Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-03-2015, 08:43 PM   #16
Forum Member
januko's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 89
Landscape pictures indicated by author of the article have become generic.

At first I thought those were cool but for the long time I see it, I no longer like it. Some I found that they are not that real, not close to what it actually looks like. It is over-processed for my taste.

I used to love those kind of pictures because they look great as desktop wallpapers but not anymore. I tried to shoot similarly but I can't get that look but I'm happy that I didn't.

Like most of us here, we shoot for ourselves and I am too. It may not be like the ones in 500px but we love it.

I also think that it is not just landscape pictures that have become generic.

Sometimes the quality of the pictures is a reflection of time. Because of that, a lot admire old photographs because it is processed what is available at that time. Photographs in the early digital cameras have this certain look as well and we can sometimes easily recognize what decade or year it was taken. But nowadays, well, I find that most likeable pictures of today are over-processed and unfortunately liked by many but it becomes boring quickly.

I am not speaking for a fact though, just my opinion.

02-04-2015, 07:17 AM   #17
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
baro-nite's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: North Carolina, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,294
QuoteOriginally posted by Paul the Sunman Quote
You inspire me.
Nice one Paul; I'd be happy to have made this myself. Sorry to break the bad news to you, but this one probably wouldn't make the 500px front page or Flickr explore. What this has going for it that the eye candy in the linked article doesn't is ambiguity and mystery. Things suggested rather than revealed. An emphasis on form, texture, masses of tone opposing and/or balanced against each other. A reason to look for more than 2 seconds.
02-04-2015, 07:47 AM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,420
QuoteOriginally posted by mattb123 Quote
When I was a watercolorist I was skeptical that photography could be art at all. I've since softened on that stance considerably and my definition of what is art has only become more inclusive over time. Sure there's art I don't care for much because it's over done or I don't like the subject or message but that doesn't make it not art.
I don't think the article posited that those photos aren't "art", just that they're not as wonderful to the author as they are to others.

Photography is and always has been an art. (And a craft.) All you need to do is take a photo with two different lenses, or at different apertures, to understand that their is a clearly emotive ("art"?) function to the results.

And anyway, as long as Duchamp's toilet hangs on a museum wall, the definition of "art" is expansive.

QuoteOriginally posted by halfspin Quote
The real issue is no one feels special. Boohoo I'm not the only one who can make pretty pictures! 7 billion ppl make for some steep competition.
There can be some of this. Many people who take these shots have to work very, very hard to get them - hiking miles, enduring hot/cold/wind/rain, or waiting for hours/days/weeks/a lifetime. Many of us are unwilling or unable to do these things. I, for one, truly appreciate what goes into many of these images and admire the work.

So while I might be impressed with the effort (or the "eye", or the post-processing), these photos have all started to look less and less interesting to me.

I recently perused a portfolio solely of double-exposures. The photos were mostly dark, sometimes hard to understand, but they undeniably captured my emotions more than the landscapes presented here.
02-04-2015, 09:07 AM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,448
QuoteOriginally posted by carpents Quote
Many people who take these shots have to work very, very hard to get them - hiking miles, enduring hot/cold/wind/rain, or waiting for hours/days/weeks/a lifetime. Many of us are unwilling or unable to do these things. I, for one, truly appreciate what goes into many of these images and admire the work.
There was an article in Outdoor Photographer about 3 years ago that was my epiphany, and you pretty much summed it up. The photographer talked about hiking 20+ miles one way every year for 3 years to capture ONE specific photograph, He talked about enduring rain/sleet/snow and other issues just to capture one specific image that only occurred once per year. That's when I realized I will never get a letter or phone call from Nat Geo asking me to be a contributor. Hell I can't even get Arizona Highways to return my call (I think they have blocked my number, maybe I need to get a new one?)

But, I guess I have been brainwashed by the psychotropic oversaturation and retina rending oversharpening. Of course I am also a fantasy fiction writer at heart, but I dream of the day I capture a photo like those. I plan my two weeks a year of vacation around one destination and probably one photograph I've seen of that place. And when I get that "wow" moment, and I'm looking at it on my OWN computer it is 10 seconds of pure ecstasy. "I did it!". But then that fleeting moment is followed by hours of morose realization that I still suck at marketing so I won't make any money on it.

Over the next year or so I alternate between enjoying my "wow" moment and depression because it hasn't gotten enough views and wonder what the point is. Maybe the author was having a bad day because his sales were down for the month.

02-04-2015, 11:06 AM   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Northern Michigan
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,155
I don't have any serious issues with this style of landscape photography. Sure, it might be overdone, but so is all the other major genres of photography. There are a lot of photographers out there doing exceptional work. If you absolutely must always be exposing yourself to stuff that is new and the original, than surely you will be disappointed. It's all been done before, and it's probably been done better! In any case, the emphasis on and mania for originality stems from 19th century's idolization of art and the artist. I share no such pretensions. I merely take pictures of things that I like to look at. If it's been done millions of times before, I don't really care. It's the craft of photography that interests me. The art side of the business I'll leave to others who are better qualified for that sort of thing (i.e., "sensitive" people with "beautiful" souls).

Something that is not merely original, but also vital, significant, true, and expertly crafted --- in other words, something genuinely artistic and great --- is something that is exceedingly rare. Most "art" that passes itself off as new and original is new only because it attempts to do something that should never have been done in the first place.
02-04-2015, 11:47 AM   #21
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Spodeworld's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: New Joisey
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,370
It's certainly possible with the K-7. You need to expose well, or bracket. But, you'll also need to know how to post process for the look.

QuoteOriginally posted by Bruce Clark Quote
Hmm, very thought provoking. I too am a subscriber to 500px preferring landscape and nature themes. I have often looked at some of the most popular submissions there and wondered how do they get 'that look'? Super smooth, glossy, noiseless with spectacular colours, colours which I have never quite seen outdoors in my part of the world. I was never quite sure what 'the look' was or how 'it' was achieved. Was it from mega $$ camera/lens combinations, impossible to recreate with my 'lowly' K-7, or was it from travel to exotic locations beyond my budget, or was it through manipulation of on order beyond my abilities? Perhaps all three. On occasion I have tried to reproduce the 'look' and have been very disappointment with the outcome.

Thanks for posting this, I will try not to feel inadequate when looking at some of these super images and concentrate on what I can do, that is try to preserve what I see, the way I see it.

Last edited by Spodeworld; 02-04-2015 at 12:11 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, landscape, landscape photography, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Recommend a lens for landscape/urban landscape photography a96agli Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 01-22-2015 10:26 AM
Your Real Estate Agent Would Like Some Free Photography, Please interested_observer Photographic Industry and Professionals 11 10-18-2013 10:32 AM
Sports Stand-Up Paddleboards, Day 1 SpecialK Post Your Photos! 5 07-26-2013 10:59 PM
How would the K-x stand up in the snow? darius Pentax DSLR Discussion 19 11-24-2009 08:43 AM
UK Petition to stop restrictions on photography in a public place - please sign up. mickdann Photographic Technique 3 02-23-2007 12:30 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:25 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top