If you were manager of the “Landscape Section”....
...should each of the following images be acceptable to post in the “Landscape Photography Section”
(no critiques, please!)
Please respond to each number with “Yes” or “No”
Thanks,
Dave
1-Yes
2-Yes
3-Yes
4-No
5-No
6-Yes
7-Yes
8-Yes
9-No
10-No
--Bob
Uuglypher wrote:
...should each of the following images be acceptable to post in the “Landscape Photography Section”
(no critiques, please!)
Please respond to each number with “Yes” or “No”
Thanks,
Dave
1,2,3,6,7,8 Yes
4,5,9,10
Just my opinion (and Bob's).
Ditto on first response. Overall let it be.
Only on UHH would one see a post like this. Every other photography fortune I visit, members seems to know what a landscape forum is. Shaking head.
Why not just start the forum, if someone posts a bird shot or anything non landscape, one of the moderators can delete the thread and pm the OP the reason. People are able to lean.
Just so you know, Dave, I've declined the nomination
There is not yet a final definition, but at this point in time if I were the one to choose:
1. yes
2. no
3. yes
4. no, only because I agreed with your comment about close-ups vs vast and because there is a Close-up Forum already
5. no
6. emphatically yes (abstracts!)
7. yes
8. yes
9. no
10. no
The only difference between mine and Bob Malarz: #2. The subject of that photo is the mill, not the landscape. BUT!!!! Let me quote IDGuy, who just posted the following to my thread:
"It is over-controlling and demeaning to remove someone’s post unless they are offensive or obviously in error. You’ll for sure discourage that poster and possibly others if they find out about the one person judge and jury."So if up to me, #2 would stand and I would hope to promote discussion about what is the subject and why/why not it is a "landscape."
#1 yes
#2 yes
#3 Yes
#4 No
#5 No
#6 Yes
#7 Yes
#8 Yes
#9 No
#10 No
rmalarz wrote:
1-Yes
2-Yes
3-Yes
4-No
5-No
6-Yes
7-Yes
8-Yes
9-No
10-No
--Bob
I agree also.
and,
Knowing up front what would or wouldn't be acceptable can help to prevent angst in the future.
tdekany wrote:
Only on UHH would one see a post like this. Every other photography fortune I visit, members seems to know what a landscape forum is. Shaking head.
They weren't borne knowing, so they come to UHH first in order to learn. Other forums might to too intimidating.
--
rmalarz wrote:
1-Yes
2-Yes
3-Yes
4-No
5-No
6-Yes
7-Yes
8-Yes
9-No
10-No
--Bob
Same results.
Just what is the point? Are you saying there are people who can't tell the difference?
The only case I can think is a language issue where a non-English speaker might not know the word.
robertjerl wrote:
Same results.
Just what is the point? Are you saying there are people who can't tell the difference?
Apparently so. I'm holding out for #2 not being a landscape
tdekany wrote:
Only on UHH would one see a post like this. Every other photography fortune I visit, members seems to know what a landscape forum is. Shaking head.
Why not just start the forum, if someone posts a bird shot or , one of the moderators can delete the thread and pm the OP the reason. People are able to lean.
xxxxxxxxx
I agree, td, that “...anything non landscape” should be fairly unequivocally obvious, by my head started shaking at the apparently expanded realms of acceptance mentioned under the originally proposed definition.
Hence this attempt to objectify the “picture vs. thousand words” concept.
Personally, I find my appetite for exemplary landscapes by others, and helpful comments on my own to be satisfied by their regular appearance in FYC. and occasional perusal of the gallery.
The one, albeit fairly frequent,divergence from my own long held categorization of “landscape” (including all other broad “scapes” ) is the inclusion of “micro-landscapes / micro-environments /and generally lots of nature macronshots.
I am quite comfortable knowing where I can find them in UHH without adding them into a “Landscape Section”.
Dave
G Brown
Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK
The only two I would object to are The bird and the snow. BIF or not F has a section already. Snow is abstract - it has little landscape value in this shot.
The mill is in the landscape had it been part of the mill it would have to go. Landscape either stands in its 'view' or because of a subject within the view.
iffy ones are the cornstalk and the leaf....Yes they are a close up - but they pertain to an outdoor view. They do not exclude their setting as the snow did. As Macro isn't always 1:1 a close-up can be a subject within landscape. Ratio of background area being larger.
my view.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.