The frustrations of landscape photography

A few months ago I got up really early and went to visit a nature reserve about 10 miles away from my home. The night before I used maps, Google Earth, weather forecasts etc to explore where I was going and everything and planning where I needed to be for sunrise. I was greeted with misty lakes and an amazing sunrise. I got two amazing shots of which I have sold a couple of prints. I didn't scout the area at all before hand. Real 'beginners luck', it would seem.

Ever since then I have been plagued by disapointment with my landscape photography. For months I have been trying to capture a really good woodland shot worthy of canvas production to hang in my lounge. Just as with the nature reserve, I have plotted and scouted many areas before heading out into the wild, but then finding that I don't get a single shot worth keeping. Today I drove 93 miles (round trip) as part of my latest scouting mission to explore the area in and around Sherwood Forest, Nottinghamshire. I walked round for a couple of hours and found a couple of potential compositions that face East for the sunrise, but at 45 miles away from my home I'd have to get up in the middle of the night to get there for sunrise, and even if I manage that, there's nothing to say I'll get anything worth keeping - that's not to mention the fact that oftentimes these places don't open until 0700.

I have come to realise that photographing people, families, babies, children, pets and other things is much easier than landscapes! You're at the mercy of so many things - your ability to forecast mist\fog\clear\damp\wet, the relief of the environment, making sure street lights won't be in your shot, knowing which way is East (or West) not to mention knowing a good place to go!!

I live in Derby, Derbyshire, UK. Does anyone know an area near to that which has dense decidious woodlands, ideally oaks, (so not pines or other evergreens) that is a good distance from roads with street lights?

Cheers

Ted

Destination photography is quite difficult to do, as you've found. I used to get so fixated on where I was going that I would miss opportunities along the way. I've since learned the error of my ways, and now enjoy the journey as much as the photograph.

I have one day-long tour I do that is almost 375 miles - I occasionally get a good shot, but the journey alone is enough to make the day worth while.

So, as long as you enjoy yourself, and don't put too much pressure on yourself, you've accomplished something. if you get some photographs at the same time, bonus.

In other words, relax - it'll happen

Maybe you're actually trying too hard. Knowing Derby & the Peak District reasonably well you haven't got to travel very far to be in wide variety of very different landscapes, and woodlands.

Have a look at John Blakemore's work, many of his landscape images were made within a few miles of Derby near Ambergate, Lathkill Dale etc.

My favourite areas near you are around Stanton Moor, or Hathersage/Millstone Edge

Ian

There are two ways to look at this.

(1) Landscape is easier than indoor work because you have much less control of lighting and atmospheric conditions and subject etc. So the key to taking good landscape shots is being patient for the right conditions and previsualizing what you want.

(2) Landscape is much harder than indoor work because you have much less control of lighting and atmospheric conditions and subject etc. So the key to taking good landscape shots is being able to make optimal use of the conditions you have and letting the scene take you where you need to be.

I think perspective (1) is easier on the ego: having complete control of the lighting situation and subject in a studio and still not being able to get a good shot is an annoying thing!

What kind of equipment do you use?
With 35mm stuff, you can forget to get detailed images. Suitable for landscape is 4x5 or larger in my opinion. Besides that it is important how you develop your negatives. To dense negatives will kill the image.

I am now shooting/working with landscapes for 2-3 years and still haven't found the holy grail in my opinion... In a while a nice image is shot, but forget it that each negative will be a hit!

ted_smith said:

to explore the area in and around Sherwood Forest,

Click to expand...

How is maid Marion looking?

So I've got a perfect view on the walk I take most days. December the town across the valley had a snow topped mountain behind it. Reminded me of a snow globe. I needed to bring a longer lens to get just the town and mountain instead of the less pretty areas. Kept forgetting. But hey it's still winter right? Wrong middle of Jan the damn stuff all melted. :rolleyes: Oh well next year.

For something to do one day, try walking into the woods without any preconceived photographs in your head. Walk in a bit, then sit down for about 15 minutes being quietly observant with all your senses. When your mind has relaxed, get up and start wandering about either on trail or off, just go wherever you notice something interesting.

