There’s nothing photogenic far from your vehicle ― why search?

[Heroique]

I read somewhere that there was nothing photogenic more than 5 ft from the parking lot. That seemed pretty reasonable to me.

I won’t argue about anyone’s belief in this proverb – if it works, it works – but I suspect this is a mangled version of the original? (Tim’s entertaining quote is from the “How do you carry your tripod?” thread.)

Anyone know the actual quote and the source?

I think it was a famous photographer – a clever justification for never traveling too far from the road, if all you want is a “good shot” and you know how to compose...

Or maybe it meant there are always good shots around you, if only you could “see.”

[Gem Singer]

Didn't Edward Weston make that statement?

[Heroique]

Hah! That was my first hunch.

Certainly doesn’t sound like the ever-traipsing AA, young or old.

[Vaughn]

EW, I believe, has had something along this line attributed to him -- something like "There is nothing worthwhile 50 feet from one's car..

Then Ruth Bernard has a quote that goes something along the lines of there being a lifetime of photographs in one's backyard.

And from Ted Orland's list of photographic truths:

"1. The Best Scenic Turnouts are clearly designated by highway signs reading: NO STOPPING ANYTIME."

[Brian C. Miller]

"Anything more than 500 yds from the car just isn't photogenic."
- Brett Weston

This really depends on the locale, and how much you can pack. Some good things are miles from the road, but in most places, what is beside the road is the same thing that is miles from the road. It just all depends. If you like hiking, have fun. If you don't like hiking, enjoy the drive. If your car is busted, then make some still lifes or bike around the neighborhood.

[Heroique]

“Anything more than 500 yds from the car just isn’t photogenic.” – Brett Weston

Yes, that’s it. The “500 yards” makes a little more sense. Still wonder what Brett really meant…

— If you saw nothing in the first 500 yards, you won’t see anything in the next.

— Any 500-yard stretch of landscape is, generally, similar to the next 500-yard stretch.

— The limited gear you can carry beyond 500 yards won’t be enough for the shot.

— After hiking 500 yards, the priority is catching one’s breath – not seeing a shot.

— The shots you take near the car are more “photogenic” than those you can’t take if you’re walking, walking, walking…

— Really, there’s nothing over there. Not then, not now, not later. Trust me on this.

[Darin Boville]

I guess if you are looking to express something within yourself you might not need to walk far.

--Darin

[Frank Petronio]

I agree with the sentiment, going far afield to some remote landmark can be interesting but it will just be another generic natural wonder shot like the other millions have done.

I am partial to seeing photos of Alpenglow from a high-up, big-wall, snowy, scary bivouac. As long as I'm not there!

[Roger Cole]

I guess if you are looking to express something within yourself you might not need to walk far.

--Darin

Sometimes you have to go a long way before you meet yourself.


I agree with the sentiment, going far afield to some remote landmark can be interesting but it will just be another generic natural wonder shot like the other millions have done.

I am partial to seeing photos of Alpenglow from a high-up, big-wall, snowy, scary bivouac. As long as I'm not there!

Ah but they will be different and won't be generic, because *I* took them, and *I* printed them. That may not matter if your goal is to sell prints or impress others, but I shoot and print for myself, and for those close to me, because I enjoy it and find it rewarding.

I have an AA calendar hanging on my wall in my kitchen. But my modest prints I have made and have hanging in my living room have a lot more meaning for me, not because they're even remotely comparable, but because I made them, which makes them special to me. I don't much care if they're special to anyone else.

Obviously I don't necessarily agree with B.W. on this one, but I also agree with those who point out that just because one hikes a long way does not make for a good photo either. There are good photos close by and remote. Take whichever ones you prefer or (as I try to do) some of each.

[Vaughn]

I personally enjoy walking far beyond my car -- not because the light is better or the scenes are better, but because I find the act of moving through the landscape on foot to be meditative and part of my process of seeing. It is a way of helping my images to be more than another generic natural wonder shot.

I was out in the middle of the Dry Falls area in central Washington last summer with my 8x10 -- the buzz of the insects, the stillness of the air, the 100F+ temperature, the awareness of where I was walking due to rattlesnakes -- all contributed to how I approached the light and forms around me.

Hopefully, this is not another generic natural wonder shot.

Scanned 4x10 carbon print:

Branches, Dry Falls, WA, 2010

[Zaitz]

Don't know how anyone could seriously believe something like that. Driving around Olympic National Park is going to be as photographically rewarding as hiking throughout it's miles and miles of trails? You may be able to get a shot of a mountain peak on the roadside but I don't think that would ever get me my ideal shot. I drive around far too much and wish more of the area was public so I could walk onto it. The roads do not cover near enough area. And if they did, they would then start to encroach on the very photos I'd want to take.

I believe the opposite is closer to being true - there is nothing photogenic near your vehicle. I can't stand the same shots people upload on flickr from the scenic parking lots. Its the same shots over and over again. I like this essay about that:
http://www.photo-mark.com/articles/repertoire/

[Heroique]

I personally enjoy walking far beyond my car...


There is nothing photogenic near your vehicle. ...It’s the same shots over and over again.

