Posted by Paul Everett on December 5, 2007 at 9:30 AM
I attended a very interesting talk in Wadhurst by Joe Cornish and Andy Rouse on Saturday evening. At one point Andy made a remark something along the lines I think that British photographers are (wrongfully) not held in very high esteem by their US counterparts. It has often occured to me when looking at the gallery forums here that much of the work by US members is much more "colourful" than we normally see here. I am principally referring to the earth, sea and sky forum (ie landscapes). This is not meant to be a criticism just an observation. Is the view of what constitutes a good photo, in terms of colour balance etc, different on each side of the Atlantic? Or are their subjects just more colourful? Or maybe I am just talking out my rear-end as usual!
Sorry if this is not an appropriate debate for this forum, no doubt the mods will remove if it is.
Paul
Posted by Dave Sewell on December 5, 2007 at 10:14 AM
Hi Paul,
I must admit I don't remember that particular comment. I do remember a few other slightly 'anti-American' overtones but not that one!
I too attended the same talk on Saturday and was equally interested in some of the comments re other nationalities and their style/views. Another specific point he raised was the UK photographers (supposed) obsession with getting the sun over their shoulder which (again supposedly) made us the laughing stock of our European counterparts. Maybe one of you guys on mainland Europe can shed some light on this theory?
He also said that by far the most antisocial group of photographers on safaris these days are coming from one country and he rather mysteriously stopped short of saying which one. So I suspect he meant us Brits. Could this be true as well?
Andy has very strong views on species reintroductions based on the view of 'if it's gone it should stay gone.' He then told us about the Capercaille project in Scotland that his Aspira Fund was donating money to. I was sorely tempted to mention that Capercailles have already been extinct once in Britain and that the population he's trying to help stem from a reintroduction scheme!!
Have to say it was a fabulously entertaining evening. AR is a gifted photographer and raconteur and a bit of controversy is always healthy!!
Dave
Hello
I think for a start that they have many more colourfull species that we have.Also it is 100 time more easy to take picture in the state that it is in Europe! A friend of mine had a photographic agency and one of his photographer was Arthur Morris. Arthur Morris told him that he never so great picture coming out of Europe.My friend invited Arthur Morris to come in England and went with him all over the country . After been to all the different honey pot in UK,my friend ask Arthur to send him his best pictures of the trip.......Well my friend never so any!!
America is very easy compare to Europe,I remember the first time That I went to Tiger tail beach in Florida...12 species of waders....gulls...terns....and you could walk within 5 meter of everything. It was like taking candy from a baby!And I will not talked about the weather....
Have agreat day
Frederic
Posted by David Clapp on December 5, 2007 at 10:52 AM
I'll hopefully hit this nail on the head, the US are simply rubbish at taking photos. No, being serious now...
I believe the problem is the super saturated work of Galen Rowell and similar pioneers. He is such an influence on the US and if you have seen his work you will understand why. He was a climber and a hiker and a mountaineer and photographer all in one, but by considering the geography of the US, this work stands as a timeless epitaph of reference they just cant shake off. Just look at the ES&S images containing a mountain and some flowers at sunset. This ideology of mans synergy with the wilderness embodies the photographic concept of US photographers with such a grip that they all tend to 'face the same way', so its all about mountains and mans insignificance. Very magnetic yes, but the pull is a little too strong for us to fully grasp. Any mountain with alpen glow reflected in a still lake strums strings of their hearts instinctively. This is where the difference occurs. Its an almost industry standard composition, one that we can play with at Glen Etive or Rannock Moor, but there is so much more to us than that. Narrow minded or geographically challenged? Perhaps both, perhaps not.
We dont have the same geography here, the vastness like they do; the empty space, the desolation, the impossibilities and extremes, it counjuers their emotions, this style of work is almost a religion. The English wilderness experience must be like shopping in Ikea and then going to Poundland. But we have subject concentration, coast and moorland and fields of bluebells, they love those! Country life, villages pubs and with real ales and thatched cottages but above all HISTORY whereas they have gas stations in the middle of knowhere run by hillbillies, spitting bottle tops from Bud Lights as they vacantly look at the only car to pass in an hour, along their neverending straight dusty roads. Seering summer heat and then a month later the kids off to school in -25C. It is extremes thats the difference. The UK is cute, or like a kid brother, not to be take seriously.
US members is much more "colourful"?? I dont agree, I would say the opposite a lot of the time. When they are not dreaming of being GRowell its dust and deserts, same old shots of the same places, I would love to nuke El Capitan once and for all, or spray paint it! The US dont seem to understand the concept of foreground very well, bar a few. A 1DsmkII is not a point and shoot (a Nikon is!!! Dont hit me, its a joke!!). I have never got my head around that in particular. The concept of photographic depth to me seems crucial to an images sucess, but they just point and shoot away. It just cant feel it flowing through my veins, its the biggest bugbear I can see.
Wave the flags for the UK! The is so much colour here, variable weather (but never enough SNOW!) and with that variable light all within a short distance. We are spoiled to say the least, you might want to remind yourself of this fact when watching the rain run down the front room window on Sunday, feeling locked in by winter's limp grip. Hooray for the Atlantic and its unpredicatble weather patterns.
Want in-yer-face 'eco porn' perfect photos of animals, go get them from our US buddies. Want soft, pastel coloured, out of focus, sorry - 'blurred/panned' - shots, then go to the scandinavians. Want wide angle, small in the frame animal, 'enviromental' shots then go to the brits.
There are always differences in views, opinions and what is liked between different cultures and markets, it's healthy and what keeps everyone in business. The world would be a boring place otherwise!
Oh, and I don't have to wait for Sunday for the rain - it's going past the window horizontally at some speed right now ... don't we just love buffering those Atlantic storms for our European buddies
Posted by David Clapp on December 5, 2007 at 11:20 AM
Eco Porn, I love it!!
Posted by David Kjaer on December 5, 2007 at 12:11 PM
The UK has some of the most stunning scenery you will find anywhere in the world and the bonus is that it is all concentrated into this relatively small group of islands we call the British Isles. There are few places in the world where you will find such diversity and I know the images produced of these islands by our many talented landscape photographers will stand alongside images taken anywhere in the world.
Our wildlife may not be quite as diverse and as easy to approach but again we have many talented photographers who are more than capable of portraying our native wildlife at it's very best.
I have travelled widely throughout Europe and the US and now have a daughter living in Texas and have never had a sense that US or European photographers rate their British counterparts as being below par!
David
Posted by Paul Everett on December 5, 2007 at 12:11 PM
Thanks for the interesting points, I guess diversity is a good thing, that way I can find someone who likes my shots
I love the US and have been there dozens of times and there is no question that it is spectacular in places, but I guess my point was how it is represented, but I suppose Nick is right in-yer-face eco-porn is what they like and what they are good at.
I like Galen Rowell's work and have his books at home, he used film and so at least wasn't tempted by heavy handed use of the saturation slider or whatever. I think in these digital days its easy to overdo it.
It was Andy's typically outspoken views combined with some of the winners of this months editors picks that made me think of how different the styles are.
Cheers
Paul
PS - I agree with the comments about the beauty of the British Isles and the quality of our photographers I hasten to add!
Posted by Graeme Lee on December 5, 2007 at 12:15 PM
Maybe not the subject you intended, for avian shots the US seem to have about 50 species vsiting their 'backyard' and I have about 10...and they're pretty much brown in colour!
And when you mentioned they didn't hold 'brits' in very high esteem for landscape photography, they probably just meant me
I'm sure you've had plenty of 'wow's from the US posters on the different forums you've inhabited. Strong velvia like colours, & either 'dramatic' or serene scenery seem to float their boats in landscape stuff - add a big lump of rock or a lighthouse & you've a winner . Guy's work has always been well liked too when he posted a shot.
As touched on earlier - it is also a 'cultural programming thing'. We are all influenced very strongly by the imagery that we see around us in the press (books and magazines) and on TV - subconsciously we will attempt to replicate that imagery in our own work as it is easier to get the work accepted commercially and by our peers. You'll find that within groups such as UKNP and NPN in that certain types of images can almost be guaranteed to elicit responses and 'wow's and everyone at some point in time will play to the audience.
The most successful artists/business people are those who can work the styles to suit many audiences - even in the same image.
Posted by Jack Garrett on December 5, 2007 at 1:06 PM
As an American, I find it interesting that most of the good photography magazines come from the UK so that tells me they must have something pretty good to offer! I love good photography no matter where it comes from. I have seen some AWESOME images from the UK and its photographers...keep up the great work you do!!
John
Posted by Dewey Jacobs on December 5, 2007 at 1:36 PM
Well . . . Foolish me, I think I'm going to jump in this cauldron . . .
(My boilerplate bio) I've been a photographer for over forty years - studies w Adams, taught the zone and photography for years . . .I have been under the weather (Ok more than under the weather) for over four years . . .
Which [the bottle half full] has afforded me time to surf the WWW and Forums (Hell I didn't know what a forum was until recently) and I admit I have been lurking around this Regional group for awhile - - - I like your style and critique . . .
