"Rob, I think it's a little unfair to imply that all landscape photographers don't understand how useful a shallow depth of field can be, just because the evidence from this shot is that I don't!"
Hi Jeremy
No, I'm not saying that all landscape shooters are unaware of dof, quite the opposite, in fact; what I believe is that pretty well every landscape image that I see published has this 'f64 or nothing' look to it.
I'm fairly sure that when they do anything other than landscape, these same shooters are perfectly aware of the dof techniques they can employ to better their pics, but that they are educated to think within an infinite dof paradigm whenever they get into landscape mode. Even without viewing the images, you can pick up the same vibe from reading the questions/concerns that are raised here about lens performance stopped down, the fears of getting something less than as sharp as it might be; it's all part of the same thing, an indoctrination that's awfully hard to override once it sets in. That's a shame, really, because as Russ showed with his manipulation, things can be made very much more intersting in landscape too, by showing the main subject and only suggesting the rest as some indicator of ambience. After all, it's usually the main subject that catches the snapper's eye in the first place, unless it really is the great sweeping landscape that is the subject... or the no subject, if you like.
?
Rob C