Sep 162007
 

You know I don’t object to changing image content at all. For every photograph there are always many different images: the one I had perceived when I decided to take the image, the one the camera recorded as a JPEG, the one I imagined it to be, the one that I distill out of RAW data, the one that I turn it into when going through cloning, straightening, vignetting, etc, and finally those that all individual viewers see, each of them a different one, because though I publish only one JPEG, it has to go into your minds, and what finally arrives there, that is highly subjective, with you being the subject and I being completely out of the game.

With all those transformations going on, with all those stages full of subjectivity, with all those acts of judgment, do you believe it is very likely that one or more transformation in between would matter? Would make the image less “true“? And true to what? Reality? My initial perception? My initial imagination? My skill? Your expectations?

And still, I have a problem. I tend to overdo landscapes. They often come out clearly artificial, many a time the sky being the culprit, when I could not resist making it darker and more contrasty than necessary, while at the same time much too saturated. Or only too greenish. And at the same time, when I ask myself why I’ve done it, I can’t give a better answer than “Because I can”.

This particular landscape is not overdone. I have done a lot to it, in fact it looks very different from what the camera chose to make from RAW data, but I have disciplined myself. I did not go over the top. It rarely becomes landscapes.

The Song of the Day is “Walk Straight Down The Middle” from Kate Bush’s 1989 album “The Sensual World“.

  7 Responses to “338 – Landscape Woes”

  1. I come here occasionally to view your art. Amazing photography. Thanks.
    Carolyn Miller
    Ohio, USA

  2. This is a picture you took in Montana right? No… no… along the Connecticut River in Western Massachusetts around Mt. Tom? Hmmmm… wait… I know that spot, it’s North of Wilkes-Barre along the Susquehanna? Or, hmmmm…. maybe we saw it in New Mexico where the Rio Grande is little more than a large creek? Definately America, although possibly on the Canadian side of the border south of Quebec City in early September?

  3. I think the exaggerations we use just substitute for all the senses we cannot satisfy by a 2D representation of nature – and thus, it’s OK.

    Great shot, Andreas.

  4. Hi Andreas,

    I really like the way the logs lead me into this picture, taking me away to the mountains and those glorious clouds.

    Alan

  5. Andreas,

    I think I don’t really like the word exaggeration here. It is rather meaningless to where I position myself.

    Hmm … I could say a lot of things now, but I guess I rather send you over to Ted’s. He has it all written down and I couldn’t hope to do better. And while you’re there, and if you haven’t yet been there, have a look around.

    You’re in for a treat 🙂

  6. I wasn’t refering to that image but rather to the article that was going with it. This image looks pretty natural to me.

    Cheers, Andreas.

  7. Andreas,

    I didn’t refer to the image either. It’s that I think, that to exaggerate, we need to have a reference point, but so far I have found none. Reality? Well, your’s or mine? We take our surroundings in with all our senses, but all of us have to omit part of it. It would be overwhelming otherwise. The simple fact that I can come up with a new image every day, most of them shot in places where I’ve been a thousand times, proves that there is more to “reality” than we can ever digest.

    It’s not that by failure we don’t see things “as they are”, it’s that we choose so, and different people make different choices, heck, even the same person makes different choices at different times. There may well be a “reality”, but when it is different for all of us, when it changes guises for ourselves, what sense does it make to refer to this fleeting concept?

    It’s the term “exaggeration” that I objected to. Not because I felt attacked, no, only because I think it is not rooted anywhere. No reference point, no exaggeration. We could speak about the concept of otherness probably.

    Anyway. Thanks for your interest 🙂

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.