Let me say I am astounded at the quality of work in the UK and Eurpoe - Top notch . . . Outstanding images . . .
Funny we (In the US spend a great deal of time planning trips FOR PHOTOGRAPHY to the UK . . .
I think I just might post to this forum - if you will take a yank from Memphis, Tennessee . . .
Dewey
Posted by David Clapp on December 5, 2007 at 2:00 PM
Nick Said - "I'm sure you've had plenty of 'wow's from the US posters on the different forums you've inhabited. Strong velvia like colours, & either 'dramatic' or serene scenery seem to float their boats in landscape stuff - add a big lump of rock or a lighthouse & you've a winner"
Well if it has a lighthouse in it or anything to do with man, its a loser! All the sites, no matter where you go will all report about a 3% or less views to comments ratio, its just appalling. It is very rare for me to photograph things without some level of mankind in it these days and because of that I would have to say 95% of my work never surfaces online except in my photo.net portfolio. Literally all the work I sell has something man made in it. I love lighthouses as the make great focal points, but it is rare for an image to get anywhere near the appreciation of a straight mountain or wilderness shot. Perhaps I should PS out the lighhouses in future and post in ES&S.
Yes I do agree the dramatic and moodier the better, our good old buddy Tristan does very well as he is the genuine Lord of Darkness, but I am realising part of the problem is how do I create a cracking looking image so it also looks good as a thumbnail??! Loads of work doesnt get a look in if the thumbnail doesnt justify the shot, but thats another issue....
Dewey get posting, we're all cool here, but remember its wildeness or your out!
There's a Lighthouse shot been chosen for the Weekly Picks on NPN recently David... get posting them .
Can't see any thumbnails on here David ....it's all down to how you 'sell it' in your caption.
Posted by Dave Sewell on December 5, 2007 at 2:58 PM
Dewey - you'd be made supremly welcome here I'm sure and with 40 years experience you've got to have a nuggett or two for novices like me! Please start posting!
All best,
Dave
Posted by Mark Sisson on December 6, 2007 at 5:03 AM
Fascinating set of insights into the cultural differences we have with our special relationship friends, and evidence too that to succeed commercially away from home you really have to get into the psyche of any market you're looking at.
This is the type of debate and duscussion that really makes this forum - along with the stunning UK images we get to see as well!
H'mm, as a UKer, and one whose sales are mainly in the US, I do have to disagree - or is it because I am N.Irish, a mountaineer, hiker, hunter and in the early learning years heavily influenced by G.Rowell and his "Inner Game of Outdoor Photography".
That said I love David Clapps work - on Photo net - so am I just confused?
The generalism I would make is that Americans like to be independant - i.e. all goods should be able to be sourced in America, where as us Europeans tend to be somewhat more cosmopolitan... so maybe the trick is not to premote your differences and blend to all markets.
Dewey - you are most welcome.
T
Posted by Peter Barritt on December 6, 2007 at 12:28 PM
Interesting debate. I fell in love with photography courtesy of Ansel Adams. Having visited Yosemite 4 years ago, he fell slightly in my esteem. The landscape there is absolutely astonishing and it is hard NOT to take some decent photos, even on a flying trip. Also most of his photo locations can be taken by winding down the car window. I also really admire David Muench and personally I feel he had great influence on the likes of Jo Cornish et al. Some of the north american landscapes are simply stunning, particularly in the South West and some are virtually untouched by mankind. The UK is more varied and has centuries of human history stamped all over it. The weather is also, like the landscape, continually changing so although challenging it does offer unique opportunities. I love selling US landscapes to americans because it seems like "coals to Newcastle" or "snow to eskimos"
but one of the benefits of travel is that you come fresh to the subject. I'm sure there are plenty of americans taking our landscapes and selling them over our meagre efforts!
One of the strengths of NPN is it's global reach and this gives some nice contrasting styles and emphasis IMHO.
Enough mad ramblings. Peter
If my 2 cents is worth anything, I just want to say that in my opinion, the UK has some of the best photos I have ever viewed. When I click on to this site, I am very seldom, if ever, disappointed by what our British counterparts display. I read the UK photo magazines regularly and it is my humble opinion that they are better and more informative than the US.
Posted by Paul Everett on December 7, 2007 at 4:40 AM
Its been great to get all the feedback on this and especially from the US contributors. The world of nature photography has enough room for all styles and I wouldn't have it any other way. Maybe I just misheard Andy, so I hope I haven't caused any offence. I do think though a dialogue on different styles and markets is a very healthy thing.
