Cany143 Loc: SE Utah

I've watched a few videos, I guess, but mostly I don't. That's because it seems like every time I did, what I mostly came away with was that plane tickets to Iceland weren't cheap, that bears'll eat you in Yellowstone, and that the only way to shoot landscapes was to shave 40 years off my age. Oh, and that I really blew my chances of becoming a millionaire by overlooking the joy$ of becoming a Travel Agent.

The camera stuff was simple 'cuz I already have a camera (or three, or --krikey!-- more). And I already had a darkroom (back in the day) and a couple of righteously app'ed computers (in the present). Can't remember having ever read a whole book about composition, but I'd read enough one-liners and quips about the most obvious of things that I wanted to gag, so I relied instead on what noted photographers like J.M.W. Turner and Carl Jung and Andrew Wyeth (and Emile Corot and Samuel Peter Rolt Triscott and a sizeable number of Hudson Valley School and Barrier Canyon Style figures, and maybe Lao Tsu, too, but maybe not so much) had shown me, and started to sort of get the hang of things.

There's been some good suggestions made, and you might wanna take note. Then forget 'em all and go shoot whatever hunk of land it is you connect with. Or whatever hunk of land it is that connects with you.

BebuLamar

Well the OP doesn't have a Canon but I think he has the best Nikon mirrorless. May be he has to upgrade to Canon.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Use the lowest ISO on the camera that isn't an "Extended" ISO. It'll be close to 100.

Get a Depth of Field calculator for your laptop or smartphone (DOFC is what I use. The same app runs on iPhones and Macs.) It will teach you when you can get better results with a wider aperture!

AVOID small apertures more than two stops smaller than the optimum aperture* on the lens you are using. MOST lenses are at their best when used about two or three stops down from wide open. On full frame cameras, apertures smaller than f/11 can lead to diffraction limiting of sharpness. I would set f/5.6 or f/8 on a 35mm lens and adjust shutter and ISO to accommodate that.

Use a lens or a camera with image stabilization (IS/VR/VC/OIS, Dual IS, Dual IS II, IBIS, ILIS...) when not using a tripod.

Do not use autofocus. Use the depth of field calculator to determine what will work best, and focus manually.

I like to use a mild wide angle lens (35mm on full frame, 17mm on Micro 4/3, 24mm on APS-C), as my starting point. For scenes where I don't mind a little distortion, I'll go wider. For distance compression, I'll go much longer.

*You can look up test reports for the most popular lenses on review sites and find the aperture range with the highest resolution, or you can do your own testing in a controlled environment.

tgreenhaw

Photography is both an art and a science.

The science part is the mechanics of recording reality.

The art is using the tools you have to convey an emotion or idea. In order to do this, you must select something you perceive and use the tools to draw the viewers attention to it. This is done through composition, lighting and depth of field.

In your example photo, the composition does not draw the eye to anything. With a very wide depth of field, the entire image becomes the subject without anything specific of interest.

If I were to take this photograph, I would use the foreground as the main subject with the distant background and sky as a large backdrop. The nondescript background, out of focus to imply distance and a plain sky would draw attention to the foreground. I might also get low to the ground to add perspective to the foreground subject matter. Here is a rough idea of what I might do.

You might consider a trip to the library to read a good book on using composition to express your vision.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

YUP! 3-D? The big challenge in all kinds of non-stereoscopic photography is interpreting a 3-dimension scene, subject, or object on a 2-dimensional pieceof paper or a screen. That has a lot to do with seeing light and using it to create modeling, light and shadow, and the illusion of dimensionality. Flat lighting=flat pictures!

docbradd Loc: Sacramento,CA

Excellent UserId, you can apply variations to nearly any aspect of photography

pminyard Loc: Bartlett, Tennessee

You might look at this site: https://www.capturelandscapes.com/comprehensive-guide-to-landscape-photography/

bkwaters

Awesome examples.

ssmiller Loc: crescent city, ca

Nice answer, What led me to look at/ attracted me to it? I have never thought about it like that, Thanks.

John H. Loc: Central Washington State

There are three ducks along the left side and a tree that is about to fall over.
If I were standing there, I would focus on the sideways duck and include the tree. Would not include any of the shiny foreground water and only about ¾ of the flat grass in the back. None of the tall growth.
There are likely other things out there, but given how the photo was taken those things can be ignored.

linda lagace

So. Concentrate on what it is that made you think "the scene looks amazing". Says you have the eye. You just don't know how to translate it to a pic. So focus on the scene. Ask yourself. what is amazing . What really makes me feel sad or happy or whatever. Is it the tree or the shadow of the tree. Is it the weed or it's reflection. Is it the edge of the shoreline. Then zoom into that. Play with exposure and depth of field to emphasize the feeling you have. If it's the whole scene definitely use the rule of thirds as everyone has pointed out but find one thing in that scene that you want to emphasize. It's hard and something I can't quite do yet. But I think you have to be a storyteller. Make up a story about something in your scene and focus on that both in your mind:s eye and with your camera.

Burkley Loc: Park City

I go back to my old film days when I shot 64 or 100 speed film for landscapes. I still like a low ISO for landscape. F stop is most often 5.6-8.

Shooting in 1 of 3 conditions helps: morning, evening and with dramatic weather. I like landscapes that have a center of interest. I’ve even started to put animals or humans in my landscapes, or something human like a dock or backpack or people.

Depth of field helps, so sometimes I use a 70-200. Rule of thirds helps with composition. So does finding structural curves or vertical lines. Horizontal features with nothing to break them up is usually pretty boring. Also, I break all my suggestions at some point and get an unintentional shot that turns out pretty good.

Dennis833 Loc: Australia

I've managed to make a living out of shooting landscapes and my advice is study the work of the best most successful landscape photographers. Don't waste time listen to any self titled experts on Youtube. Find a photographer with a style of work that you admire and then go out in search of similar scenes to shoot and experiment on. Get your eye tuned in first and then deal with the technical side bit by bit. Good luck.

jwohlhueter

Sorry but this person is borred and just posting to see what can be dredged up. His icon shows an understanding of composition. He/she has created 300 topics and over 3600 messages since joining 8 years ago.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

After 6 pages of replies and no further comments from the OP, I'm thinking this is a a troll post.
--Bob