i sucks at landscapes.

[gregtallica]

Again, speaking as an on-looker rather than an expert - the mailboxes are fine, but the horizon line looks really crooked. Not too bad for not having quick access to any big exciting landscapes in the neighborhood.

Now I'll let the pros chime in, this is just a fun thread to follow.

 

[JacaRanda]

Probably should be thinking of making an image as opposed to finding something to just shoot. I get what you mean, but your attitude may need to be adjusted so that you can start producing landscapes that are pleasing to you and maybe to others as well.

The exact location you took in this latest shot has lots of potential. Why not try the same shot with a different lens or at different focal lengths. I would like to see more of the street leading up to that scene. I'm okay with the mailboxes, but maybe not the speed limit sign.

People have worked long and hard on figuring these things out. You can't just expect to automatically be good at it. If you do, you will continue to be frustrated.

 

[dannylightning]

i had a version with more road from what you all were saying sounds more like wasted negative space and i was hearing zoom in tighter.. i did have a version showing more of the road but i think i liked this one best. i did take it from a few focal lenghts and all of that. i was using my 18-200mm lens on this one.

i have drove down the road a few times and though that might make a nice shot so this is the first spot i hit, than i walked around teh block and shot a few other things but nothing that interesting.

 

[JacaRanda]

I want to see that street live and in person. Maybe fly back there and catch a Cavs game in between some landscape and birding In my dreams.

 

[soufiej]

i had a version with more road from what you all were saying sounds more like wasted negative space and i was hearing zoom in tighter.. i did have a version showing more of the road but i think i liked this one best. i did take it from a few focal lenghts and all of that. i was using my 18-200mm lens on this one.

i have drove down the road a few times and though that might make a nice shot so this is the first spot i hit, than i walked around teh block and shot a few other things but nothing that interesting.

You've been given a buzzword, "negative space", which I don't feel you have fully understood.

This example somewhat relates to a lesson I recall from the "Drawing from the Right Side of the Brain" textbook. To draw a teacup, do not look at the shape of the actual cup. If you want to draw the shape of the handle, concentrate on the lines which form and the space encapsulated by those lines which are the inside of the handle as it connects to the outside of the cup itself. You might want to give this exercise a try to better your comprehension of what negative space is and how to employ it to your best advantage.

Drawing 3 - Drawing the negative spaces

The idea of using negative space in illustration and design is to free your mind of pre-conceived ideas of how something looks or "is". Very much like flipping the image upside down for the non-visual personality type, you are seeing reality in a new and unrealistic manner.

If you are asked to draw an illustration of a chair, most people will rely on their life long concept of "a chair" to do so. By removing the positive space image of a chair from your memory and forcing you to view only that space/line which defines the negative space not physically occupied by the chair, your mind is freed from its conventional views of how things exist. This allows you to see those things which you have always accepted as "chair" or "cup" in entirely new ways.

"Seeing" is the major impediment the tactile/auditory personality has as they approach composition.



Negative space is not necessarily "space". And, certainly not always space occupied by something.

Do not think of the water in either of your previous examples as "negative space". It is very positive space which is being defined by the negative space which surrounds it. And vice versa.

As with the optical illusions which flip your brain back and forth between seeing this then that, positive and negative space can be either at any one time also; 50 Mesmerising Designs That Make The Most Of Negative Space – Design School

The water in either image is not negative when it is a very active player in the composition. (not "competition") Water has color and texture. It has life. It is dynamic and it is calm. It is pure and it is putrid. It is rising and it is falling.

It is, most of all, symbolic.

It is contained by something with a line. Once there is a line, there must be space. Lines keep our mind active or they allow it rest.

If you looked deeply into either of your previous examples, you could experience your mind slipping into a Theta brainwave pattern. Theta brainwaves register at about 4.0 - 7.5 Hz which is where your mind settles just before you drift off to sleep in most cases.

theta brainwave patterns - Google Search

Theta is a state of mind which is highly relaxed yet vividly attentive. It is the experience many marijuana users report as their perceptual high when, say, listening to music after smoking. Or viewing a painting or photograph. Someone drinking moderate amounts of alchohol may also find themself in this same restfully alert state of mind. Someone listening to binaural or isochronic waves can place their brainwave patterns intentionally in this range of frequencies which can simulate marijuana's relaxed high.

(More interesting to a neuro-scientist and those who study the cognitive sciences of perception is the fact the Schumann Resonance is measured just beyond this range at 7.83Hz. Early space travel showed astronauts returning to Earth after a period of time outside of the effects of the Schumann Resonance left them disoriented to some degree. Eventually, NASA began to include Schumann Resonance generators in the US space capsules to alleviate this problem. Humans both respond to this frequency and need this frequency. schumann resonance - Google Search You asked why those two images "worked". This is partially an explanation of their effect on your mind, your cognition, and why many people will intuitively respond to these images.)



Therefore, the elements included in your previous two examples are all hitting on major themes which humans respond to intuitively and naturally. Negative space is defining the existence of these elements but it is not the elements themself.

Therefore, "road" = negative space misses the mark.




