Like a face, a mountain has a preferred side. I want to show an example.
Here are two views of the Tetons from different places. One shows the iconic look of the famous peaks, the other is seldom seen probably because it does not look like the classic Teton shot. You may even like it better, that’s not the point here, The point is that each landscape has some view that maximizes the expected look of that place.
For the Grand Tetons, we are used to seeing the view from the barns, Schawbacher Landing (shown here) Snake River overlook and a few other places along hwy 89. Oxbow Bend features Mount Moran, and is also an Icon, but is a different mountain.
The view from Jenny Lake is so close to the peaks and from such a low angle that the entire nature of them is changed.
I think it is less popular for that reason. I once tried a sunset shot of the Tetons from the west side. I was very disappointed.
It was smoky this trip and no clouds, so neither of these shots are great images. They are simply a way to illustrate a point.
Ummm ... they are both quite nice in their own right.
The "classic view" does a very nice job of representing your "all in focus" yet having the ability to "draw the eye" around the scene without the use of "selective focus". My guess is that this is the kind of shot that appeals most to your aesthetic approach.
It has great "push/pull" attributes to it.
warm/cool
near/far
smooth/texture
bright/dark
positive space/negative space
hard/soft
Along with ...
framing/lines/scale/balance
While "in focus" / "oof" is a readily used "push/pull' technique to "draw the eye" ... it isn't the only way to do so. This is a nice illustration of how to use the more 'subtle' elements to harmoniously do so as well and still have everything "in focus".
I know it isn't the point of your post ... but it is a nice job, nonetheless ... and I feel it well represents in an image what you've been trying to convey to us in words.
Hi Rusty. The last time I was at the Tetons, I noticed how much the character of the mountains changed as I drove south. I have been driving by the Tetons for 30 years, usually on the west side along I15 where it is visible on clear days for maybe a 30 mile stretch. No mistaken the shape.
But On this trip I was over on the east side on 89 which is where all the famous icon shots are taken. Then I did Jenny Lake once just for fun, and was surprised. It might not even be recognized from this angle. I just wanted to share this piece of photo insight.
This Jenny Lake shot was taken mid morning. Next day I was there for sunrise but did not like any of my shots because of smoke (not visible but still contrast killing) and the fact that the mountains are sort of bland in direct red light.
I have my Schwabacher Landing shot from an earlier trip. Always looking to repeat or improve. but sometimes that's not to be.
I realized something as well. I have a bucket list of icons I want to shoot. Gives me an excuse to go on vacations. But I usually get many more photo trips 5 to 50 miles from home between these icon trips. They are unplanned where the long trips are planned. Both are part of the hobby.
For the Schwabacher shot, I was there early enough to do some milky way shots in total darkness until arriving headlights messed it up. I have some at longer focal length and the entire series of alpine light. But I waited for the sun to light up those aspen. Most of the other people were gone by then.
Hi Ben, not sure I agree with your conclusions or your statement that mountains have 'faces' (unlike architecture, which most definitely has faces". IMO the iconic view of Schawbacher Landing owes much of its popularity not to the mountains, but to the combinaation of river, reflections, fall color AND the mountains. Your 2nd view is less interesting, not because we don't immediatly identiy the peaks, but because the scene lacks the elements of composition and subject that work together to create a scene that is 'greater' than its parts.
sadja wrote:
Hi Ben, not sure I agree with your conclusions or your statement that mountains have 'faces' (unlike architecture, which most definitely has faces". IMO the iconic view of Schawbacher Landing owes much of its popularity not to the mountains, but to the combinaation of river, reflections, fall color AND the mountains. Your 2nd view is less interesting, not because we don't immediatly identiy the peaks, but because the scene lacks the elements of composition and subject that work together to create a scene that is 'greater' than its parts.
sadja wrote:
Hi Ben, not sure I agree with your conclusions or your statement that mountains have 'faces' (unlike architecture, which most definitely has faces". IMO the iconic view of Schawbacher Landing owes much of its popularity not to the mountains, but to the combinaation of river, reflections, fall color AND the mountains. Your 2nd view is less interesting, not because we don't immediatly identiy the peaks, but because the scene lacks the elements of composition and subject that work together to create a scene that is 'greater' than its parts.
Guess your concept of the Tetons is not like mine. I could draw them or see them drawn in a quick sketch and know what it was. But they only have that shape from a certain range of view points.
The famous Snake River overlook scene has a different but still recognizable view.
By the way, Don H showed me this place in 2005 and said this was pretty close to where AA shot it.
Here is the view from the west side, as close as I could get. But this is pretty much what they look like from Debois Id to Idaho Falls when driving I-15, only 50 or so miles further west.
These are drive to shots. I don't backpack anymore but I do hike up to perhaps 500 feet elevation gain and a mile in. My photo gear weighs 35 pounds or so and my back gives me trouble after a while.
I am going to do an icon project where I will give some tips on the icons I have done with respect t time and place.
I wish that I had some examples at hand, but you could also use views of Mt Timpanagos from American Fork, Orem, and then Provo to illustrate the same point.
From American Fork you get the classic front-on view. From Orem you get Little Baldy in the line of sight and the view is not so great. But from Provo you get a angled view suggesting that the mountain is towering over you. This is in the space of about 7 miles, IIRC.
I have most of those and you are correct. I really like the view from Silver Lake flat and also from Deer Creek Res. Nebo is simillar. a giant of a mountian when driving north on I-15. Not much from the back side.
