geniuses, big artists. Most of us see it

"normaly", in a more common way. In a world of photography it means

that most of us take the pictures that show how, exactly, the things

are looking like (shots are pin sharp from front to back, with nice

light, etc.). I found that the most creative landscape photographers

are in Scandinavia. It seems like they are "playing" with the camera

and nature. (I'm not from Scandinavia).

Because most of readers of this forum come from America, you will

probably don't like me and that what I'm going to write now:

It is very boring to look at most of landscape photographs from

America. You have a very beautiful country, but how long can I look at

hundreds of pictures of "delicate arch", "colorado canion", "bla bla

canion", etc.? It seems for me like almost everyone of you have the

same secret book titled "From where and when, and with what lens you

can take an outstanding picture of America's landscape". I found only

few landscape photographers from America, who photograph east of

America, and these pictures were more interesting for me than

"canions". There won't be a second Ansel Adams, so leave the "canions"

and look around your home. May be some of you will become a genius?

<p>

Best regards

<p>

Lukasz