Meet Your Brain Waves — Introducing Alpha, Beta, Theta, Delta, And Gamma

This Is Your Brain. This Is Your Brain On Music

The Schumann's Resonances and Human Psychobiology - extended version


Obviously, you can take excellent photographs without any discrete knowledge of these concepts. And forcing yourself to find these elements in your viewfinder will typically result in your images looking as though you forced them into the frame. Visual personality types tend to easily spot these elements while tactile and auditory types must learn to recognize them when and where they exist.

But do not mis-use the concepts either. Just as always using the rule of thirds (particularly if you always favor placing objects on the same side of the frame) will quickly become boring, diversity in your photography pays off.

You are rushing things to get to an end. That is exactly what you should not be doing. You are not seeing what it is you are going to take a photo of.

photography and pre-visualization - Google Search


IMO you would benefit from not trying so hard to "get" landscapes.

Next time you go out, find an object you feel is photo worthy. Then take your time, even to the extent of spending several hours in one spot. Don't take photos just to be taking photos. Stay and observe how light and shadow change the object through the day.

An alternate rule of thirds is this; your first thoughts about an image are always wrong.

Your second thoughts about the same image are equally poor.

Your third thought about how to compose an image may be correct.

Select your one object and take as many photos as you feel you need, in as much time as required, in order to show the object in what you feel is its true essence. In other words, if you like a park bench, show how many ways that object can display its full "park benchness".

Think symbols.

Think line.

Think what isn't.

think contrast.

think color.

think what was.

think what can be.

Think why.

think again.


Where is the negative space in this first image?
Understanding and Using "Negative Space" in Photography | Photography Mad

Your example of a nightime image of the stork is very much like the Japanese woodcuts of The Floating World; Overview - The Floating World of Ukiyo-e | Exhibitions - Library of Congress

Such Japanese art is non-representational. Realistic (enough) images are used as symbols of themes. Composition is ruled by the symbolism.

No need to learn symbolism at this point. However, show us a photo which you feel contains symbols and symbolism.

Leave landscapes go by for now.

 

[UncleSteve]

Danny,

I am not going to comment on your photos, I think the others have done a good job on helping you explore the area of landscape photography. I am going to say I see a trend in a lot of your posts....They contain negative words and phrases like "I Suck" or "They Suck" or "No one would hang on their wall." and so on. This type of language does not lend its self to helpful learning. Trust me, everyone is there own worst critic and we can all find major flaws with our photos that most other people would simply over look. I have something like 25000+ images on my computer, I have a total of 25 in my online portfolio, thats a 0.1% success rate. You are going to take a few that you don't like, and that is the beauty of digital. But do you ever just say "I like this one because..."? The next photo you post try and not use a single negative term relating to it. Say things like: "I like the red building, how to I really make it the focus of the image" or "the sidewalk lines draw me into the picture, but I think the frame is just a little off, how would you have adjusted it?" This will help with a positive attitude when you shoot and then want to try the new ideas posted here. Positive thought process will help drive understanding and acceptance of the images you have produced, and there are some good ones. Be positive, you have great gear and a desire to learn so enjoy photography. I will step off my milk carton now.

Steve

 

[limr]

I'm not going to add any technical advice because quite frankly, it's never really the kind of thing that has really helped me very much. And you've gotten a TON of it and might be feeling overwhelmed at the moment.

Here's what I will add, fwiw. The way I see it, it all boils down to the same principles as you would apply to any other kind of photography: include only what is necessary to capture the feeling or bit of visual interest you want to convey. This is true of any kind of picture, not just landscape. It's just harder, for whatever reason, to apply that lesson to landscapes. I know it's the thing that used to trip me up: my desire to get everything into a landscape. I thought it had to be a wide angle to include as much scenery as I could.

As mentioned, that technique usually flattened the image out, making it difficult to pick out what the subject might be. I think I started getting better (at least I think I got better ) when I stopped being afraid of leaving stuff and using, as Derrel mentioned, a longer focal length, or learned how to control the proportions of foreground, subject, and background with a wide angle better.

As for your mailboxes, I personally would have shot only half of the street, gotten low, lined up the mailboxes and made them the subject of the shot, not just something I wish weren't there.

 

[dannylightning]

in a reply to the last few post. and i do appreciate all of this advice.

with my back hurting all the time and the 8lbs + i already carry around for hours i do not take any more gear with me than i need to, i really enjoy shooting birds so usually all i have with me is my 160-600mm and if i want the 18-200mm i need to go back to the care and change lenses. to be honest i do not see that much that i want to shoot as far as landscapes go. mainly we got some lakes and trees around.

in my mind as i drive by that street and see the view for the last few days i envisioned the trees opening up kind of like a tunnel of fall colors so i was trying to capture that which i guess i sort of did.

overwhelmed a bit yes.. that is for sure but i am glad to be getting the information..

i use words like i suck, and no one would hang it on the wall because well that is the truth, no point to sugar coat it, i just realize i am not good at this yet and i could use something help push me a long. most of the time i am good at what ever i try to do, or get good at it quickly. i seem to be way worse at this landscape thing than i have ever been at anything i have tried to get good at, except for maybe math lol.. not sure saying what i think about the photos would be hurting anything, i know i can get better at this i just need some help to get to where my landscape photo skills unsuck lol..

i usually at least like photos that i take of anything, except for landscapes, i do get a landscape type photo here and there where i think its not bad but most of them are horrible. now i wish i would have saved some of the bad ones to post and show you all just how bad they really are and i think you wold see why i say i suck at it..

here is something like i would normally take. some are much worse than this.. i guess this one is not bad but there is nothing special about it., i though that was a cool looking tree and shot it.