Stick near the car, and this keeps happening:

“Soon the signs started appearing. THE MOST PHOTOGRAPHED BARN IN AMERICA. We counted five signs before we reached the site. There were 40 cars and a tour bus in the makeshift lot. We walked along a cowpath to the slightly elevated spot set aside for viewing and photographing. All the people had cameras; some had tripods, telephoto lenses, filter kits. A man in a booth sold postcards and slides – pictures of the barn taken from the elevated spot. We stood near a grove of trees and watched the photographers. Murray maintained a prolonged silence, occasionally scrawling some notes in a little book. ‘No one sees the barn,’ he said finally.” (from Don DiLillo’s novel, White Noise)

[Merg Ross]

[QUOTE=Heroique;695599]Yes, that’s it. The “500 yards” makes a little more sense. Still wonder what Brett really meant…

I photographed with Brett many times, and often more than 500 yards from the vehicle. Also,his FWD vehicles were often a great distance from paved roads. Bear in mind that his comment came at the time he was carrying an 8x10 over his shoulder, always over his shoulder.
There were numerous attempts to get him into the wilderness with a backpack, (I suggested it more than once) but his Army experience left him with no such desire. He had been through boot camp three times before graduation, and any thought of putting a pack on his back was out of the question.

I think the quote and sentiment, although often attributed to Brett, was certainly shared by his father. Edward made a comment about finding adequte subject matter by simply looking at the ground near his feet. The message from both was simply to survey what was at hand, and I believe both did quite well with that approach, and without excessive exercise.

[Vaughn]

My sister took some photos of that barn. She has an interest in photography for a long time and really enjoys making pretty pictures and is quite proud of her images of that barn. Personally, I never feel the need to go there, though I was close a couple summers ago. I know what it looks like! LOL!

I carried my 8x10 far up Mosaic Canyon in Death Valley last month. Not too many people, but no solitude. I was talking to a fellow with a large Digital SLR while I had my 8x10 set up. I mentioned that this was my first hike up this particular canyon and he was surprised that I did not scout the place out first before hauling the big camera up the canyon. I gave him my old "At least bad day of photography is a good day of exercise." I did not want to go into the whole deal about how I like to experience the light and use that light as I find it. The light may never be the same, nor how I am relating to that light at that moment.

Sort of like what EW said, "...I almost never wait, that is, unless I can see that the thing will be right in a few minutes. But if I must wait an hour for the shadow to move, or the light to change, or the cow to graze in the other direction, then I put up my camera and go on, knowing that I am likely to find three subjects just as good in the same hour."

Why scout and go back for the shot, when there are more subjects waiting where ever I go?

[Brian C. Miller]

Bear in mind that his comment came at the time he was carrying an 8x10 over his shoulder, always over his shoulder.
There were numerous attempts to get him into the wilderness with a backpack, (I suggested it more than once) but his Army experience left him with no such desire. He had been through boot camp three times before graduation, and any thought of putting a pack on his back was out of the question.

.... Edward made a comment about finding adequte subject matter by simply looking at the ground near his feet. The message from both was simply to survey what was at hand, and I believe both did quite well with that approach, and without excessive exercise.

I don't blame Brett one bit for not wanting to shoulder a backpack. I refuse to own an AR-15 because of that isn't-it-swell-Mattie-Mattel jammamatic rifle, no matter what others think. I remember doing pushups and holding in that position with two packs on my back when I was in basic training. Ech. Carrying 40 pounds of gear on one shoulder would certaintly get tiring.

I have found plenty of things right next to the road to photograph, myself. It all involves swiveling my head like a maniac and not driving off the road.

There may be something interesting down a trail, but there's miles and miles of trails with nothing but generally the same landscape, over and over. I can think of some really good individual spots that have something good, and those are worth a hike, but there's usually some indication that it might be a good spot in the first place. Packing 50 pounds of photo gear just for nothing is something that I'll pass on, thanks.

[Steve Gledhill]

One of humankind's best attributes is its unwillingness (or at least of 99% of us) to walk out of sight of our car. This alone dramatically benefits those of us who are prepared to walk further. I'm happy to be in the remaining 1%, even with a heavy camera backpack. I don't like to contemplate what it would be like if every car's occupants were liberally spread all over every beautiful landscape!

[austin granger]

"...I’ve found that hikes precipitate a predictable mental arc. At first, the novelty of new surroundings captures the senses; there are a million fresh things to hold the attention, and I gladly bear them witness. But then, just as surely, the newness fades, and my interior world rises up to reassert itself. It seems my attention always wants to turn inward, back to my own bramble, back to my own thicket of dendrites, those ten million thoughts and desires and well-worn dead ends. I stroll along while the internal discourses are practiced, and the arguments are fought. My memories are indulged, regretted over, rearranged, or fitted with alternate endings. Material goods are acquired; how would I look, how would I feel; with that, in that, on that; Royal Blue or Goodwood Green; I’ll try them out, now the one, now the other, now back to the first. I stroll along and in my mind, people are possessed–ah, the most tempting flight of all. Of course, they are not really people but only projections of myself.

Still in all, it’d be a pleasant enough way to pass the time, if it weren’t for the dangers… For the inevitable price of such idling is that the world begins to retreat. It just fades away, passes one by, and one hardly notices it, miles after mile, year after year. It is then that though one walks through the world, it is but lightly, as if on stilts.

This is how one becomes a ghost.

I can imagine, but only just, that some people don’t live this way at all, that their minds and the world are joined together like gears. I imagine that some people manage to remain in focus.

But that is not me.

And so I must treat myself. I know some remedies. Ironically, a long hike works wonders. For though at first the condition at hand may worsen, eventually it seems, the body begins to consume the thoughts for fuel. It takes time, but eventually, the musings unconnected to the present begin to peter out. Eventually, the junk is purged. The fat is trimmed. But it’s not easy. Toward the end, the most stubborn scenes play over and over, perversely, like a song stuck in your head. At last though, even those fade away, and the world returns..."

Excerpted from 'Elegy from the Edge of a Continent: Photographing Point Reyes,' by yours truly.

I apologize for quoting myself at such length, but this topic's obviously right up my alley. My short answer is that it takes at least 500 yards.

www.austingranger.com

[tgtaylor]

This is the 1920's image that catapulted Ansel Adams into national recognition:

http://www.afterimagegallery.com/adamsbannerpeak.htm

And it's a 15 mile hike (one way) to reach it.

