• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Landscape

Cool as Ice

A
Cool as Ice

  • 0
  • 0
  • 22
Pond

H
Pond

  • 2
  • 0
  • 47

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
202,703
Messages
2,844,458
Members
101,478
Latest member
The Count
Recent bookmarks
0
landscapes

I think the premise is misleading: To be "FINE ART" some image must evoke an emotion, a feeling. If it does not evoke one that interests the looker, then it is either a negative emotion, not necessarily a bad thing, or, much worse, a neutral feeling.

A well done photograph should evoke a feeling, and it can be of a paint can or the grandest vista there is on this earth.
 
Of course people put art on their walls for all sorts of reasons. Sometimes the content has some implicit meaning to the owner and they wish to 'pay homage' or have a continual reminder of a place or person. Maybe it is entirely the visual qualities, or the way it makes them feel. Perhaps even reverence to the photographer or the amount of money they spent on the art.

One thing I suspect most buyers consider (be it a small or large part of the decision) is how accessible the image is to others who may not be familiar with it. Others being spouses and family, friends ... those whose opinions of us are important to us. A good fine-art landscape image is probably less complicated to understand than a good fine-art portrait, or at least the motives for having it on the wall are less likely to be missinterpreted.

Thinking for example of Karsh' Churchill. For the sake of discussion - assuming it is fine art, and that it has been purchased for the wall not a vault.
If I put that image on my wall, it could be because I wish to espouse my political affiliations or because I hold Churchill's character in high esteem. It might be because I have a personal interest in mental health and wish to pay tribute to a man who despite suffering manic depression had some pretty significant achievements. Or perhaps I just think that Karsh was a genius. It might be simply because being a portrait photographer myself, I can appreciate what it took to achieve the image and want to regularly look at one of the finest examples of a portrait ever done. Perhaps I just paid a lot for it and want to show off. Point is the reasons could be complicated and easily missinterpreted without further insight. Imagine what the reasons might be if there is a photo of Kim Phuk running from napalm on the wall.

On the other hand i do have a waterfall on my wall that is often looked at closely by other people. It is arguably the most photographed landscape subject (and arguably one of the least qualified to be 'modern art'). I appreciate it for the degree of art and craft. I admire the photographer. Other people usually like it a lot. My reasons and motives for displaying it aren't complicated. It was expensive, but the value in return is enormous to me the buyer.

Perhaps it is as simple as the fact that landscapes just work_well as fine-art for the wall.

But who knows - as the market for fine photographs for the wall changes and matures further, and buyers' tastes and understanding become more sophisticated it could all change. Or maybe my meanderings are way off ...

blansky said:
As for photographers, photographing people is probably harder than landscapes ...
Hmmm ... I used to think that as well ... until I tried to do a good landscape.
 
Well, drive somewhere and get out of the car and the first thing might notice is the landscape (or cityscape, or cloudscape or seascape .... you get the idea). Some people collect what they like, and most people appreciate these things. A collection of street shots of say New York might not do well in a gallery out west, but then a collection of landscapes of the west might not do well back east.

Let's face it, the general public might prefer color work over black and white...recall a gallery owner in Santa Fe telling me that they needed a good platinum printer to include with the rest of the work...Why?..they felt it would appeal to some of the customers. Don't know that it changed anything, just something the owner thought would help move some of the work.

Even though I like landscapes, most of the work I do seems to be more urban in nature, because that is what is close by for me to work with. Learned my love of photography reading Life magazine...not many landscapes were featured in it..but a lot of good street, war and other photography.

If someone can actually figure out what the 'collectors' want before they do, they could stock up on it cheap and sell it for unreal prices.....but my crystal ball must be old and a bit blurry...because I don't have a clue. And since the feeling I get from most on this site is they shoot for themselves, not for what someone might want...it really does not matter.

JMO...
 
photomc said:
recall a gallery owner in Santa Fe telling me that they needed a good platinum printer to include with the rest of the work...

Have a phone number? :D
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom