Large Format Landscapes

[dlin]

Below Blue Hen Falls, Cuyahoga Vallen National Park

Negative: TMY developed in Pyrocat HD
Print: Agfa Classic toned in selenium and thiocarbamide

[StevenJohn]

Knoxville, TN
90mm Grandagon
FP4+ in Rodinal 1:50

[Robert Belcher]

First off, try as I may I can't even seem to get good cliche images, much less something original! I suppose there are others at this forum like me who struggle enough just trying to learn the craft of LF, much less make meaningful images.

It is a rare image, be it landscape, portrait, flower, etc., that is not cliche to those who have looked at a lot of images. Ken's image looks unique in this thread, but if someone started a thread of "pastoral landscapes," barns would probably be well represented...

So what the heck am I getting at? I don't know, I guess I'm just streaming a few thoughts. I'm glad you posted your comments, and I take issue with, but not offense at, them. For all you others, keep the images coming, cliche or not! [/QUOTE]

I think that many of us here are in the same stage of learning as h20man--first the technical aspects of the craft and then the art of LF imaging . I am less than a year into this and I have yet to create an image that I am willing to share. I am getting better at the technical part of making an image (thanks in no small part to the discussions I read on this forum) but the art and vision part are developing much, much slower. Therefore, I study the images I see here and in other venues--determining what appeals to me about the image and what doesn't. And I try to emmulate those images and, by doing so, learn something of the craft and, hopefully, hone my visualization skills. I am thankful for forums like this where so many skilled, talented artists exhibit their work (cliche or not) and provide me, maybe unwittingly, a visual thesis for my art training.

As to cliches, as many images as have made and exhibited (and, more recently, posted on some website or other electronic venue) over the last 150 years or so, I suspect there are very few that aren't cliche at least in some respects. And those vey few are created by the real artisrts of this medium--some of whom exhibit their images on this website and one day will be recognized alongside the greats of this medium.

Like h20man, I like'em. Please keep them coming.
Robert

[mandoman7]

Knoxville, TN
90mm Grandagon
FP4+ in Rodinal 1:50

I like this shot Steven. A distinctive arrangement.

[Robert Belcher]

Oh! And one more thing. Many of you have been at this LF thing, or some other art form or medium, for 10, 20, 30, 40 or more years developing your art and craft to the point where your images are not cliche but are truly unique art. Most of us aren't born gifted, talented artists but have to work to develope those gifts and skills and, in that process, produce much cliche work. I suspect even Michaelanglo produced some cliches in his body of work.

One of the wonderful things about this, and other forums, is that people like me have available to us the benefit of the hard work and experience (cliche or not) of people like you to help us in climbing that learning curve.

[mandoman7]

I think that many of us here are in the same stage of learning as h20man--first the technical aspects of the craft and then the art of LF imaging . I am less than a year into this and I have yet to create an image that I am willing to share. I am getting better at the technical part of making an image (thanks in no small part to the discussions I read on this forum) but the art and vision part are developing much, much slower. Therefore, I study the images I see here and in other venues--determining what appeals to me about the image and what doesn't. And I try to emmulate those images and, by doing so, learn something of the craft and, hopefully, hone my visualization skills. I am thankful for forums like this where so many skilled, talented artists exhibit their work (cliche or not) and provide me, maybe unwittingly, a visual thesis for my art training.

As to cliches, as many images as have made and exhibited (and, more recently, posted on some website or other electronic venue) over the last 150 years or so, I suspect there are very few that aren't cliche at least in some respects. And those vey few are created by the real artisrts of this medium--some of whom exhibit their images on this website and one day will be recognized alongside the greats of this medium.

Like h20man, I like'em. Please keep them coming.
Robert

At the very least, David's cliche accusation has prompted some good comments.

As you've suggested, Robert, the question of what is cliched can be elusive. For some, any work that doesn't involve alternate processing is mundane. For others, its about the arrangement of shapes and not whether the subject matter is new. For yet another group, its about the subtle tonalities and the emotions they evoke. The point being that, as a viewer, we might be jumping to conclusions that a piece is derivative, and be missing what the artist is actually trying to do.

It might be, also, that the poster's observation was more about the responses to the work on this forum than the work itself. It does seem that the more Ansel-like work gets more response on the forum, along with long exposures of water movement, or approaching storm scenes. Conversely, sometimes there are distinctive images that get posted but get little response. Its a group that has its tastes, for better or worse, like any focus group. If getting good responses on the forum is your only goal, then the cliched shots mentioned might be something to shoot. If you're trying to get in a gallery, they might want something different.

There's a flip side to an over stringent approach to being "creative" that I've seen among artists, though, too. Replicating the mannerisms of a creative person doesn't make you a creative person, yet we see characters in funny hats with wispy beards selling work like crazy in the downtown galleries. Originality is where you find it.

The best thing for this group to think about is posting work as often as you can manage, whether or not it qualifies as great art. Its good for you and the group at large. The family with the active discourse is healthier than the one where everyone withdraws with hurt feelings. I believe its growth inducing to put it out there and find out what people think, even with the occasional hurt feelings, and that its likewise educational to watch other people present work and get varying responses. Its not the real world, but its nonetheless a place where things can be learned through participation.

[Robert Belcher]

At the very least, David's cliche accusation has prompted some good comments.

As you've suggested, Robert, the question of what is cliched can be elusive. For some, any work that doesn't involve alternate processing is mundane. For others, its about the arrangement of shapes and not whether the subject matter is new. For yet another group, its about the subtle tonalities and the emotions they evoke. The point being that, as a viewer, we might be jumping to conclusions that a piece is derivative, and be missing what the artist is actually trying to do.

It might be, also, that the poster's observation was more about the responses to the work on this forum than the work itself. It does seem that the more Ansel-like work gets more response on the forum, along with long exposures of water movement, or approaching storm scenes. Conversely, sometimes there are distinctive images that get posted but get little response. Its a group that has its tastes, for better or worse, like any focus group. If getting good responses on the forum is your only goal, then the cliched shots mentioned might be something to shoot. If you're trying to get in a gallery, they might want something different.

There's a flip side to an over stringent approach to being "creative" that I've seen among artists, though, too. Replicating the mannerisms of a creative person doesn't make you a creative person, yet we see characters in funny hats with wispy beards selling work like crazy in the downtown galleries. Originality is where you find it.

The best thing for this group to think about is posting work as often as you can manage, whether or not it qualifies as great art. Its good for you and the group at large. The family with the active discourse is healthier than the one where everyone withdraws with hurt feelings. I believe its growth inducing to put it out there and find out what people think, even with the occasional hurt feelings, and that its likewise educational to watch other people present work and get varying responses. Its not the real world, but its nonetheless a place where things can be learned through participation.

Thank you for your comments. I do welcome criticism; I don't always like it, but I do learn from it. And rarely do I get my feelings hurt by critism. You are also correct in that I am remiss in not posting my own stuff. I will rectify that. Thank you again.
Robert

[mrladewig]

Well, I guess I've got some more cliche rubbish to add to the pile.

This is the same setup as my last, but shot on Ektar 100, which has worked better for me in this high contrast situation.

[David Aimone]

Lovely tones and well done with the contrast. If cliche, even Mozart had to practice his scales...

Well, I guess I've got some more cliche rubbish to add to the pile.

This is the same setup as my last, but shot on Ektar 100, which has worked better for me in this high contrast situation.

[David Aimone]

NOT to say that I think the shot is cliche...