Too much of a good thing?

Is too much ‘sharing’ of nature photography a bad thing? I ask because our local paper had a photo contest (which I did not enter) and a winner was a shot of Mesa Arch at sunrise with the Washerwoman in the distance. My immediate reaction was a groan. It IS a beautiful sight, but I’ve seen similar photographs many times before. I’ve got a similar set of slides myself. Maybe it’s just a matter of icon overload, but I’m beginning to wonder if our hearts are hardened by too much beautiful nature photography.

Familiarity breeds contempt. How accurate that is. The reason we hold truth in such respect is because we have so little opportunity to get familiar with it.
Mark Twain


Pete D.

That's a great question, Pete. I had a similar exchange with a fellow NPN'r a while back about the location of a spot I considered "well known" but that for him was an accidental discovery. I could only imagine the sense of discovery of coming to such an amazing spot unprepared and that I had probably robbed myself of this same opportunity by viewing countless images of beautiful places.
Personally i always try to find new and unfamiliar places and there's no shortage of those in my immediate surrounding. I would still rather be at Mesa Arch at sunrise than any number of other places and I'm glad that familiarity and care for it made sure it is now protected so I will always be able to.

Guy

I hear you....I'm the editor of the photojournal of the non-profit that I work for, which means that people submit their photographs to me to post on our site. Obviously, nothing professional, but I like to keep it to good and relavant shots. But I've been quite jaded since I've started posting here.

Good and bad, it's hard enough telling people that their pics aren't up to snuff, but I've learned the art of critique by posting here, and believe I've been able to help alot of people out with their photography!

I had to take a step back on the icon question a few years ago. Yes, they might be old and familiar to me, but on behalf of those same icons I can't express that feeling outside a circle of "close friends" such as NPN.

What in the heck is Hank talking about now?

I think feelings of awe and discovery are critical for the continued preservation, funding and appreciation of these great places, along with many others desperately in need of help. The only way that is going to happen is if more people feel strongly about them. If my lack of enthusiasm for shots of the same old places discourages a new visitor or beginning photographer, I'm working exactly counter to my own most strongly held convictions.

So bring on the new icon shots! I'll dance with first time visitors to Mesa Arch or Delicate Arch and conceal my yawns as they show me their first fumbling attempts to photograph them, too.

We need those folks and their enthusiasm!

This is a tough issue and something that every nature photographer must wrestle with in some fashion. I would also say that the same thing could be argued with compositional approach...I'm on ultra-wide/near-far overload at the moment. Back to the main topic, living in a low-key place such as where I do, the number of "icons" that I have access to is quite small. There are never the less, a few such places (mostly along the Minnesota-Lake Superior shoreline), and I personally choose not to photograph them in any manner. The main reason being, that I cannot get excited about such heavily trampled turf and I also find that my enthusiasm drops significantly when there are a lot of other people present. Hank is onto something in his comments on the importance of "discovery". Without that sense, I doubt I would have a reason to photograph. Thankfully the world is constantly changing, so even the places I'm most familiar with are different every time I return. There is joy to be found in the small discovery's just as much as the large ones I have found. A flower may be about to bloom, light may manefest itself in an unexpected way, water levels rise and fall creating different possibilities. I have come to the conclusion that there is still much to discover if we are really willing to look and engage our subject matter.

Nature photographers who are familiar with all the major sights might be overloaded on looking at Mesa Arch shots and other icons, but it doesn't mean the general public has seen many or even familiar with the sights. Believe it or not, there's people in my family who aren't familiar with Half Dome. For me, I haven't even been to Mesa Arch so I would imagine it to be exciting if and whenever I go.

I know where you're coming from Pete, although if I ever got a chance to go to Mesa Arch I'm sure I'd be there with tripod set up! But this is one reason I enjoy photographing the little intimate scenes that can be found just about anywhere. I was wandering around the little lake near my house this weekend and shot a few images that may not be stunning like Mesa Arch, but beautiful in their own way. And they are definitely unique!

Here's my take on the issue of icon shots for what it's worth. Photography like any endeavor in life is a journey. Not everyone takes the same path and even those along the same path are not at the same mile marker. There is an evolution of style, technical expertise, interest, expectations etc. that occurs along the journey. Being prejudicial of an image solely because of content or icon status is not fair to a photographer who with that image may be working hard to push the boudaries of their own personal experience. Everyone who has a pic of Mesa Arch had a "first time" experience themselves and most likely returned to shoot many more images with the hope of correcting "mistakes". Great art masters throughout history have copied styles and subject matter in their early years in order to learn the craft. There comes a time along the journey, however, when the wealth of experiences cause them to want to distance themselves from copying and to find their own personal style. The flip side of your post which concerns the issue of judging mirrors the artistic journey. A judge with a great deal of experience will unlikely award a prize in an open competition to an "icon shot". However, I would hope that the artistic journey is taken into consideration in a contest open to youth or amateurs only and an icon shot would be given fair consideration. In the end I believe our hearts are only hardened by too much beautiful nature photography only if we let them.

