Jump to content

Favorite landscape photographers


Glenn McCreery

Recommended Posts

<p>My interest in landscape photography started when I purchased a 4x5 view camera and attended Ansel Adam's Yosemite Institute in the late 70's, so the majority of my favorites tend to be the older generation of film photographers. My criterion for favorite is; if I owned one of their prints, would I frame it and hang it on my wall? My list includes, in no particular order,<br>

Ansel Adams<br>

Brett Weston<br>

Edward Weston<br>

Wynn Bullock<br>

Galen Rowell<br>

Eliot Porter<br>

Paul Caponigro<br>

William Garnett<br>

George Tice<br>

John Sexton<br>

Bradford Washburn<br>

More recent photographers that I appreciate include Marc Adamus, Trey Ratcliff, and William Lau. I am sure that there are many more landscape photographers whom I might appreciate, so I would like to hear of your favorites. </p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Some of the post-modernists have been attacking poor old Ansel now for some years. Or hadn't you heard? It's so passé to like Adams.<br>

I think it says almost everything about Adams's critics that they find William Mortensen (aka, the Antichrist) superior to Adams. Love them gorilla suits, I guess.<br>

I'd sure go with your non-exclusive list, meself.</p>

<p><em>(And yes, I am a grouchy mood today. Want to make something of i</em>t?)</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I'm not terribly excited by the work of the old classic landscapers such as Glenn McCreery mentions. Not that I don't like any of their work at all , but even a lot of Adams' work leaves me quite cold these days, and I tend to prefer a rather more contemporary and interpretative approach.</p>

<p>So for me I'd rather spend time looking at these guys, several of whom I'd struggle to justify classifying as dedicated landscape photographers. <br>

David Maisel<br>

Michael Kenna<br>

Edward Burtynsky<br>

Roman Lorenc<br>

Hans Strand<br>

Guillermo De Angelis<br>

Bruce Percy<br>

Nadav Kander</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Glenn, the <em>This Is Mars</em> book from which I took those is just gorgeous. If you're interested, I would highly recommend it. Took me completely by surprise.</p>

<p>Charles Stobbs, back in 1993, Komar and Melamid did world surveys, country by country, of what people want in a picture. Landscapes -- with people -- won almost everywhere. They then made paintings that met the preferences from the surveys. The USA painting is of mountains, a lake, and has George Washington, three pilgrims and three deer in it.</p>

<p>See <a href="http://awp.diaart.org/km/usa/most.html">the USA painting here</a>. See <a href="http://awp.diaart.org/km/surveyresults.html">the survey results here,</a> and <a href="http://awp.diaart.org/km/painting.html">the paintings they made for each country here</a>. [Note that in almost all country's the <em>least</em> favorite was any kind of abstract.]</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Thanks for pointing me to a few new landscape photographers. I like many of their images but they won't replace the Ansel Adams in my house (I wish it was an original :-). For very personal reasons I'd like to add<br>

Jim Brandenburg <br>

to the list.<br>

Julie,<br />the Komar and Melamid project is fascinating, though one has to wonder whether the average of thousands of surveys really produces favorites or simply averages filtered through the preferences of the two artists. HiRISE images (which I find absolutely cool), due to their often abstract nature, should not make it onto anybody's favorite list. Of course the camera takes thousands (millions ?) of images - most of them probably excruciatingly boring, except for the guys who study Martian geomorphology, except for the few that are chosen for publication in a book. For the same reason some of Washburn's aerial survey photographs are rather pleasing abstracts, but many are just dreadfully uninspiring (mostly taken for documentary purposes I assume).</p>

Christoph Geiss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I guess it's impossible for me to say that I like *both* Ansel Adams <em>and</em> the HiRise pictures, though for very different reasons. I didn't realize this was a zero sum game.</p>

<p>I'm dumbfounded that anybody could find any picture of Mars "boring." (However, since you said it, I do believe you're telling the truth.) I remember the very first picture from Mars, from one of the Rovers, of a flat bunch of red mud and rocks. It gave me chills. I was awestruck. And I still am.</p>

<p>As to "except for the few that are chosen for publication," isn't that what photography <em>is</em>? Before, during and after? Or are all of your pictures spotted at first glance, and executed perfectly with none that are boring or worse?</p>

<p>If it's a photograph, and it's a landscape, it qualifies as a landscape photograph.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Do "sky-scapes" count? If so, have a look at a remarkable book, 'The Last Cosmology' by Kikuji Kawada (2015). A true visionary. For some unusual photographs of trees and forests, seek out 'Spirit of Forest', by Kiyonaga Yasuo (2007), a large format landscape photographer who does much alteration of his images, giving them a ghostly look. While I do admire many of the famous photographers listed by other posts, these two Japanese photographers are my current favourites.</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Charles, I don't think Kikuji Kawada is going to squeak through — and I don't think he'd want to, do you?</p>

<p>On Japanese landscape photographers, what do you think of Toshio Shibata? He's nothing like your favorites, but he's also nothing like traditional landscape photographers. (I like him very much.)</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I study enough scientific images for a living that I can find plenty of them boring in an artistic sense. That does not diminish their scientific value. Some may even have artistic merit. I do not dispute that HiRISE produces plenty of landscape images, however, the original post asked about "favorite landscape" photographers. A machine that mindlessly snaps image after image, based on previously selected target coordinates won't make it on my list.</p>
Christoph Geiss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 3 weeks later...

Christopher Burkett. The remaining color film and print Photographer relying exclusively on wet print developing. Utilizing the last of Cibachrome chemistry who's work can be seen at the Photography West Gallery studio in downtown Carmel on Dolores St. There's no explaining the impact that his Photographs have on the eye unless you see them in person. There's no better definition of the Phenomenon of, "Depth," until you see these prints in person. Galleries throughout the US.

http://christopherburkett.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don. I have an opposite view on Burkett. I've seen his work "in the flesh" - mostly in Cannon Beach- and always been a bit disappointed because for me, it doesn't live up to what I've seen online. I do wonder how many prints these increasingly aged luminaries like Burkett, Tom Till, the Muenches, Fatali etc are selling these days vs a decade or two ago. Maybe I've got it wrong, but I do wonder whether the world hasn't moved past red rocks in Velvia? Don't get me wrong I liked this stuff too- and I'm looking at a bookcase full of their work and the UK equivalents. But things change, and I guess I have too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

David-- Yes there has been a change in landscape style. There seems to be a trend of under saturated and unpolarized. I have seen my share of bleached out, nearly white skies, foliage with nasty reflections and burned highlights in the scene. I believe that this style was brought about by the move to digital by most shooters. Editors/publishers came to expect this understated look and so when film was submitted for publication, it was considered "dated". The style pendulum has swung too far into the understated camp in my opinion but I agree that Velvia, when abused was too far in the saturated camp. Velvia could not be used in all landscape cases and that got shooters in trouble. I do like the Provia compromise.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
A living legend? David Muench for me. It's not just the images, it's how broad and extensive this man's experience is. I went to a few trips with him. Loved his easy compositions and gentle manners. Not the greatest instructor, but somehow his photos came out just "right" with an inspirational flair. I asked him about composition, to my surprise he said Mary I never learned these things until later in my life (i.e., when he had to teach). :) He is a natural. Edited by Mary Doo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not pay much attention to landscape photography really but I guess Michael Kenna would be my favorite. He is actually the only famous landscape photographer that I know the name of that shoots film. I saw him on you-tube.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...