[Vaughn]

Well, in New Zealand I bicycled 2000 miles or so with a 4x5 and backpacked 15 miles or so and got this image. No national reconition, though, LOL!

[Brian C. Miller]

This is the 1920's image that catapulted Ansel Adams into national recognition:

http://www.afterimagegallery.com/adamsbannerpeak.htm

And it's a 15 mile hike (one way) to reach it.

I bet that Adams already knew that the lake and the mountain were there. :)

Really, Adams started on the road to fame with that picture? I only read his instruction books, not his autobiography or biography. (Some of the prices on those pictures amaze me. $6000 for Grass and Pool (http://www.afterimagegallery.com/adamsportf3grasspool.htm)!)

[Merg Ross]

It is true that Ansel, as a young man, did a fair amount of hiking. However, many of his most revered images, those upon which his reputation rests, were made from the tailgate or roof of his vehicle. A perusal of his portfolios is evidence.

[Heroique]

My short answer is that it takes at least 500 yards.

That was a unique post, Austin – usually, photographers use images to capture a single moment of consciousness in the field, but you’ve used words to describe a moving rhythm of consciousness in the field. Glad it takes you only 500 yards to re-emerge from that “thicket of dendrites” – others might get lost for good!

[Thad Gerheim]

There's nothing spiritual far from your tv- why search?

For one there is physically more light and topography at high elevations!
I find along the journey my perception of space and time change and my senses become elevated (especially in grizzly or rattlesnake country!) This is my passion, and I'm glad it's not everyones. So, please only take photos where there is a sign with a camera on it, that's where the best ones are made!

[John Kasaian]

Part of the drive is to bring back images to share. There are a lot of images in wilderness areas where there are no roads, so I'll offer you:
"There is nothing photogenic 500 yards from the packmule":D

[tgtaylor]

I bet that Adams already knew that the lake and the mountain were there. :)

Really, Adams started on the road to fame with that picture? I only read his instruction books, not his autobiography or biography. (Some of the prices on those pictures amaze me. $6000 for Grass and Pool (http://www.afterimagegallery.com/adamsportf3grasspool.htm)!)

Yep. Adams 1923 image of Banner Peak and Thousand Island Lake brought him and the Sierra Nevada to national attention.

[rdenney]

One of things we always seem to be seeking is drama. It takes a bold scene to force its way through my self-narrative and declare itself to me. It happens when it happens, and there seems to be no correlation between that happy event and the proximity of my car.

The problem with drama, of course, is that the drama we feel demands novelty. I don't see the drama in my own yard, but anyone who visits us, especially on their first visit, does. And it is closely held drama--everything dramatic is within perhaps two hundred feet of where I might put a camera. (The sky occasionally provides the exception.)

While some of my photos portray plenty of drama, and while these are the photos that make friends and family ooh and aah, these are not photos that are routinely available to me and if I insist on them I end up never making photographs at all.

Some, when responding to that conundrum, continuously seek the dramatic views, which often means for them the novel views. They often couple the photographic pursuit with the hobby of hiking and exploration. Not everyone shares that second hobby, however. I have done in the past at various times, but again limiting myself to those opportunities would mean too few opportunities to make pictures.

Others believe that the drama, however understated, can be found anywhere if one will just open their eyes and see. That was always the thrust of my art teachers. But it's not the easy way.

As I review the photographs I like, I note that fewer of them were made in situations presented with unbounded drama and more of them have revealed the understated drama of common scenes. I'm thinking of some of the art of Andrew Wyeth, or the photography of Eliot Porter. And where I live in the East, that is the approach more likely to yield satisfying results. I think I could spent five years and never leave my yard, if only I had the vision and discipline.

There is, of course, a school that eschews drama altogether, seeking photos of scenes chosen seemingly for their banality and commonness. I might someday come to understand those, but not yet.

(And for me, a hike or run needed to be at least four miles to get past the discomfort of intense exercise and into a physical zone that would allow the mind to roam freely. Sometimes, it would then turn to interior topics, and sometimes it wouldn't. I can't or won't really invest the time required to maintain that level of fitness any more, so I leave that process for my memory and use other processes. The mind is versatile, after all.)

Rick "whose six acres contain an infinity of variety" Denney

[Vaughn]

Vaughn "I prefer very quiet drama" Hutchins

[tgtaylor]

Yep. Adams 1923 image of Banner Peak and Thousand Island Lake brought him and the Sierra Nevada to national attention.

Banner Peak and Thousand Island Lake lie on the John Muir Trail 43 miles from the trails official start at Happy Isles in Yosemite Valley. The idea of such a trail was first thought of in 1884 by Theodore Solomons who began advocating for its construction in 1892. After several years of exploring and considering possible routes, construction began in 1915 and the trail was completed in its present day form in 1938.

Although the Sierra Nevada was popularized in the 1871 in several articles written by Clarence King and published in the The Atlantic Monthly in 1871 (Mountaineering in the Sierra Nevada), the Sierra Nevada was a relatively unknown western mountain range when Adams made his now famous image in 1923. It is that image, taken when he was about 21 years old and long before he even thought of the "zone system," that brought both himself and the Sierra Nevada to the national attention.

Today Banner peak is about a 15 mile one-way hike from the nearest road (at Agnews Meadow or Reds Meadow) and considered one of the "crown jewels" of the Sierra Nevada. In 1923 it may have been even further from any existing road. One may take other interesting photo's from the road side but you will (hopefully) never be able to take that one.

[QT Luong]

I agree with the sentiment, going far afield to some remote landmark can be interesting but it will just be another generic natural wonder shot like the other millions have done.


