Irrelevance: Locations & Landscape Photography

I think landscape photography is too often focused on locations, especially on social media.  The qualities of landscape photography get replaced by simply showing a new location and it begins to take the form of travel photography.  The photographer shows up once, takes a photo of the conditions when they were there and leaves.  In my mind, this is not landscape photography.  It’s entirely possible to get lucky with a great display of light when visiting a location, but that only shows what it was like on that day and likely fails to capture the essence of a landscape or location.  Of course, it’s not possible to visit distant locations on a regular basis to know the subtleties but over time and repeated visits, once can become more familiar with a location.

The other option is to not consider landscape photography as photographing a distant landscape that you rarely visit.  I bet most who are reading this have a place close to them to photograph.  It doesn’t need to be a grand landscape, it can be a local park, river, field, etc.  Visiting these places on a regular basis and noting the changes of seasons, how it looks in different weather, different times of day or when it’s dry or wet is a great place to start.  By seeing the same place in varying conditions, you’re able to distinguish the ordinary from extraordinary.  You’ll begin to understand the nuances of the place and you can use this to create better photographs.

Applying these same ideas to a landscape you don’t visit as often is challenging but can be rewarding as a landscape photographer.  You may visit a more distant location once or even a few times a year and with DSLR’s, you can easily make many images.  I just challenge you to consider if these images are documenting what a landscape looked like when you were there or do they show some of the magic of the place?  It may mean you get ONE image from a week vacation to the Grand Canyon.  By being highly selective of your images and visiting locations repeatedly the photographs will begin to go beyond what a place looks like.  Maybe, just maybe, the photographs can convey what it feels like.

I’ve shared 2 images of clouds to represent these thoughts.  The locations of these clouds are completely irrelevant to the image.  As with landscape photography, locations are often irrelevant to the image.  Whether or not you agree with this, give this a try with your images sometime.  Remove the location information from your image and see if the qualities of the photograph communicate that sense of place.  I’ll discuss using clouds in a landscape photograph in a separate post, stay tuned:)

Thanks for reading,



4 thoughts on “Irrelevance: Locations & Landscape Photography

  1. Pingback: ALL NIGHT LONG | dan4kent

  2. I love your ideas for finding places to photograph. Your opinion is spot on! One question, though. Did you take these two photographs with your Nikon FM? Your post regarding switching to a Nikon FM is what brought me here. The photo at the bottom of this post is mindblowing.


    • Sorry for the long delay in getting back to you. Those images are digital but I’ve posted many recently all shot on the Nikon FM. Let me know if you have any questions and hope you’ve picked one up by now! Thanks, EE


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: