Never mind, Eric, it is just landscape haters speaking in tongues. ![Wink ;)](https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Neither true nor fair, Slobodan. (Emoticon notwithstanding.)
The term really owes its existence as reaction to the great lack of originality in a huge majority of ARAT subject matter. That's why when something really cool comes up, such as Chris's two photographs, it makes us 'ere lot with a more tempered, less acolyte-like take on ARAT sit up, take notice and comment. That's why you won't find us of that persuasion generally commenting on ARAT threads.
From a personal standpoint, I find it quite difficult in my own reality to see those sorts of images in the raw, as it were, even if I do enjoy the good ones in the final, photographic presentation. I believe we probably all have visual blind spots, and that's but one of mine. Having said which, I am not suggesting that I don't feel capable of appreciating landscape work, just that I think there's so little good stuff about. Generally, I think that I feel more impressed with black/white interpretations of the genre.
As an edit: think I am really turning further and further away from colour in my own appreciation of photography; this could be an atavistic thing because of the era when I first became obsessed with the medium - it might even be a reaction to the general disappointment I feel with colour printing. Perhaps more likely is the impression that I have that black/white is just more interesting in its ability to take things out of cold reality and into a further space where imagination can run more freely. Bad colour is obvious, try to disguise it how you may - with words or with visual exaggerations - the truth will always out.
Rob C