 

[dannylightning]

ok i just went thew all of my old photos, here is my almost entire landscape collection, some are pretty good IMO but these are my best work and i have taken lots and lots of landscape shots and i get a descent to good one ocasionally..
some of them are back when i first got into photography and did not know what i was doing with editing so i slayed them with the processing but you still can get the idea. these are the very best i have gotten.. the night shot of the tail lights over the highway is a shot that i really like.

just curious to see what you all think about the ones that i think are good or descent.

 

[soufiej]

Very quickly, my initial response is you are simply not very selective in what you shoot "SQUIRREL!!!" My feeling is what it has been from the start, you walk up and take a shot then walk away.

You do not employ the pre-visualization mentioned in my previous link.

You find maybe one thing which is interesting and rather than getting in close to examine that object's unique qualities, you simply try to force it into a "landscape". And, you and I do agree that the area around you is not chock full o'landscapes.

I mentioned the fellow who didn't understand why the skies in his photos lacked drama, the same rule applies to your not so much landscapes. You can't make something into what it's not simply by stepping back a few feet.

This is why I suggested you actually take some time studying a single subject. The tree you found interesting might be, but not from a distance as you have placed it in your shot. It's that one tree that's interesting, the rest is not. That means we don't need to see the uninteresting stuff.

You shoot from the student photographer's perspective of always standing upright. Any time you always do the same thing, we come to expect the same thing from you. Great photography, IMO, always surprises the viewer. Good photography, at the least, makes the viewer go, "Well, that's not what I was expecting."

Get down low and then get down even lower. Go up high when possible. Do something different.

Take your camera and turn it, turn it in any direction other than "landscape" because you think you're shooting landscapes. You seem to have your rule of composition which is either rule of thirds or completely centered. You cut off things that shouldn't be cut off but include needless stuff on the sides.

First shot, top left; you've cut off the edge of the water to show us, what?

You have a lot of centered horizons in the collection of shots. Know when to use a rule and when to break a rule. You only break a rule when there is a good reason to do so.

There are simply a lot of things in your photos which aren't interesting. That's not meant to sound rude but you are not out snapping shots just to snap shots and then calling them landscapes. There must be a reason for why you take a photo. And, once you've decided this subject is photo worthy, you must realize that without sufficient time to study the scene when you can observe more than the casual "Oh, that's nice" look, your camera will not and cannot record exactly what you perceive. I did mention this in my first post.

The train tracks are not positioned properly to make them a visual component of the image. They are almost a distraction but, given the rest of the shot, they become the main focus but lead our eyes nowhere, off the edge of the image never to return most likely.

The one tree and the arch are obviously subjects you found interesting. Therefore, you felt including other items would turn them into landscapes.

Should I be looking at the parking lot or the building? You are not telling us anything about what you find interesting in these images. There is no story, there is no emotion, there is no point of view.

There is no Bigfoot.

There is plenty of "SQUIRREL!!!"

 

[soufiej]

Using Previsualization to Create Remarkable Photographs


If you have not done so, apply the grid lines to your viewfinder.

What's the minimum and maximum aperture of your lens? You aren't using either.

 

[dannylightning]

well, there is lots of great informaton here, some of it seems pretty helpfull, other stuff is just kind of like not really sinking in.

maybe i am not meant to be a landscape photographer. i don't know.

 

[soufiej]

OK, what's not sinking in?

 

[dannylightning]

i dont know, negative space drawing, and some of the other stuff you guys posted links to, most of it really.. i have learning disabilitys, hands on has always been much better for me than reading about stuff.. maybe allot of it is just to technical and goes over my head. when i read something i don't remember allot of it when i am finished reading, its always been that way for me for some reason which is probably why i never did well in school, i am a very slow reader and after i get done reading something i could not usualy tell you much of what it said. i did not really expect so much in dept technical information about taking some landscapes,

when i look at a land scape my favorite ones are these big wide angle shots with water, a nice sky and something nice to look at in the background like this.. i do not see much around to shoot like this though.. here is a link to the type of landscapes i would like to be taking.. so i think i have been trying to create that kind of a scene even though i do not really have that kind of scene to shoot.

landscape photos - Google Search

landscape photos - Google Search

landscape photos - Google Search

 

[soufiej]

Silk purse and sow's ear comes to mind.

First question is, do you feel the photographer in any of these instances simply walked up and took that shot without further thought or preparation?

Pick one of those images and tell me what you are seeing.