Why is landscape photography the prefered choice of prints for an overwhelming majority of photographers?
Printable View
Why is landscape photography the prefered choice of prints for an overwhelming majority of photographers?
I'm not so sure that it is, though it's a significant part of the "fine art" market.
Why is this a "presentation and marketing" issue?
Do you mean "horizontal" versus "vertical" compositions?
I'm not so sure it is! Certainly elements of beauty in God's creation offer solace to our busy souls but I doubt if 30% of all photograpy intended for reflective viewing is landscape.
I just went and made a quick count in my own home. I have 17 LF photos on display of which 8 are landscape. Not quite half. I would have said 30% before I counted and been wrong.
I guess it would probably come down to what you classify as landscape, most of the galleries I visit here in the west, seem to have an overwhelmingly amount of enviormental elements fine art shots on the walls, such as old towns, cabins and that type of stuff, myself personally the majority of my prints are wildlife and enviormental stuff.
Dave
If you are talking about LF photography then landscapes don't move. I'm including old barns, rustic buildings, etc as part of landscapes. I almost exclusively shoot street shots and would find it difficult with larger format cameras.
For my own personal enjoyment, I much prefer landscapes. High-end collectors aren't big on landscape photography, though. A lot fo the submissions that have been given to me are landscape photography...and as much as I personally enjoy it, I really wish I could get something more than an image of a black and white waterfall...Quote:
Originally Posted by David A. Goldfarb
It doesn't relate to film in itself...so this was the closest I assumed for it.Quote:
Why is this a "presentation and marketing" issue?
I'm doing something wrong then. A very well-known and respected photographer says that over 90% of collectors of photography live in New York City and do not collect black and white landscape photography. My own personal research varies a bit as to the percentage of where they live, but I never thought about finding out what type of photography they collect. When I spent time in galleries in NYC, I found a LOT of landscape photography mixed with street, architecture, and so on. Personally, I love infrared landscapes...beautiful stuff. But if the audience isn't buying landscape, then why are so many photographers selling it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Satinsnow
I don't know that I would agree that 90% of the collectors live in NY, but I think it really depends on the part of the country your in, like I said around here in the west you will see alot of wildlife and what I consider enviromental elements photography, of couse I guess the term 'landscape' could really cover a broad range of photographic styles.Quote:
Originally Posted by inkedmagazine
Dave
I think landscapes do very well with the general public and beginning collectors because it's easy to understand, pleasing to look at, and ultimately easy to live with. When someone buys a print, a print that could cost hundreds or thousands of dollars, they are often making a commitment to live with that image in plain sight for a very long time. Some people may feel uncomfortable having the continuous gaze, of people they do not know, "watching" them around their homes. Landscapes don't intrude and they can take you to a place of beauty or adventure. Personally the only photos of people I want hanging on my walls are those of people I know.
More experienced collectors might already have boxes full of landscapes and seek more unusual or provocative images. Then again a well done landscape, or one that is more unique, can still find a home with a seasoned collector. As for 90 percent of the photography collectors being in NYC, I'd have to disagree with that. Certainly there are many collectors there, however there are many collectors all over the US and other countries.