Is technology ruining landscape photography? - FM Forums

Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

FM Forum Rules
Landscape Posting Guidelines

FM Forums | Landscape Photographer | Join Upload & Sell

3 … 5 6 end

Archive 2013 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

I don't know about you folks, but movies have strongly influenced my perception of photography for at least 50 years. I think Kodachrome was the main look, and that was pretty saturated. Now when I see an older film I can see that we have progressed past that look.

Jul 03, 2013 at 07:03 PM

Sneakyracer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

allstarimaging wrote:
As I was looking through a number of posts on this forum I was becoming more and more aware of how so many images seemed to have over the top processing. Colors that are over saturated, HDR images that look like animation, are shadows allowed in an image or must every thing be shot with bracketed exposures and then stacked in photoshop? How many over saturated soft waterfall shots do you see and say to yourself "Wow..where are the elves and the trolls?

It's the same in the portrait forum. Every shot the subject has impossibly white eyes and teeth, plastic...Show more →

Call it the D800 effect.

Jul 03, 2013 at 07:24 PM

Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

Photography is an interpretive art form and everyone has different tastes. Has digital ruined landscape? Heck no. It has catapulted it forward.

Jul 03, 2013 at 07:37 PM

Sneakyracer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

On a more serious note.

There is a huge gamma of situations in regards to how a place and moment in time is portrayed in an image.

Places like Yosemite, The Bernese Alps, The Grand Canyon etc are such amazing places that being there, even during midday, just takes your breath away. More than any image can make you feel since photography lacks the three dimensionality and sense of scale that standing there gives you.

Capturing an interesting moment (weather/light/conditions) is key to make images at those places special.

But, I have seen images of places that you can tell (if you know or later when you go) are mediocre or small scale and are made into an interesting image due to post-processing and composition (wide angle with foreground up close, exaggerating the perspective, near-far) that over dramatizes reality.

That is valid also I guess although it rarely works well for the true grand landscapes.

A particular technique has been popular as of late: Night shots of a galaxy and starry sky composited in the image that could have been taken during another time of the day/night (or not).The clean shadows (even at high iso) of the Nikon D800/E (D600 also?) has made that MUCH easier than before. Specially for web use, one can make pretty clean images without the need of a long exposure that would require a start tracking rig for sharp results.

I have good examples and bad examples of this technique (and everything in between).

Jul 03, 2013 at 07:46 PM

Greg Campbell
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

I'd make an argument somewhat parallel to Ben's.

IMO, a great many beginning photographers have been mesmerized by the wide variety of PP options that are 'out there.' This is not a surprise; go to any camera club and what gets discussed? Gear and software. Megapickles and Plugins. Yea! As a result, people confuse PP and gear dweebery with actual photography (IMO, what happens _before_ the shutter is pressed!) and neglect many aspects of preparation and planning that are crucial to making a decent image.

When I join local clubs and meetup groups on outings, I'm almost always amazed at how little effort many people put into the images. The fact that digital images are 'free' only encourages people to spray and pray. They point the camera in the general direction, close their eyes, and and fire off a burst of exposures, trusting the camera to make it all come out OK. Upon returning home with umpteen gazillion images, the shooter then sets about 'making them look good.' Hours of fiddle-farting on the computer ensue. The final output is, all too often, a poorly composed image with either saturation or HDR effects cranked to '11.' Joe Photo then posts these on FLikr, etc., and receives a hail of "Wow!" replies. Success and Fame! The next week, Joe, now an accomplished 'photographer' meets a new member of the club and immediately starts 'sharing' his new-found knowledge and expertise. The cycle is complete....

IMO, most new shooters are unnecessarily ensnared in this diabolical trap for at least a year or two. Some do eventually escape, but many (most?) spend the rest of their days slogging along on the PP/gear 'upgrade' treadmill, never quite managing to make the images they dreamed of.

Jul 03, 2013 at 08:16 PM

Rand47
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

I agree... But when you stand shoulder to shoulder, tripod to tripod, with 500 other photographers all shooting the same landscape icon, one must do something to make your images seem different from the 50,000 ones just like them posted.

Jul 03, 2013 at 08:42 PM

stanparker
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

I don't feel competent to criticize the efforts of others even though I may not personally like the result. We all know how tempting it is to take a good image and push it just a bit, maybe a bit more, and where do you stop. There is no "standard" for art, and that includes photography. My goal may be to produce a "realistic" image, but I may be the only one who knows what reality was at that time.

I agree that the trend is toward more "spectacular" images, any way they can be obtained. I think it's true in many areas that it is necessary to extend the limits to gain attention. Just look at the progression of action movies over the years. While I may not approve, the general public certainly seems to. While the technology of film/paper once served to limit the art of photography to an extent, that limit has forever been eliminated and public taste may now be the only restriction. Ye gads.

Jul 03, 2013 at 08:59 PM

Ben Horne
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

Rand47 wrote:
I agree... But when you stand shoulder to shoulder, tripod to tripod, with 500 other photographers all shooting the same landscape icon, one must do something to make your images seem different from the 50,000 ones just like them posted.

To me at least, the answer is obvious. Rather than using punchy post processing to make make your photos stand out from the crowd of other photographers shooting the same subject, simply go somewhere else where you are not alongside 500 other photographers.

Photography is much more enjoyable when you aren't shoulder to shoulder with a bunch of photographers taking the same photo as everyone else.

Jul 03, 2013 at 09:16 PM

Phrasikleia
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

The biggest risk to any art form is stagnation. If we keep producing photos that look as though they could have been shot thirty years ago, then we're not really getting anywhere. While there will always be room for staunch traditionalists, the boundaries of an art form must be explored in order for it to evolve. Technology is at least one way forward, something that allows us to plot some distance between one generation and the next. Ideally our advancements will be more than superficial, but in the right situations, even simple processing advancements like expanded dynamic range or vibrant colors can add something important to the essence of a photo--not every instance of creative processing is tantamount to putting lipstick on a pig. Granted, a lot of experiments end badly, and we have to endure some real eyesores along the way, but getting mired in redundancy is just as bad. When we start prescribing the aesthetics of an art form, that's when it is truly dead.

Heh, I rather like that last sentence I just wrote...makes me want to do the ol' blow-on-the-nails-and-buff-them-on-the-shirt gesture.

Ben Horne wrote:
[...]to make make your photos stand out from the crowd of other photographers shooting the same subject, simply go somewhere else where you are not alongside 500 other photographers.

Photography is much more enjoyable when you aren't shoulder to shoulder with a bunch of photographers taking the same photo as everyone else.

Amen to that.

Jul 04, 2013 at 08:49 AM

Karl Witt
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

This is very interesting for me. I am here learning by what I 'see' and with some kind insight from others and right now am unaware of exactly what I can and can't do in processing with landscape/seascape images.

So you guys show me an image of a place I have never been, an exposure combination I have never used, a level of light be it bold or neutral and I simply look at the merits of the image overall and like it or not but don't really know if it was like it was shown or whether it was 'created' I guess to me if the comp is strong I can begin to appreciate it for what it is. There may be several things I pick up on that makes me wonder whether it is 'live' or 'PS'

It would be difficult to draw the line of technique that would be considered the 'standard', blending, stacking, adding or subtracting...............or if it needs to be a 'single' exposure only. Somehow I find it acceptable that if I have taken an image RAW and when in processing I can tweak colors, expand or condense the light value ranges then it somehow was 'there' in the file to work with if that makes sense? I am thinking we all know when we have gone too far and I am sure there are those that like to go as creatively far as they can and we recognize both styles and we may like or dislike but realize it is simply ones interpretation that they wish to share with us.

After a short time here looking at the images I realize just how very important the quality of the light is to the subject. Having the luxury as Ben says to capture it at the right moment for that scene is something I don't have but I can appreciate and strive for. It reminds me of going on vacation chasing down a lighthouse I wanted to see, getting a documentation shot and then planning what time of the day or evening and hoping for certain clouds and sky and then being frustrated because I have only one silly day for this to happen.......not likely the results I would hope for.

Is technology ruining landscape photography................No IMO technology is tool, only if the tool is used wrong does it ruin anything..............kind of like using 60grit sandpaper to finish a fine piece of woodwork, it is up to the photographer not to ruin the landscape

Karl

Jul 04, 2013 at 09:17 AM

kentrks
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

Okay Jack, you started this and I know I am not going to finish it but I will give my 2 cents or maybe even a dollars
worth. Your post really hit a nerve and I agree 100% with all you said. It was very well put. I am not buying even for a second the bovine scatology that says " I just want to process the way my eye saw the shot". That is just nonsense. Today's sensors pretty much capture what the eye saw. Only a little contrast and saturation are needed to make a digital image complete. The fake looking HDR, the over saturation, the crunchy contrast, and the over processing in general have taken nature photography in a direction I do not travel or follow! I try my best to be a true shooter. To capture what is there, to process it in a manner that enhances and not embellishes, and to print in a manner that represents God's incredible creation as naturally as possible. There is enough natural beauty that I don't have to invent or create any!!
And here is a novel approach; I find that the better I get at using my equipment (1ds m2), the better my printed images look with very little processing. And finally something my mentor taught me - I shoot and process what I like - not what I think someone else will like.

Sorry, off my soap box now.

Jul 04, 2013 at 09:24 AM

ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

Well I am heading to Jackson Friday and I will be at the barns and oxbow and Snake River overlook. I have seen all the off Icon shoots and they do nothing for me. But there are supposed to be isolated T-storms so I may get the shot I have always wanted, the south barn with a colorful dramatic sky.

The fact is, I have not seen many of those so it could be fairly unique. Also the last time I was there in summer I had the place to myself unlike fall. But it could be crowded and I may need to go to a different location. Snake River and Oxbow accommodate a lot of people.

I have my composition all picked out, just need the right light and for some water in the stream and decent grass on the ground. If not, well I wait another year.

I will shoot for the foreground and for the bright areas and blend. I may mount a ND grad. I will be back at sunset for a really tough exposure, one that no modern camera can do as well as the eye. Maybe a d8000 can have the shadows lifted but otherwise you will have a well exposed sky and a nearly black foreground. I would not waste the gas for that.

Jul 04, 2013 at 09:39 AM

jphendren
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

I'm an old film shooter, and I've noticed that a lot of people detest any shadows in their images. Shadows are a reality in nature, if you lift them too much it looks un natural to my eyes. HDR's are hideous to me as well, they look like a PIXAR movie, not a representation of what the photographer had in front of his lens. With that being said, photography is an art form, and as such people can create whatever kind of image they like. I like my images to look like a properly exposed Velvia 50 slide, and only process far enough to get that effect.

Jared

Jul 04, 2013 at 11:06 AM

Tuan Le
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

No, technology isn't ruining landscape photography. It gives us better tools that allows us to be more efficient and flexible in the creation of our images. Of course, those tools can be abused to make something you and I find hideous, but it undoubtedly will also advance and perhaps redefine the artform as it had in the past.

Phrasikleia wrote:
When we start prescribing the aesthetics of an art form, that's when it is truly dead.

Heh, I rather like that last sentence I just wrote...makes me want to do the ol' blow-on-the-nails-and-buff-them-on-the-shirt gesture.

Well said... even if you said so yourself.

Jul 04, 2013 at 11:38 AM

Callisto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

I was with a group of photographers and we went into some major photographic galleries for landscapes and we agreed that most of the shots were rather saturated. Now these photos are selling for $3,000 and more which is certainly not the last word concerning what is the best or even proper level of editing. I admire those here who maintain a very natural looking photo but achieve such interesting colors and tones through great lighting. This involves planning and the willingness to often get up before the sun. As long as the eye has a greater range than the cameras we will have the desire to bring out those tones that are most pleasing either in the camera or in the edit of the photograph.

Jul 04, 2013 at 01:24 PM

Matt Tilghman
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

Not for me!

Jul 04, 2013 at 03:05 PM

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

The technology is, in and of itself, neutral. How it is used is another question.

Jul 04, 2013 at 04:40 PM

Charlie Shugart
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

I scan film.
But that's mostly because I can't figure out how to set "automatic" cameras and software gear.

Charlie

Jul 04, 2013 at 08:10 PM

Rand47
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

Ben Horne wrote:
To me at least, the answer is obvious. Rather than using punchy post processing to make make your photos stand out from the crowd of other photographers shooting the same subject, simply go somewhere else where you are not alongside 500 other photographers.

Photography is much more enjoyable when you aren't shoulder to shoulder with a bunch of photographers taking the same photo as everyone else.

Apparently you couldn't see my tongue firmly planted in my cheek!

Jul 04, 2013 at 09:42 PM

JimFox
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Is technology ruining landscape photography?

Rand47 wrote:
Apparently you couldn't see my tongue firmly planted in my cheek!

I've often thought of doing a coffee table photo book of all the ICONS and call the book, "From Twenty Feet Back." It would be photos of phalanxes of photographers all blasting away shoulder to shoulder with "the icon" in the background. :-)

Hi Rand,

I have to say I agree with how Ben took your post, there was no indication that your words were meant tongue in cheek. Just like in texting, with posting online, the standard has been for many years to use emoticons or the like to visually indicate when writing tongue in cheek...

Jim

Jul 04, 2013 at 10:02 PM

1 2 3 … 5 6 end
FM Forums \| Landscape Photographer \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 5 6 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.