Viewing any natural wonder as "generic", shows a lack of appreciation for the natural world which indeed may make it better to stick to the roads. However, others have kept their sense of wonder more intact. Not believing in your ability to create something that millions have not done, self-defeats you, whether you are shooting in your backyard or far afield.




http://www.photo-mark.com/articles/repertoire/

A great read

[Bill_1856]

With a walker or wheelchair 50 FEET can usually be a significant problem. Believe me!
(I hope to get new knees sometime this year.)

[Vaughn]

...Today Banner peak is about a 15 mile one-way hike from the nearest road (at Agnews Meadow or Reds Meadow)...

A loop hike from Agnew Meadows to the Thousand Island Lake Basin was my intro to backpacking in the Sierras back in the late 1960's. It is also where AA took EW and Charis on a mosquito infested trip.

Talking with Michael, AA's son, last month, he told me how he went with his dad on burro trips photographing, so AA did extend with trips away from roads past his younger days.

I am hiking to the top of Half Dome this summer -- hoping to take the 5x7. I don't have a burro, but I'll have three 14-year old boys!

[rguinter]

A loop hike from Agnew Meadows to the Thousand Island Lake Basin was my intro to backpacking in the Sierras back in the late 1960's. It is also where AA took EW and Charis on a mosquito infested trip.

Talking with Michael, AA's son, last month, he told me how he went with his dad on burro trips photographing, so AA did extend with trips away from roads past his younger days.

I am hiking to the top of Half Dome this summer -- hoping to take the 5x7. I don't have a burro, but I'll have three 14-year old boys!

You'll probably still need the burro...

Bob G.

[Vaughn]

You'll probably still need the burro...

Bob G.

Yeah, but getting a burro up the cables is difficult...

[Heroique]

If I tried to summarize all the best insights so far:

“If you can ‘see,’ anywhere & everywhere can be photogenic; and if you can’t see, well, anywhere & everywhere can be photogenic.”

(I presume Brett Weston w/ his “500 yards” would disagree. Or agree, depending on which way you choose to read him!)

[Brian C. Miller]

With a walker or wheelchair 50 FEET can usually be a significant problem. Believe me!
(I hope to get new knees sometime this year.)

I know exactly that problem! Unfortunately, replacement spinal discs haven't been perfected, so I gimp about as I can. I'm limited to where I can go that some conveyance can carry the equipment. Sometimes I think about hiring somebody to pack the equipment for me.

[Bill Burk]

In a vacuum, I would have interpreted his message as a joke, playing on the definition of photogenic - something or someone that is easy to take a good picture of. Or maybe a cynical comment that the entire California coast is within 500 yards of a road.

Thanks, Merg, for pointing out that Brett Weston hated backpacking. I can accept that as fact. For anyone who requires it, accessible subject matter is perfectly relevant.

Austin, I admire your way with words (and pictures). I similarly find a week on a mountain trail gives my mind some precious few days where all the trappings of my normal life disappear from my thoughts entirely, and a snowfield can easily lure me on a half-mile hike from the comfort of camp.

Frank, I know you're poking some fun. Your Tuscan pictures may be near a car, but you certainly went to a bit of effort to get there.... Was the wine better than you've ever tasted at home? My snowfield supplied ice for the finest Martini's I've ever had.

[Wayne Lambert]

On my camera cabinet I have the following quote attributed to Morley Baer, "There are no good pictures more than 100 feet from the car." Of course, he could have picked it up from Edward or Brett.

Speaking of photographing subjects at your feet, I saw a good example of Ansel doing that very thing at I workshop I attended. The subject of the workshop was the making of a photographic book and the would-be writers were supposed to use lines from Robert Louis Stevenson'sOld Pacific Capital to accompany the would-be photographers' photographs of Monterrey. The first morning Ansel was showing the photographers how to use a Polaroid camera. Stepping outside the classroom he looked around a moment and then selected a rock-tree-shrub subject literally just outside the door. A minute or so later he held up a minor masterpiece. Needless to say we all became instant believers in refined seeing. When he passed it into the crowd a lot of hands reached for it. Unfortunately I was on the back row. But I do have a 4x5 Polaroid he helped me with the previous summer at the 1969 Yosemite Workshop. I call it Ansel's Suggestion because he pretty well showed me where to put the tripod.

[tgtaylor]

Assuming that you are physically able to mount a horse or mule, you and your gear can be transported to any location in the Sierra accessible by pack animal. You can even make a deal with the packers to set-up your campsite and tear it down upon departure. In my opinion this is an ideal way for several photographers to spend several days in a locale in comfort and at a reasonable cost while operating out of a base camp.

AA essentially did the same although in his case he purchased the mule outright at the beginning of the season and sold it back at the end. It was on one such excursion that the 1923 image of Banner Peak was taken and not only did that image catapult Adams and the Sierra Nevada into national attention, but it also served to kick-start the genera of western landscape photography and that of the "wilderness photographer."

Thomas

[Heroique]

...Stepping outside the classroom [Ansel] looked around a moment and then selected a rock-tree-shrub subject literally just outside the door. A minute or so later he held up a minor masterpiece...

This is a super anecdote. Thank you, Wayne.


...I do have a 4x5 Polaroid he helped me with the previous summer at the 1969 Yosemite Workshop. I call it Ansel's Suggestion because he pretty well showed me where to put the tripod.

I must not be the only one who’s hoping you’ll scan this and share it – even if I wouldn’t, if the shot were mine. To be sure, the better half of me would discourage you from doing so. A unique private treasure.

(Please? :rolleyes: ?)

Of course, it would be a treat for all of us to simply hear about AA’s “tripod tip,” and a general description of the resulting image. I bet he didn’t ask you to walk your tripod 500 yards for a better shot...

