Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,486   Posts: 1,571,303   Online: 788
      
Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 64
  1. #51

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    282
    99% of my shots have no people in them (this has been commented on several times at the processing lab). But as some folks have posted here, a single, subtle and unobtrusive person can sometimes completely transfom an image. There are even time an unsubtle person works in a landscape picture.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Rick.jpg 
Views:	52 
Size:	719.1 KB 
ID:	43080

  2. #52
    Poisson Du Jour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vic., Australia.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,653
    Images
    15
    Absolutely no. Not even footprints.


  3. #53

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,286
    Images
    21
    I think this is actually a pretty deep question, philosophically. When you photograph a landscape, are you trying to produce an image of a "pristine" landscape, uncontaminated by the icky business of humanity?---or trying to show something about the interaction of people and places?---or telling a fundamentally human story in which the landscape is an important character? All answers are legitimate, but they lead to different photographic places.

    Speaking for myself, I generally want door #2. As a human, I see landscapes in human terms, and that liminal space where being human collides with the landscape is pretty compelling to me. That doesn't necessarily mean "people in landscapes", but it does mean I'm usually more drawn to a landscape image that has something to say about the human interaction with it than to one that doesn't acknowledge people at all.

    -NT
    Nathan Tenny
    San Diego, CA, USA

    The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
    -The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_

  4. #54

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Prague
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    24
    I remember reading somewhere that they asked Sudek, why there are usually no people in his photos. He replied, he doesn't mind them being there, but they usually leave before he sets up his camera

  5. #55

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    florida
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,179
    Images
    2
    I go mostly without people in landscapes but there are times when they are important elements of the image and times when they can be considered part of the landscape. An example:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	dom sq.jpg 
Views:	40 
Size:	760.2 KB 
ID:	43095

    http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

  6. #56
    SteveR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Geelong, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    529
    Images
    5
    Like NT said, I think it really depends on the intent of the image. I like to look at pictures of a pristine wilderness, but for my own work, I find myself more drawn to compositions with some sort of 'trace' of human presence. I find the idea of nature claiming back what man has tried to make his own very intriguing, and a bit haunting. In my personal work, I feel it makes for a more powerful image... but then, coming across a beautifully unspoilt landscape is always marvellous!
    ____________________________________________

    My goal in life, is to be as good a person as my dog already thinks I am.

  7. #57

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    7
    as said, depending on what you want to convey. i like people in landscapes if they enjoy it but it really has to fit the picture.
    but in general a human aspect makes it feel more reachable, more real, gives it a relation.. (not talking about tourists standing in front of a beautiful natural sight..)

  8. #58
    John Austin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Southern Forest Region, Western Australia
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    521
    Blog Entries
    3
    I don't allow people in my landscapes, and have been very abusive to friends and strangers who walk in my landscapes - Yes, if I am looking at a landscape I do own it!!!

    Where people are photographed in my land they are naked, the prime subject and I am very pleasant to them so they will work with me again

  9. #59

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Santa Fe
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    20
    Generally, "no people" or I wouldn't call it a landscape; but specifically, "it depends". I have the fortune, and the fortitude, to get to shoot mostly in the west where it is usually not too difficult to find vast panoramas that seem untouched by man.
    Overall, I would just say that it can be a great composition, but becomes something besides a landscape with people as a significant compositional element.

  10. #60
    eclarke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    New Berlin, Wi
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,959
    Images
    71
    Trying to make rigid definitions is best left to camera clubs and the PSA. Don't want "yer hand o man" in your nature pictures, you'll be disqualified and won't get your ribbon...

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin