Photo's are indeed boring. Dutch painter said that when you paint something that is already beautiful, its getting kitsch. You have to paint (photograph) something ordinary on a beautiful way. I hope you get my point.
I know what you mean, bringing out the beautiful in the so-called ordinary is always a good premise. I think it is possible to photography a traditionally beautiful landscape, but at least try to be creative about it, simply pointing the camera at a sunset for the millionth time doesn't really cut it.
@@stilllife-artandthephotogr3494 And that is what separates art from a snapshot. Taking a mundane and often overshot subject and putting it into a new light, so to speak, very difficult.
Recently discovered this channel and I must say it's such a breathe of fresh air. Thank you for making such insightful content on photography. I know you're slow to upload (which is not a complaint, the quality outweighs the quantity), but when you spoke about "snapshots" in this video it got me thinking about Eggleston and his democratic way of seeing. Although I don't like formulating my opinions from those of others, I would be really interested in hearing your thoughts and critiques of his work. Seeing as that he is highly praised in the art world (my own opinions included). However I am fairly young in this profession, so much of my artistic opinion is still in need of refinement so I'm always open to hearing criticism of those who I admire. Just a suggestion. I look forward to your next upload. Cheers!
I came here from Tomas Heaton's latest video. Excellent content ill be back. Something I notice about most of those landscapes is the light they seem to be mostly taken around midday with high sun or are north faces that are all in shadow, without good light mostly early morning or late evening (golden hour) light those large landscapes have no depth they just look flat.
I don’t visit Toms site much anymore. Nothing against him at all but I just find that type of photography so boring. Really tired of it to be honest it has no depth.
In photography the two most important colours are 1. Red 2. Yellow. The human eye is super sensitive to the colour red. Could this be related to our own blood colour and our evolutionary psychology? Who knows, but interesting to think about. Ever notice that doctors and nurses in operating rooms wear blue coloured scrubs? And the lighting in surgery rooms is blue light? This desensitizes the medical staff's eyes to the colour red, in order to shield them to a degree, from seeing all that red blood.
Share some link with your pictures in order to enlighten us and show how it should be done... please?? :) and be careful with the adjectives you use. "Mundane" were many of the scenes the Great Masters used in painting during history. Mundane scenes that taught and educated most of the greatest photographers in history.
I found this video extremely shortsighted. It seems like you have a problem with blue rather than boring compositions. The examples you showed towards the end clearly fall into a different genre which, I believe, few will perceive as landscape photography. And why is it necessary to bring the human element, I mean humans are just one of the thousands of species out there that we don’t need to see from the lens of a human again. Also, it’s subjective: I can say some of the so called fine art photos of facades of buildings as boring. I have seen so many of them over the years. And many photographers still carry that tradition which I would bluntly call it as formula. Art in landscape can be evocative but the examples you showed no justice.
