Animate Landscapes - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

02/08/2007 10:29:55 AM · #1

Many landscape photographs carefully mask away any traces of human presence in the frame and use landscape's beauty is the sole coercive force of the image. But adding a human being or some evidence of a human to a landscape may add a whole new direction to it. The tricky part is to do this in such a way that the photograph still remains a *landscape*.

I don't shoot landscapes often, and, while on a two-week vacation, I resorted to shooting predominantly landscapes, and brought with me a dozen articles on technical and compositional aspects of landscape photography, to read when there was no good light :). One of them was entitled Animate Landscapes (in Russian language, sorry, but the illustrations don't need translation), with a disclaimer that the term "animate" in this context was self-invented by the author, and, probably, not perfect.

I liked the idea a lot, and tried shooting a set of such photographs. Only a few worked to my satisfaction.

It would be interesting to discuss this idea and see any other examples of "animate" landscapes.

Message edited by author 2007-02-08 10:32:00.

silverfoxx

Canon EOS-5D

02/08/2007 10:38:41 AM · #2

very good article, I totally agree with everything there.
humans or "traces" of humans is what makes a photograph stand out for me. I don't like lifeless landscapes.

I think your fisrt photo

is a good example of "animated" landscapes (I don't like the word "animated" though, it sounds too mechanical)
I also like the second one, the mood here:

do you think this one can also be an example of a human landscape?

Message edited by author 2007-02-08 10:41:36.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

02/08/2007 10:48:04 AM · #3

Originally posted by silverfoxx:

I don't like the word "animated" though, it sounds too mechanical

"Animated" is mechanical, because it implies motion. I chose "animate" as in animate/inanimate distinction.

Originally posted by silverfoxx:

do you think this one can also be an example of a human landscape?

It definitely has the "animate" part, but is missing the "landscape" part, IMO. :) I'm not a big fan of heavy post processing, too. But the feeling is there.

Message edited by author 2007-02-08 10:48:16.

silverfoxx

Canon EOS-5D

02/08/2007 11:06:53 AM · #4

Originally posted by agenkin:

It definitely has the "animate" part, but is missing the "landscape" part, IMO. :) I'm not a big fan of heavy post processing, too. But the feeling is there.

jaja, sure. not much landscape there, true.

mechanical was not the right word from me either...

but this is strange, a landscape is something living already, isn't it?
and still it's not "live" enough for me without humans.

Fromac

Nikon D7000

Olympus 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 Zuiko Digital ED

02/08/2007 11:18:58 AM · #5

I like the idea. My current "Good" submission fits, and I shot these last summer.

I enjoy landscapes most when there is evidence of humans in the frame.

Elvis_L

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

02/08/2007 11:43:20 AM · #6

While my title points to the person without it i think he is not the subject but adds to the shot. I agree that a person or people interacting with the landscape can often have a mroe dramatic impact

silverfoxx

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

02/08/2007 11:53:23 AM · #7

I think one of my heros Jerry Uelsmann creates perfect examples of animated landscapes.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

02/08/2007 11:55:11 AM · #8

All use this concept in one way or another. I got lots of others... It's actually not that easy to eliminate the hand of man on Cape Cod. I mean, you can do it, but you have to go out of your way to do so. Or shoot straight out to sea, of course...

R.

dleach

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

02/08/2007 12:06:54 PM · #9

Originally posted by agenkin:

<> One of them was entitled Animate Landscapes (in Russian language, sorry, but the illustrations don't need translation), with a disclaimer that the term "animate" in this context was self-invented by the author, and, probably, not perfect.
<>

Go to google.com and enter in the URL. Google will then pop up a page with the link and offer to translate the page... still a bit interesting to follow ;-)

02/08/2007 04:19:27 PM · #10

Originally posted by dleach:

Go to google.com and enter in the URL. Google will then pop up a page with the link and offer to translate the page... still a bit interesting to follow ;-)

Boy, this automatic translation is awful. :) Sometimes the sense of a phrase comes out as exact opposite of the original. On the other hand, such translation is better than nothing.

02/08/2007 04:26:40 PM · #11

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

This is my favourite of the ones posted so far, idea-wise. I wish there were a stronger emphasis on the tracks (compositional and/or with a light spot). I love the rim light on the snow banks and the colour cast of the setting sun upon the snow.

Olympus 12-100mm f/4.0 M.Zuiko ED IS PRO

02/08/2007 04:35:16 PM · #12

Originally posted by silverfoxx:

I think one of my heros Jerry Uelsmann creates perfect examples of animated landscapes.

Hmm... which ones? I've just looked through all of them, and found only one: the last picture in the fifth set, with (what looks like) a dog on a trail. It's hard to tell from the tiny images that his flash site lets one see.

Message edited by author 2007-02-08 16:35:59.

LevT

OM System OM-1

02/08/2007 04:54:35 PM · #13

I not only never try to hide a human presence in the landscape, I often seek it, as a focal point of an otherwise boring "postcard" shot

Probably, I am just not a landscape photographer... :)

levyj413

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for Nikon

02/08/2007 05:07:57 PM · #14

These are three of mine. What do you think?

Message edited by author 2007-02-08 17:08:08.

02/08/2007 11:39:37 PM · #15

Originally posted by LevT:

I not only never try to hide a human presence in the landscape, I often seek it, as a focal point of an otherwise boring "postcard" shot

Hi, Lev:

These are all good examples. Some of them still have the postcard quality due to over-saturated colours, though. :)

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G

02/08/2007 11:43:32 PM · #16

Originally posted by levyj413:

These are three of mine. What do you think?

I think that the human presence in them may be too strong, especially in the first and the second ones. The human figures are not so dominant in the third one, but it has this touristy taste to it: the people definitely look like they are but temporary visitors, rather than part of the landscape.

Tim

Nikon D300

02/09/2007 12:09:35 AM · #17

I dont entirely agree with the notion that a landscape needs a "human touch" - but it does need a focal point and one of the easiest ways of introducing that element is through our built environment or simply by including a figure in the photo. It's also the easiest way to show some sense of scale

Take for example this photo by

philupfrom the January free study

Without the stargazer this would be quite a bland photo but with the human figure it becomes IMO quite enchanting.

levyj413

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for Nikon

02/09/2007 12:54:29 AM · #18

Originally posted by agenkin:

Originally posted by levyj413:
These are three of mine. What do you think?

I think that the human presence in them may be too strong, especially in the first and the second ones. The human figures are not so dominant in the third one, but it has this touristy taste to it: the people definitely look like they are but temporary visitors, rather than part of the landscape.

Hmm. Okay. Guess I'm not understanding your definition. People are always "temporary visitors" unless they live in the spot where you shot them.

02/09/2007 08:49:03 PM · #19

Originally posted by dr_timbo:

I agree. The idea was not to say that any landscape needs a human presence, but that a landscape can benefit from it, and that such landscapes can be discussed separately from the "inanimate" ones. And the benefit can go beyond simply being a focal point or a point of reference, but speak about the human's place in, and relationship with the environment.

Originally posted by dr_timbo:

Without the stargazer this would be quite a bland photo but with the human figure it becomes IMO quite enchanting.

This is a good example. The convexity of the hill creates an illusion of representing the roundness of the Earth, disproportionally small compared to the person standing on it. I don't care for the phase of the person's movement/posture, though.