My example was a photograph of an iconic landscape, but my concern is really more general. I feel like I have almost unlimited access to beautiful nature photography. What has that done to my appreciation of beautiful nature photographs? I fear that I have lost something, and that we are all losing something. When a beautiful photograph of a spectacular landscape makes me groan, there is something wrong. It's not just me. I'm worried that all of us are reaching beauty overload.

Pete D.

These responses are great, and my personal experience resonates a lot with what Hank said. The Internet makes it seems that the whole world is taking great iconic shots. And that the whole world has seen the great places, especially in the western U.S. But we really are a small group.
I "saw" the extreme of this thinking in a post several years ago. The photographer wasn't even going to go with his wife to Yosemite for the first time because he had seen all the photos - and what was the point. At times I find myself heading in the direction of this insane thinking.

I think a lot depends on your motivation for shooting. I still love shooting icons when I am in those places. I go to Yosemite on a semi-regular basis and if I get a shot I really like from Tunnel View, it is fine with me, even though I have seen a million of them. I don't have a problem with others groaning if they are burned out on Half Dome shots. I do it for my own satisfaction. I also try for new non-icon perspectives while I am there. I also enjoy out-of-the-way spots far from icons. It is all good.

I would agree with Richard. The general public (and buying public) love icon shots.

Here are my thoughts on Icons.

New photographers will enjoy shooting Icons to have their OWN version of a magical place that has loomed in their imagination for years. I still get these feelings, but as we mature as photographers I find that we are still inspired by the icons but feel a need to put a more personal spin on our version. I still go to the icon spots and ask myself how I might see it differently than others before me. What would it look like in winter or at night? Sometimes this gives me more of a challenge as an artist than discovering new scenes on my own. I don't know about you, but sometimes I get the photographer's version of writer's block. Being forced to come up with a new way of looking at an old icon is the kind of exercise they teach in school and sometimes we need to go back to our roots to stimulate the creative juices to grow as artists.

That being said, there are also drawbacks to driving from icon to icon with a photography guide. Or trying to emulate a scene you saw browsing the images on NPN. Most of the great Icons in the US can be photographed from a turnout on a road. I agree with other posters that these activities can sometimes paradoxically lead to an artistic stalemate. I am a huge proponent of exploring the world on foot because I feel we end up ultimately more connected to the natural landscapes we strive to photograph. The wind or the heat or the smell of the wet sage or the swishing of water on the shoreline can stimulate all of my senses and ultimately lead to a spectacular shot by drawing my attention to the vital elements I 'feel' in a particular landscape. There are thousands of 'Iconic' shots out there in the wilderness just waiting for the right photographer with vision and an appreciation for the place. When I stumble upon a great scene that I've never seen in a photograph before I get the opportunity to treat it with my own artistic vision from the start. And I feel a wonderful sense of purpose in getting it right because I know I may not get back to re-shoot it as easily since I had to WALK there.

A healthy combination of unique Icon shots as well as your own wilderness discoveries will probably lead to a portfolio of images that uniquely represent who you are as a photographer and as an extension, your unique vision of our natural world.

Mike Anderson
www.lightscapephoto.com


P.S. Jim Goldstein's recent post "Yosemite at Dawn" is a great example of a photographer creating his own vision for a popular icon shot. It is also a great example of the concept of image maturity, which directly relates to the discussion about icons. This shot would not have been as effective if shot in an unknown valley, but because we immediately recognize the Yosemite landmarks, our minds can 'fill in the detail' of the valley and let us see a new interpretation of the classic icon. Here's Jim's post: http://www.naturephotographers.net/imagecritique/ic.cgi

I don't have that many icon type shots in my collection, but I'm thinking that I need some more. One of my shots I took several months ago at the St. Louis Gateway Arch sold as part of a travel guide front cover recently. I think the image is a little different than the standard shots, so maybe that's why it sold. Most importantly, I had a good morning shooting it.

overexposure can create a sense of "I've seen it all before, and guh, not another one of those shots"

You compleatly miss the actual photograph and your mind has already seen it too many times before, the actual image is glossed over. You become less open to viewing an image as its own. With the online community, viewing lots of highquality photographs from around the world can jilt your perceptions after a while.

That happended to me for a while, and I lost all interest in photography. I was burnt out creativitly and took a long sabatical from photograhy and art in general. Slowly I have have been dipping my toes back into photography for the past few weeks. I think the break was a good thing, it has revitialized my own creative vision.