If you were manager of the “Landscape Section”....
Nov 28, 2018 14:08:54 #
I would say #2 is a landscape. To me the subject is the environment in which a mill is located; a part of the landscape.
Nov 28, 2018 14:12:16 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
Orientation: I have many vertical landscapes img ... (show quote)
Linda, This image (from a former life) is 100% nature, it is also 100% about the waterfall. Would it also qualify as "landscape"?
Nov 28, 2018 14:15:50 #
Nov 28, 2018 14:29:22 #
Rich1939 wrote:
Linda, This image (from a former life) is 100% nature, it is also 100% about the waterfall. Would it also qualify as "landscape"?
I.M.O. Yes. Just as much about nature and about the wetland winter reeds in #3 and about nature and about the terraced rock-scape in #7.
Dave
Nov 28, 2018 14:36:22 #
I might suggest this article in Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landscape_photography
This might help narrow the definition a bit.
--Bob
This might help narrow the definition a bit.
--Bob
Nov 28, 2018 14:39:25 #
[quote=Linda From Maine]Yes, and that's why I added, 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."
I'm not positive of Uuglypher's purpose in posting this topic...??
Sorry, Linda, not to have spelled it out. It’s purpose is to elicit exactly the sorts of responses that it has, (and, I hope, many more responses from others in UHH) to get a better handle on what the general sense of what “landscape “ means to the majority of responders from UHH.
Dave
I'm not positive of Uuglypher's purpose in posting this topic...??
Sorry, Linda, not to have spelled it out. It’s purpose is to elicit exactly the sorts of responses that it has, (and, I hope, many more responses from others in UHH) to get a better handle on what the general sense of what “landscape “ means to the majority of responders from UHH.
Dave
Nov 28, 2018 14:53:41 #
rmalarz wrote:
I might suggest this article in Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landscape_photography
This might help narrow the definition a bit.
--Bob
This might help narrow the definition a bit.
--Bob
Or it might broaden it beyond our conventional understanding - it mentions close-up and fisheye lenses.
But it does suggest another criterion - static subjects (although moving water should not disqualify an image) and ambient light (the presence of city lighting could be considered ambient).
But you can easily see why trying to nail down a specific specification may be more trouble than it's worth.
Nov 28, 2018 15:02:08 #
rmalarz wrote:
I might suggest this article in Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landscape_photography
This might help narrow the definition a bit.
--Bob
This might help narrow the definition a bit.
--Bob
Now I think I know where the term “microscopic” offered in the definition in the original thread came from..
Another excellent on-line gallery of landscapes can be found by Googling “Landscape imagery” > Images
Dave
Nov 28, 2018 15:17:56 #
Might it not be more efficient to list what wouldn't be acceptable in a UHH forum section on landscapes.
Nov 28, 2018 15:30:46 #
1-Yes
3-Yes
4-No
5-No
6-Yes
7-Yes
8-Yes
9-No
10-No
I agree with the above. I originally thought "yes" to #2 but Linda from Maine has me wavering on that one.
3-Yes
4-No
5-No
6-Yes
7-Yes
8-Yes
9-No
10-No
I agree with the above. I originally thought "yes" to #2 but Linda from Maine has me wavering on that one.
Nov 28, 2018 16:15:52 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
Just so you know, Dave, I've declined the nominati... (show quote)
I agree with Bob Malarz too, but Linda, why do you question #2 as a landscape? How would you label it, if not a Landscape? I read your subsequent post re intent and think I understand your reservations. Just wondering what you think would be an appropriate label or category. I shoot a lot of pictures that have buildings or man made objects set in landscapes - sometimes I use them elements and sometimes as focal points, but I have always considered them to be landscapes.
Nov 28, 2018 16:28:57 #
Rich1939 wrote:
Wowsa, great impact for me! In my own topic, an edited draft includes "Landscape photography is primarily about nature: the vast outdoor spaces in the world, including the sea or other bodies of water." I don't see how you can separate water from the land on which it exists. Linda, This image (from a former life) is 100% nature, it is also 100% about the waterfall. Would it also qualify as "landscape"?
But, happily, my opinion doesn't matter because we now - finally - have volunteers to manage the new section
repleo wrote:
That's an excellent question, Phil! I can accept the photo as landscape when offered no satisfactory alternative, but it still doesn't speak to me as well representing the "the vast outdoor spaces in the world" or even just "outdoor spaces" because I'm stuck on the importance of the mill as subject (I expanded on that earlier in this thread). Now I see why some discussion in dsmeltz's topic went into "landscape" vs. "scene." It's a scene! but Linda, why do you question #2 as a landscape? How would you label it, if not a Landscape?...
But it's all moot as there are now several volunteers putting together the section - and their emphasis may be nothing like I offered in my own topic.
Thanks for making me think!
Nov 28, 2018 16:32:35 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
Apparently so. I'm holding out for #2 not being a landscape
Linda, is that because it features a man-made central subject? What, then, to do about urban landscapes?
Nov 28, 2018 16:36:54 #
DWU2 wrote:
The subject (as I see it) is man-made, yes. The land is just "there" IMO.Linda, is that because it features a man-made central subject? What, then, to do about urban landscapes?
Urban landscapes were mentioned in the draft as being acceptable for the new forum, but I'm not the moderator (others have accepted the challenge - yippee!).
Here is an old photo of mine I would classify as urban landscape, even though I have not yet read any references as to how the experts define
Nov 28, 2018 17:03:39 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
The subject (as I see it) is man-made, yes. The land is just "there" IMO.
Urban landscapes were mentioned in the draft as being acceptable for the new forum, but I'm not the moderator (others have accepted the challenge - yippee!).
Here is an old photo of mine I would classify as urban landscape, even though I have not yet read any references as to how the experts define
Urban landscapes were mentioned in the draft as being acceptable for the new forum, but I'm not the moderator (others have accepted the challenge - yippee!).
Here is an old photo of mine I would classify as urban landscape, even though I have not yet read any references as to how the experts define
It's hard to know where to draw the line. Although it's no blue-ribbon winner, what about this one, with landscape in foreground and urban in background?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.