[Wayne Lambert]

Thanks, Heroique. At the 1969 Yosemite Workshop Ansel divided the students (about 50 as I recall---could be wrong) into two groups, an A group and a B group. When we were out photographing he would spend the morning with one group and the afternoon with the other. His workshop assistants were also with the groups. One morning we were photographing in the forest on the Valley floor and Ansel told us to spread out and look for good subjects. I walked a good ways, farther than I realized, and finally found a good Yosemite subject---trees and a big rock. For 30 or 40 minutes I tried to find the right view but nothing seemed to work. I was about ready to pick up and leave, hadn't heard any voices in an hour or two, when I heard crunch, crunch in the forest and "yahoo." It was Ansel. He asked me how I was doing and I said not very well. He said "May I have a look?" and I said "Please do." Actually quite a thrill to have Ansel check your groundglass. After a few moments he said "Very interesting. May I move your tripod?" I said "Of course" and he moved the tripod forward about 6 feet and then said "What do you think of this?" The image had moved from the realm of Wayne Lambert to the realm of Ansel Adams. He said "Let's try it", so we made a Polaroid. He looked at the print and handed it back to me. "Pretty good" he said and continued on into the forest. The photograph is on my website [URL="http://www.waynelambert.net"] in the Polaroid Type 52 section. The tripod tip and the lesson I learned that day was Get closer. As a postscript, I have always been bothered by the fact that the silhouetted branch from one tree merges with the branch from the other tree. I've always thought that if it were a 100% Ansel Adams photograph he would have done something about it.

[Heroique]

...I was about ready to pick up and leave, hadn’t heard any voices in an hour or two, when I heard crunch, crunch in the forest and “yahoo.” It was Ansel. He asked me how I was doing and I said not very well. He said "May I have a look?" and I said “Please do.” Actually quite a thrill to have Ansel check your groundglass...

Wayne, what a pleasure for all of us to read. It’s so good at illustrating AA’s courteous (and effective) style as a working educator; you might even share it w/ his current biographers. And I’m sure you have plenty more. At any rate, AA’s “6 feet” seems so much more efficient than anyone else’s “500 yards.” What an educator. I’m glad he helped you get your shot.

[tgtaylor]

..."May I have a look?" and I said "Please do." Actually quite a thrill to have Ansel check your groundglass. After a few moments he said "Very interesting. May I move your tripod?" I said "Of course" and he moved the tripod forward about 6 feet and then said "What do you think of this?" The image had moved from the realm of Wayne Lambert to the realm of Ansel Adams. He said "Let's try it", so we made a Polaroid. He looked at the print and handed it back to me. "Pretty good" he said and continued on into the forest...

A memorable story. However it is more of a testament of Ansel's insight or photographic 'seeing' than your own. Perhaps it would have been better if Adams would have let you take the photograph you were having so hard a time of finding and then suggesting the one that he ended-up framing for you to take and forcing you to 'see' your composition of it rather than his. Let me demonstrate.

Here are two photographs of the same subject. The first is my own taken around 2002 while scouring the banks of the Merced with a 6x7 camera looking for a photograph. I recall fussing for several minutes before settling on this composition:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5058/5504813341_a4055af99e_m.jpg

The second, perhaps including the same tree in the composition, was taken by Adams with a 6x6 camera at a date that is not known to me but obviously many years before mine. I discovered it in 2005 0r 2006 while reading Adam's The Camera and the image below is a scan of it which can be found on page 99:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5258/5505412210_8f6321a58b_m.jpg

Which image is the better? Well, I can truthfully say that today I would be disappointed if Adams had suddendly appeared behind me and I took his composition rather than mine.

Thomas

[Heroique]

...Which image is the better? Well, I can truthfully say that today I would be disappointed if Adams had suddenly appeared behind me and I took his composition rather than mine.

You didn’t show the photo’s context, and ignored its educational purpose.

Unless you want to appear self-serving – and I suspect that’s not your intention – you might want to re-think how to make this comparison. BTW, I like your shot.

(Ansel Adams, The Camera, p. 99)

[Brian C. Miller]

Hey, look! AA used a square, and then cropped it to a rectangle! Now, what does that do for our thread about square composition?? ;)

Heroique, I think Thomas' photograph still shows scale, like the closeup of the tree's bark.

Wayne, the trees look like they are forming a 'pi' symbol.

[David_Senesac]

Sure Weston was jokingly thinking more in terms of his own photography and not others.


One of humankind's best attributes is its unwillingness (or at least of 99% of us) to walk out of sight of our car. This alone dramatically benefits those of us who are prepared to walk further. I'm happy to be in the remaining 1%, even with a heavy camera backpack. I don't like to contemplate what it would be like if every car's occupants were liberally spread all over every beautiful landscape!

A primary difference between my own body of work and the 99% you others is going more than 500 yards from roads. Given the weight of view camera gear and the fear many have distancing themselves from civilization , we of the 1% know this is not likely to ever change.

Roadside anything obviously worthy has been shot to death.

Well away from roadsides a vast amount of unique worthy material.

[Vaughn]

I have been photographing 4 miles of a creek for the past 30 years or so. There are some images from the side of the road, but mostly I am hiking the trail along the creek -- and sometimes in the creek itself. Always something new, light creating new forms under the redwoods, old friends falling down, and new growth bursting in the light created by the fall.

With the 8x10 and and 30+ years of wandering along the creek, I find that I don't quite get the mileage I use to. But I enjoy the wandering. And generally, no one else is seen. Occasional elk, but haven't spotted a mountain lion yet.

But it is a perfect place for those who wish to stay within 500 feet of their automobile. There are numerous trails off the road that are relatively flat, designed so that camera-loaded buggies work great. (I use to take my three boys for walks here in their baby stroller -- a three-seater.) And 500 feet will get you in the middle of a virgin redwood forest and out of sight of one's automobile and the road.

And that is what I would mostly do if I had a 14x17 or 16x20 camera. But with a dinky little 8x10 I can hoof it several miles or explore down the creek. Or take the 5x7 on the pod over my shoulder, and a small pack with holders and darkcloth (and lunch) and do a little more exploring that the weight of the 8x10 makes difficult.

[Bill Burk]

Wayne,

I can almost hear the footsteps, thanks for the story. I bet he was excited to see that you were only a few feet away from that shot.

[Bruce Watson]

Why search? Because it's fun. No other reason needed.

[rdenney]

Roadside anything obviously worthy has been shot to death.

Well away from roadsides a vast amount of unique worthy material.

I won't argue the shot-to-death part, although it is arguable.

I'll argue the "worthy" part. I think the point of such quotes is to get our heads out of our predetermined idea of what is worthy and open our eyes. There is worthiness everywhere, if we have the eyes to see it.

I have photographed more than a few Famous Landmarks. None of those photos are really like any others, because of the choices I made and the conditions when I was there. When in those locations, though, I've often been clouded by the celebrity of the place and ended up not really feeling it myself. Sometimes, I've had a unique view, other times not. But the photographs I make in my yard are unique in terms of their location--there is nothing famous about them. I don't even have to get in the car to reach them. Are they unique in terms of how I represent them? If not, then that is my fault and my fault alone, not the fault of those beautiful little details that I usually take for granted.

Rick "sometimes standing at the overlook with the camera pointed the opposite direction as everyone else" Denney

[William McEwen]

It is true that Ansel, as a young man, did a fair amount of hiking. However, many of his most revered images, those upon which his reputation rests, were made from the tailgate or roof of his vehicle. A perusal of his portfolios is evidence.

Mary Alinder talks about this in her excellent bio about AA. Once AA hit 50 or so, he sort of lost the fire in his belly to go out and make photographs.

I disagree with Alinder's conclusion that it was fear of failure that made AA stop spending so much time photographing.

But she points out that many of AA's important images made after the age of 50 or so were not made on long photo trips. For example, "Moon and Half Dome" was made when Ansel was driving to a meeting. He saw the picture, stopped his car, got out and shot several frames with his Hassy. Then he continued on to his meeting.

[William McEwen]

"If you can't drive to it, screw it." - Huntington Witherill.

[Wayne Lambert]

Since the topic is how far do you need to walk to find a good photograph (and in essence, refined seeing), I should have related this anecdote first. On another morning at the 1969 Yosemite Workshop our first stop was at a roadside pull-off on the Valley floor. From the roadside we had an open view across a meadow toward the high cliffs and granite spires of the south valley wall. While most of us began to scatter into the meadow Ansel proceeded to set up on the roadside. The stop seemed precipitous and unplanned, and I wondered if he had seen something that the rest of us didn't; in fact I was pretty sure he had. Soon there was a small crowd around him, and he was letting people under the darkcloth one at a time to see the groundglass. Lots of oohs and aahs. I got in line. I looked toward the cliffs but couldn't see anything particularly remarkable. The bellows were wracked way out. I don't recall the lens but it could have been as much as 500-600 mm on the 4x5. When my time came I was amazed. He had selected a spire at the very top of the cliff. The brilliant morning sun was grazing it at 90 degrees and there was just enough mountain haze to make it look as if it were glowing with light from within as well as from without. I could see it in one of his books. It was roadside photography, but it was undoubtedly by a master of the genre. Here the story breaks down a bit. All the above is true, but this next part is debatable. Over the years I have convinced myself that one of the last lookers that morning was Beaumont Newhall who happened to be visiting Ansel for a few days in Yosemite that summer. He summarized the moment for us all. As he stepped from under the darkcloth he shook his head and quietly said, "My God, Ansel, I can see better on your groundglass than I can with my own eyes."

Well, memory can play tricks on you and mine more so than others. A few years ago I thought I should see if any one else remembered Newhall's presence and this wonderful quote, or if this was a Newhall anecdote (unrelated to 1969 Yosemite) that I had picked up somewhere. Probably the only student at the 1969 Workshop who really became a famous photographer is Bob Kolbrener who also happened to be my roommate at the Yosemite Lodge that summer. In later years Bob had a close relationship with Ansel and assisted at the Yosemite workshops. I called Bob and related the story. Nope, he said, he didn't remember Newhall being there. So, there's the story. Probably I have mixed up Newhall and the quote and an experience that certainly could have provoked a comment like that. If anyone can shed light on the matter, please let me know.

[Bill_1856]

"If you can't drive to it, screw it." - Huntington Witherill.

Sounds about right to ME!

[Mark Sampson]

There's a quote from Thoreau that applies here. A mangled version follows:
'The best reason for a walk is the arguments against it.'

[engl]

So it is an American thing? Pretty much only Americans responding here, and none of the (admittedly few) European LF photographers I know stick close to their cars.

[Heroique]

...none of the (admittedly few) European LF photographers I know stick close to their cars.

Too true to be good! If it’s not quick, easy, and repeatable, it’s not American. And walking 500 yards w/ LF gear is certainly not quick, easy, and repeatable. Besides, we Americans have a love relationship w/ our cars. Who wants to abandon her by the road?

[Daniel_Buck]

get a 4x4 vehicle, and cut that walk down a bit :-D And you don't have to leave the vehicle by the road, you leave it stashed away behind some bushes somewhere out of the way where probably nobody else is up there anyway.

