Will the Real Landscape Photography Please Stand Up ?

[elliot_n]

Surely the question then becomes whether there's a profound difference (or indeed any difference) between large dogs which are brown, and brown dogs which are large?

[amolitor]

Surely the question then becomes whether there's a profound difference (or indeed any difference) between large dogs which are brown, and brown dogs which are large?

Um, wha? My post, the one you're replying to, is actually specifically about why this isn't the question, and I can't think how on earth I could be more clear.

[Isaac]

… I can't think how on earth I could be more clear.

By talking about artists and photographers.

[Diego Pigozzo]

...
The differences are not in the individuals, but in the categories and the way we define them.
...

I think this is exactly the point: the difference is the way we define categories, nothing else.

[Isaac]

Richard Prince on one end... but who on the other? Edward Weston or Peter Lik? Where does Ansel Adams fit in?

On his seventieth birthday, speaking at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, [Ansel Adams] re-asserted the Stieglitz position as if forty years of artistic nihilism, experimentation, iconoclasm, cynicism, spiritual muckraking, and the arrogance of fashionable despairs had never intervened. "I believe the artist can accomplish most on the agenda for survival by creating beauty, by setting examples of beauty in order, by emphasizing the concept of the essential dignity of the human mind and spirit… I believe, with Alfred Stieglitz, that art is the affirmation of life."

"Ansel Adams, Photographer", Wallace Stegner in "Ansel Adams in the National Parks" pp20-21

[elliot_n]

By talking about artists and photographers.

Yes, the dog analogy isn't particularly helpful here. Much better to give some examples of practitioners who fall into Slobodan's categories. (Unless this is just a logic problem.)

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I knew we are going to step into some dog poop along the way.

[Diego Pigozzo]

Much better to give some examples of practitioners who fall into Slobodan's categories.

I'm not sure giving examples would be fruitful: we already disagree on which category Salgado belongs, I don't think more example to disagree on would help.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I'm not sure giving examples would be fruitful: we already disagree on which category Salgado belongs, I don't think more example to disagree on would help.

Then perhaps you could elaborate why you consider him an Artist?

[Diego Pigozzo]

Then perhaps you could elaborate why you consider him an Artist?

Because, like Ansel Adams, it is able to show the mighty power of the nature.
At least to me, of course.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Because, like Ansel Adams, it is able to show the mighty power of the nature.
At least to me, of course.

You are talking about Salgado the landscape photographer, not Salgado the documentary photographer?

[Diego Pigozzo]

You are talking about Salgado the landscape photographer, not Salgado the documentary photographer?

Yeaph!

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Well... when you paint like the original Impressionists did, you are an Artist. When you paint like Impressionists today, you are... an impersonator.

By the same token, when you photograph like Ansel Adams today, you are a copycat.

[Diego Pigozzo]

Well... when you paint like the original Impressionists did, you are an Artist. When you paint like Impressionists today, you are... an impersonator.

By the same token, when you photograph like Ansel Adams today, you are a copycat.

This makes all photographer copycats, doesn't it?
I mean, everything has been photographed in every possible ways, isn't it?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

This makes all photographer copycats, doesn't it?
I mean, everything has been photographed in every possible ways, isn't it?

This is me, being a Salgado copycat:

http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=63891.msg514611#msg514611

[Diego Pigozzo]

This is me, being a Salgado copycat:

http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=63891.msg514611#msg514611

So, if the answer is "yes, all photographers today are copycats", does still make sense asking for "real landscape photography"?

[Isaac]

This makes all photographer copycats, doesn't it? I mean, everything has been photographed in every possible ways, isn't it?

No and no.

[Diego Pigozzo]

No and no.

Can you show me some photographer today that shot something in a way that was never shot before?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

So, if the answer is "yes, all photographers today are copycats"...

No, the answer is not "yes." Most are, though, with few separating from the pack by breaking new grounds, exploring new angles, concepts, ideas. You know, things that make artists Artists. Simply using a few aesthetic tricks, borrowed from classical arts, like I do (and Salgado) does not make a photographer an Artist.

[Diego Pigozzo]

As that would require an exhaustive comparison with every photograph every made, I leave you to believe whatever you wish to believe.

Well, if you're saying that there certanly are some photographers that are not copycats I think you can name some of them, otherwise I could wish to believe that you're just believing there are non-copycats photographers out there.

Looking on the site I found this article by Michael Reichmann, which shows some (beautiful) shots closely resembling those of Ernst Haas.

(I have no idea who Ernst Haas is, I read his name here).

Is Mr. Reichmann a copycat photographer?