I find I do better work being open to what's around me rather than demanding things of it. Anyways, might be something fun to try

Murray

I'm reasonably sure that there will be some breathtaking scene right near to where you live that will present itself to you when you have no camera with you ...

Ted, have a look at this site - I've found some fantastic locations from just walking some of these in my area. Buy a map, pack your camera and sandwiches and go.....as someone said above be open and you'll find inspiration.

- Tony

hey willie, I politely disagree.

If Ted is making 8x10 prints, 35mm film will be fine.

and to say that the only suitable format, in your opinion, is 4x5 or larger, is simply that, your opinion.

Ever shot medium format?

Padley Gorge is my favorite, and it's right by the railway station for those that are car-less.

The problem is you got a few great shots right out of the gate. It creates the impression that it is not all that hard. It's a curse. Kind of like winning big your first trip to the race track or bingo. Welcome to the club of extreme pleasure and frustration.

I find most of my utterly disappointing landscape photos are done when I am overly prepared. The sun never rises where I've planned it to, the scene is flat when I think it should be full of contrast and tones.

I think pre-visualization is not done in the hours or days prior but at the moment. To set and look at what has caught your eye and let the scene define itself to your aesthetic, allows for a lot of spontaneity.

I certainly would enjoy a bad day of landscape photography more than I would a bad day of photographing people...personal preference.

Bruce: "I think pre-visualization is not done in the hours or days prior but at the moment."

It can be a bit of both, but I do like just wandering around, looking at the light...photography as an act of discovery. I especially like returning to the same area many many times and getting to know it...and trusting to the old saying that Luck favors the well-prepared.

Vaughn

Vaughn said:

I especially like returning to the same area many many times and getting to know it...and trusting to the old saying that Luck favors the well-prepared.

Vaughn

Click to expand...

Just what I was going to say. I have been back at the same spot close to my home four times and get completely different images from the same spot every time.
/matti

Vaughn said:

I especially like returning to the same area many many times and getting to know it...and trusting to the old saying that Luck favors the well-prepared.

Vaughn

Click to expand...

I have a shot that is one of my all time favorites that I shot early on and with 35mm gear. I moved up to 4X5 and returned time and again but "the shot" was never their again. It is gone forever as far as I can tell. Nothing has changed, the trees are still in the same place, I go back on the same day of the year at the same time and it is gone. I realize it is me who has changed, I do not see what I once saw. I look at it as every shot is the last time this will be seen just like this.

To me the "Best Light" is whatever is in front of my camera on that day. Just being out there, and with a camera is so much better than being in the warehouse!!
I adjust my critical/aesthetic thinking depending on the weather and/or light. I don't go out with preconceived notions of what I want to photograph. I let the scene dictate how I think. So relax and enjoy the journey.

gene

matti said:

Just what I was going to say. I have been back at the same spot close to my home four times and get completely different images from the same spot every time.
/matti

Click to expand...

This is what I have observed photographing along the same stretch of creek for 30 years -- always new stuff...enough to last me a lifetime!

Vaughn

With a deciduous hardwood forest, you are trying what I find to be the hardest of all subject matter. I live close to the New Forest, time and again I return home without having exposed any film.

The most visually stimulating areas are often too cluttered when trying to commit to film. There is an excellent essay in Galen Rowell's 'Inner game of Outdoor photography' which explains some research done by Edwin Land. This explains how the brain filters out aspects of a 3D scene viewed by the eye. Then once this is put in a photograph, the brain reacts in a different manner and cannot ignore the distractions.

I would suggest considering using longer lenses instead of wide, to restrict the field of view and therefore make it easier to balance the elements in the image without too much distraction. Also minimise sky coming through the canopy and burning out on film. A high viewpoint looking down/across a dip/gulley helps here. Try to find a scene with space around interesting trees/logs to minimise the chaos. Also higher sun angle backlit or obliquely works well as it comes down and through the canopy. If working in colour, then I prefer the fresh yellowy greens of spring or early Autumn when just thinking about turning. Winter gives different feel. Summer is very tricky indeed - best spent on the beach!

As others have said returning to same locations over and over can yield different moods, but seldom will you see the same conditions again. I try to think of this as a good thing, but do have lots of frustration that it is so!

I can relate to the frustrations of landscape photography - as can many of the posters here no doubt...

I am building up images of the Scottish Highlands for a long-term project I hope to get published one day. Every 4 - 6 weeks I do a 600 mile+ round trip northwards, I've been doing this for years. I've found getting good stuff is a mixture of planning (maps beforehand, lots of reading, making use of dull days to scout locations) and being flexible enogh to not get 'stuck' in visualising a particular scene. A contradictory mix I know . I also go back to locations at different times of the year, different light conditions etc.

I think now that the secret to building up a strong body of work is sheer graft - life tends to get in the way of consistent photography trips. But then - cheesy philosophy alert - nothing worth doing is easy...!

Hang on in there!

Cheers,
Gavin

papagene said:

To me the "Best Light" is whatever is in front of my camera on that day.

Click to expand...

With me the best light happens just after I have used up all of the film!


Steve.

I'm a tree and woodland fanatic myself. For me, the least productive way of working is to go somewhere expecting to take a particular type of photograph. Instead, I have a mental list of locations that are always likely to be interesting, and I just go and bimble about until I see something worth photographing. I often end up taking photographs at the expected location, but the photographs themselves are quite unexpected.

If I'm scouting for new locations in the UK these sites have detailed descriptions of local reserves that are often off the national radar.

www.woodland-trust.org.uk
www.wildlifetrusts.org
www.rspb.org.uk

You can also search for local SSSIs, which often turn up obscure but beautiful small patches of woodland.

In the end though, you just have to go there and see what's on the ground. Even detailed aerial photos and Google Earth can't tell you how the mixture of trees and underwood is going to look in a particular light at a particular time of day.

My own favourites in Derbyshire are the relatively young woods around Hathersage and the countryside near Haddon Hall and Chatsworth. Don't forget the White Peak: some of the striplike woods along the bottoms of the Dales are gorgeous.

PS: I *like* the clutter. The most effective way I have found to photograph it without getting too confusing is to use a short-to-mid telephoto (80 mm or so on 35 mm) and a narrow depth of field. This produces photographs which stimulate the monkey part of my brain looking for the next branch to grab

PPS: it was on the tip of my typing finger. If you want oaks, Ladybower Wood is an obvious choice.

david b said:

hey willie, I politely disagree.

If Ted is making 8x10 prints, 35mm film will be fine.

and to say that the only suitable format, in your opinion, is 4x5 or larger, is simply that, your opinion.

Ever shot medium format?

Click to expand...

I shoot close ups on 6x6.
But wide landscape shots always at 4x5 or 6x12cm.

You are not able to show details in a 8x10 photo.

Willie Jan said:

I shoot close ups on 6x6.
But wide landscape shots always at 4x5 or 6x12cm.

You are not able to show details in a 8x10 photo.

Click to expand...

No Willie, you only speak for yourself - "You can't show details in a 18x8"

I've shot on 5x4 and made reductions for a hand made book, there's plenty of detail. I've also shot a vast amount of 35mm and had no problems with fine detail in a 10x8 print , and larger.

Ian

In 25 years I've found it doesn't matter how much you prepare, or what gear (format) you shoot it: landscape will always be very serendipitous. I've spent days in some areas and only come up with one shot I like (and who else do we need to please?), others I've stumbled on and shot a roll that I love.

No matter how 'picturesque' the location, it will almost always boil down to the light at the moment you're there. (and if you're only carrying one camera, loaded with b/w, you'll want color.) Often I'll end up in a stunning location with flat light and end up focusing (literally) on details, rather than the whole picture and come up with lovely shots of trees, rocks, moss, etc-rather than that mountain that I went after.