Just as example, you could hike up to this point, maybe an hour hike up hill with mostly loose dirt and rocks. But it only took me less than 10 minutes to drive up there in the jeep. Don't get me wrong, I love hiking, but I also like driving off road too. Some trips I do mostly hiking, some mostly driving, and some 1/2 and 1/2. Having a 4x4 vehicle certainly gives more more options :-)

http://www.buckshotsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/deercreek_01.jpg

http://www.buckshotsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/deercreek_02.jpg

[Roger Cole]

So it is an American thing? Pretty much only Americans responding here, and none of the (admittedly few) European LF photographers I know stick close to their cars.


Too true to be good! If it’s not quick, easy, and repeatable, it’s not American. And walking 500 yards w/ LF gear is certainly not quick, easy, and repeatable. Besides, we Americans have a love relationship w/ our cars. Who wants to abandon her by the road?

True, BUT - we also have thousands of miles of roads that go through relatively undeveloped, unspoiled areas where everything within range of the road hasn't been built up. This is particularly true in the west but also in some parts of the Appalachians I'm familiar with too.

[Zaitz]

Thanks, Heroique. At the 1969 Yosemite Workshop Ansel divided the students (about 50 as I recall---could be wrong) into two groups, an A group and a B group. When we were out photographing he would spend the morning with one group and the afternoon with the other. His workshop assistants were also with the groups. One morning we were photographing in the forest on the Valley floor and Ansel told us to spread out and look for good subjects. I walked a good ways, farther than I realized, and finally found a good Yosemite subject---trees and a big rock. For 30 or 40 minutes I tried to find the right view but nothing seemed to work. I was about ready to pick up and leave, hadn't heard any voices in an hour or two, when I heard crunch, crunch in the forest and "yahoo." It was Ansel. He asked me how I was doing and I said not very well. He said "May I have a look?" and I said "Please do." Actually quite a thrill to have Ansel check your groundglass. After a few moments he said "Very interesting. May I move your tripod?" I said "Of course" and he moved the tripod forward about 6 feet and then said "What do you think of this?" The image had moved from the realm of Wayne Lambert to the realm of Ansel Adams. He said "Let's try it", so we made a Polaroid. He looked at the print and handed it back to me. "Pretty good" he said and continued on into the forest. The photograph is on my website [URL="http://www.waynelambert.net"] in the Polaroid Type 52 section. The tripod tip and the lesson I learned that day was Get closer. As a postscript, I have always been bothered by the fact that the silhouetted branch from one tree merges with the branch from the other tree. I've always thought that if it were a 100% Ansel Adams photograph he would have done something about it.

What an awesome story....thanks for posting this and your other one. I could read these all day.

Edit: And the photo is really great too.

[Grif]

What a great thread, and timely for me. I've been driving the same commute for the past 5 years, and really started "looking" at it last fall. Only a few shots so far, but wow. When you just stop and "look" instead of just seeing the same old commute it's a whole new world. I guess the portfolio name wouldn't be far off if it just said "From My Car". I guess I'll add that to the list of things I need to do RealSoonNow ;-)

[paulr]

The National Bureau of Standards is about to raise the official distance to 550 feet, in order to discourage excessive driving. It may remain 500 feet for those driving hybrids.

Seriously, my take on that remark is that it doesn't presume the world suddenly getting ugly or boring when you venture from the road. It's based on the idea that the world is interesting and worth photographing everywhere, so if you feel you have to travel far just get interesting pictures, something is likely wrong.

This says nothing about people who like to walk for walking's sake, and who bring a camera because they want to.

[Vaughn]

Looking for an image of my favorite photograph, I found this...

"After parking the car and investigating further he found a suitable situation some six hundred feet from the road, he returned to the car to retrieve his 8 x 10 in view camera and set about capturing this image."

Underline and bold added by me

http://www.coolantarctica.com/Shop/ansel_adams/tenaya_creek.htm

Of course he was a younger man in 1948!

[Jim Galli]

So it is an American thing? Pretty much only Americans responding here, and none of the (admittedly few) European LF photographers I know stick close to their cars.

In Europe if you walk 500 yards from the car you get to another road.

[Bill_1856]

Looking for an image of my favorite photograph, I found this...

"After parking the car and investigating further he found a suitable situation some six hundred feet from the road, he returned to the car to retrieve his 8 x 10 in view camera and set about capturing this image."

Underline and bold added by me

http://www.coolantarctica.com/Shop/ansel_adams/tenaya_creek.htm

Of course he was a younger man in 1948!

He spotted it from the road while crossing the bridge in his car.

[Daniel_Buck]

In Europe if you walk 500 yards from the car you get to another road.

good call. There are many places here in the US that you can drive modern highways and not hit a gas-station, grocery store, or house for almost an hour. And especially when you start hitting the back roads. And on back roads you might not even see another vehicle or person for that hour or more. I'm taking a trip across the US to visit friends and family, and I'm going to put probably 12,000 miles on my jeep in 5-6 weeks!! that's more miles than most folks drive in a year, haha!

[Preston]

It's very easy to look around, whether you are 50 feet from the road or five miles from the road. In each case, however, seeing is the challenge before us.

--P

[paulr]

In Europe if you walk 500 yards from the car you get to another road.

In my neighborhood you walk 5 yards from the car you get to a wall or fence.

Of course, you're usually well over 500 yards from any parking space, so it makes more sense to sell the car and just walk around, tripod slung over your shoulder, like Jesus.

[tgtaylor]

In Europe if you walk 500 yards from the car you get to another road.

One morning, while getting my morning dose of caffeine in a campground coffee shop in Crete, the girls working the counter asked me how big the US was. I told them that it was 5000 kilometers across (coast to coast). They didn't say anything but as soon as the manager who once lived in San Francisco came in they told him in rapid Greek that I said the US was 5000KM across. He looked down for a second while computing the distance in his head and then looked back up to them and nodded "yes."

The US is a big country compared to many others.

Thomas
"That's a big name in greece."

[Roger Cole]

good call. There are many places here in the US that you can drive modern highways and not hit a gas-station, grocery store, or house for almost an hour. And especially when you start hitting the back roads. And on back roads you might not even see another vehicle or person for that hour or more. I'm taking a trip across the US to visit friends and family, and I'm going to put probably 12,000 miles on my jeep in 5-6 weeks!! that's more miles than most folks drive in a year, haha!

I've heard that, but I don't know these "most" folks. I drive more than twice that much a year, and most people I know drive at least 15k-18k.

On the other hand, I suppose it's balanced out because I don't know anyone who lives in New York City:


In my neighborhood you walk 5 yards from the car you get to a wall or fence.

Of course, you're usually well over 500 yards from any parking space, so it makes more sense to sell the car and just walk around, tripod slung over your shoulder, like Jesus.

Yeahbut, New York is just nominally in the same country. It's actually a different world. (Meant kindly but half seriously.)

[Bill_1856]

good call. There are many places here in the US that you can drive modern highways and not hit a gas-station, grocery store, or house for almost an hour. And especially when you start hitting the back roads. And on back roads you might not even see another vehicle or person for that hour or more. I'm taking a trip across the US to visit friends and family, and I'm going to put probably 12,000 miles on my jeep in 5-6 weeks!! that's more miles than most folks drive in a year, haha!

Let's see: 12,000 miles @ 18 mpg @ $4.00/gal = $2667. Haha yourself!

[rdenney]

Let's see: 12,000 miles @ 18 mpg @ $4.00/gal = $2667. Haha yourself!

The rent difference for comparable housing in Manhattan would exceed that...

...every month.

Rick "not counting transit fares, which ain't exactly free" Denney

[tgtaylor]

Let's see: 12,000 miles @ 18 mpg @ $4.00/gal = $2667. Haha yourself!

Well let's see: 12,000 miles @ 45/mpg in my "little" Echo (50/mpg if all highway) = $1,064. Haha all of you!

The Echo is the biggest small car that I have ever seen: Plenty of leg and head room; the front seats drop back so someone my size (5'10") is able to inflate an air mattress and sleep in relative comfort in the front seat if necessary; and the trunk will completely hold my 10" telescope with tripod and all accessories for an observing session. That latter is a primary purchasing requirement for me. If it won't fit, I don't buy, period.

Thomas

[Daniel_Buck]

Let's see: 12,000 miles @ 18 mpg @ $4.00/gal = $2667. Haha yourself!

18mpg is probably an over estimate on my jeep, even just highway miles :D I'm figuring on about 16mpg on the freeway doing 70. That's cool though, I've been expecting not to work for these 2 months anyway, and one paycheck will cover the entire fuel cost, so I'm ok.

Even with my not-so-eco-friendly jeep, it's still probably going to be cheaper than flying all over the place, I'm going to be visiting alot of people in alot of different states. Though, I haven't calculated the cost of flying, I'd rather just drive anyway. If I see something nice, I can go to it. If I see a road or a trail that looks interesting, I'll take it.

[Sirius Glass]

Well let's see: 12,000 miles @ 45/mpg in my "little" Echo (50/mpg if all highway) = $1,064. Haha all of you!

The Echo is the biggest small car that I have ever seen: Plenty of leg and head room; the front seats drop back so someone my size (5'10") is able to inflate an air mattress and sleep in relative comfort in the front seat if necessary; and the trunk will completely hold my 10" telescope with tripod and all accessories for an observing session. That latter is a primary purchasing requirement for me. If it won't fit, I don't buy, period.

Thomas

Until some jerk rear-ends you and you get seriously killed!

Steve

[Thad Gerheim]

Until some jerk rear-ends you and you get seriously killed!

Steve

Is that different than getting unseriously killed by an oil tanker or cancer from heavy metals in your drinking water. Its a good thing we don't count the unseriously killed!

[Curt]

I have two, one is a Jeep like Daniel's and the other is a Dodge Ram. Wife has an Elantra, 35 mpg.

Jeep 16 to 20, 6 cylinder Sport, sleep in it? No.
Ram 1500 four door small V8. Can pull my lt wt rv. Gets 12 mpg. Sleeps many. Bath, kitchen, beds. On a longer trip it's economical.

Both being 4x4's it's good to go where I want. I need a shooting platform for the truck.

New clutch for the Jeep new transmission for the Ram.

I'd walk as far as I can depending on the day. Americans like to see what's just over the next hill. It's in our stock.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Americans like to see what's just over the next hill. It's in our stock.


...and then invade. It's in your stock. ;)

[Brian C. Miller]

...and then invade. It's in your stock. ;)

Hey! We were trying to free Canada from British oppression. And now the Queen can change your country's seal as she sees fit, whenever she likes. Just because nobody up north there notices for six months isn't our fault... ;)

[Roger Cole]

I don't know where this bizarre discussion of costs and relative safety came in. Weren't we talking about photography?

I drive more than twice that 12k figure, but my car gets nearly twice the mileage (32-35 on my Mazda3 with stick shift that I mostly keep my foot out of) and gas so far is nowhere near $4 a gallon again here - $3.429 in my neighborhood right now, all of which is pretty irrelevant to photography. We aren't really talking about whether it's worth driving an hour to photograph but more like whether it's worth walking an additional five miles (or whatever) after driving. (Vehicle mass also doesn't correlate directly to safety, especially when comparing the popular high mass vehicles with high roof lines and accompanying proneness to roll over - which is all even more irrelevant.)