Cheers
Paul
Posted by chris hajee on December 7, 2007 at 5:11 AM
maybe not my place to answer but after reading all the comments I,ve read manny times that it,s much easier to aproach birds in the US than over here in Europe( UK ) I,m living in Holland and just sitting at home the last 2 weeks looking at the rain and dark weather I would love to see a US photographer getting a nice shot overhere. maybe I,m just jealous
Fascinating thread! I'm an unashamed Galen Rowell fan and think it's a testament to his work that so many photographers try to emulate his style. That said, having viewed David Clapp's collection of images you could say I'm a fan of his now too!!
As has been said before, this is one of the beauties of this forum - you get both local and global perspectives and I believe that can only be a good thing for all of us.
Posted by David Clapp on December 7, 2007 at 8:05 PM
Many thanks for the support to my images, it was unexpected and very uplifting to read. This has been a very decent and interesting set of comments, the main thing is that it brings to light lots of influences and perspectives. The necessary injection by Dewey added some great balance.
Posted by Duncan Armour on December 9, 2007 at 10:45 AM
I too went to this talk as well but I guess I caught a different nuance from what Andy was saying. I actually think he mostly lumped the US/UK photographers together in that the general mode of shooting is with the sun at our backs whereas photographers from other european nations tend to shoot into the light far more. Certainly Arthur Morris and others fall into the former camp and many Nordic phorographers seem to prefer the latter. But I think what Andy was trying to show was the way his own style was evolving from very literal, tightly framed shots to more interpretative, dare one say it, "artistic" shots, where the environment and lightling create more of a mood , sometimes combining this with the use of slow shutter speeds for more impressionistic effects. And perhaps in a world where everyone has a digital camera and there is a surfeit of straight cheetah shots for example, it will be this less literal style of photography that will prove to be more commercial.
Personally, I thought the safari van comment was targetted at our US colleagues, who last time I went to Kenya far outnumbered the Brits, but I'd be guessing. There's no doubt that the proliferation of camps and numbers of tourists in the Maasai Mara make it far less attractive as a destination these days.
Actually the Wadhurst talk was a fantastic evening, as the alternating of 5-6 images by Joe then 5-6 by Andy with commentary from both a technical and artistic point of view , highlighted a lot of similarities in their approach to composition despite completely different technical equipment. And it did illustrate how hard both photographers have had to push to find new views of their subject matter when it is all too easy these days to be jaded because we've seen it all before. So yes, you can go along to Yosemite and take good pictures from your car (though Ansel didn't have that luxury I'd say), but it is hard to take something truly original.
Discussion
23 repliesSorry if this is not an appropriate debate for this forum, no doubt the mods will remove if it is.
Paul
I must admit I don't remember that particular comment. I do remember a few other slightly 'anti-American' overtones but not that one!
I too attended the same talk on Saturday and was equally interested in some of the comments re other nationalities and their style/views. Another specific point he raised was the UK photographers (supposed) obsession with getting the sun over their shoulder which (again supposedly) made us the laughing stock of our European counterparts. Maybe one of you guys on mainland Europe can shed some light on this theory?
He also said that by far the most antisocial group of photographers on safaris these days are coming from one country and he rather mysteriously stopped short of saying which one. So I suspect he meant us Brits. Could this be true as well?
Andy has very strong views on species reintroductions based on the view of 'if it's gone it should stay gone.' He then told us about the Capercaille project in Scotland that his Aspira Fund was donating money to. I was sorely tempted to mention that Capercailles have already been extinct once in Britain and that the population he's trying to help stem from a reintroduction scheme!!
Have to say it was a fabulously entertaining evening. AR is a gifted photographer and raconteur and a bit of controversy is always healthy!!
Dave
I think for a start that they have many more colourfull species that we have.Also it is 100 time more easy to take picture in the state that it is in Europe! A friend of mine had a photographic agency and one of his photographer was Arthur Morris. Arthur Morris told him that he never so great picture coming out of Europe.My friend invited Arthur Morris to come in England and went with him all over the country . After been to all the different honey pot in UK,my friend ask Arthur to send him his best pictures of the trip.......Well my friend never so any!!
America is very easy compare to Europe,I remember the first time That I went to Tiger tail beach in Florida...12 species of waders....gulls...terns....and you could walk within 5 meter of everything. It was like taking candy from a baby!And I will not talked about the weather....
Have agreat day
Frederic
I believe the problem is the super saturated work of Galen Rowell and similar pioneers. He is such an influence on the US and if you have seen his work you will understand why. He was a climber and a hiker and a mountaineer and photographer all in one, but by considering the geography of the US, this work stands as a timeless epitaph of reference they just cant shake off. Just look at the ES&S images containing a mountain and some flowers at sunset. This ideology of mans synergy with the wilderness embodies the photographic concept of US photographers with such a grip that they all tend to 'face the same way', so its all about mountains and mans insignificance. Very magnetic yes, but the pull is a little too strong for us to fully grasp. Any mountain with alpen glow reflected in a still lake strums strings of their hearts instinctively. This is where the difference occurs. Its an almost industry standard composition, one that we can play with at Glen Etive or Rannock Moor, but there is so much more to us than that. Narrow minded or geographically challenged? Perhaps both, perhaps not.
We dont have the same geography here, the vastness like they do; the empty space, the desolation, the impossibilities and extremes, it counjuers their emotions, this style of work is almost a religion. The English wilderness experience must be like shopping in Ikea and then going to Poundland. But we have subject concentration, coast and moorland and fields of bluebells, they love those! Country life, villages pubs and with real ales and thatched cottages but above all HISTORY whereas they have gas stations in the middle of knowhere run by hillbillies, spitting bottle tops from Bud Lights as they vacantly look at the only car to pass in an hour, along their neverending straight dusty roads. Seering summer heat and then a month later the kids off to school in -25C. It is extremes thats the difference. The UK is cute, or like a kid brother, not to be take seriously.
US members is much more "colourful"?? I dont agree, I would say the opposite a lot of the time. When they are not dreaming of being GRowell its dust and deserts, same old shots of the same places, I would love to nuke El Capitan once and for all, or spray paint it! The US dont seem to understand the concept of foreground very well, bar a few. A 1DsmkII is not a point and shoot (a Nikon is!!! Dont hit me, its a joke!!). I have never got my head around that in particular. The concept of photographic depth to me seems crucial to an images sucess, but they just point and shoot away. It just cant feel it flowing through my veins, its the biggest bugbear I can see.
Wave the flags for the UK! The is so much colour here, variable weather (but never enough SNOW!) and with that variable light all within a short distance. We are spoiled to say the least, you might want to remind yourself of this fact when watching the rain run down the front room window on Sunday, feeling locked in by winter's limp grip. Hooray for the Atlantic and its unpredicatble weather patterns.
In conclusion, its all Galen Rowells fault
Want in-yer-face 'eco porn' perfect photos of animals, go get them from our US buddies. Want soft, pastel coloured, out of focus, sorry - 'blurred/panned' - shots, then go to the scandinavians. Want wide angle, small in the frame animal, 'enviromental' shots then go to the brits.
There are always differences in views, opinions and what is liked between different cultures and markets, it's healthy and what keeps everyone in business. The world would be a boring place otherwise!
Oh, and I don't have to wait for Sunday for the rain - it's going past the window horizontally at some speed right now
Our wildlife may not be quite as diverse and as easy to approach but again we have many talented photographers who are more than capable of portraying our native wildlife at it's very best.
I have travelled widely throughout Europe and the US and now have a daughter living in Texas and have never had a sense that US or European photographers rate their British counterparts as being below par!
David
I love the US and have been there dozens of times and there is no question that it is spectacular in places, but I guess my point was how it is represented, but I suppose Nick is right in-yer-face eco-porn is what they like and what they are good at.
I like Galen Rowell's work and have his books at home, he used film and so at least wasn't tempted by heavy handed use of the saturation slider or whatever. I think in these digital days its easy to overdo it.
It was Andy's typically outspoken views combined with some of the winners of this months editors picks that made me think of how different the styles are.
Cheers
Paul
PS - I agree with the comments about the beauty of the British Isles and the quality of our photographers I hasten to add!
And when you mentioned they didn't hold 'brits' in very high esteem for landscape photography, they probably just meant me
I'm sure you've had plenty of 'wow's from the US posters on the different forums you've inhabited. Strong velvia like colours, & either 'dramatic' or serene scenery seem to float their boats in landscape stuff - add a big lump of rock or a lighthouse & you've a winner
As touched on earlier - it is also a 'cultural programming thing'. We are all influenced very strongly by the imagery that we see around us in the press (books and magazines) and on TV - subconsciously we will attempt to replicate that imagery in our own work as it is easier to get the work accepted commercially and by our peers. You'll find that within groups such as UKNP and NPN in that certain types of images can almost be guaranteed to elicit responses and 'wow's and everyone at some point in time will play to the audience.
The most successful artists/business people are those who can work the styles to suit many audiences - even in the same image.
John
(My boilerplate bio) I've been a photographer for over forty years - studies w Adams, taught the zone and photography for years . . .I have been under the weather (Ok more than under the weather) for over four years . . .
Which [the bottle half full] has afforded me time to surf the WWW and Forums (Hell I didn't know what a forum was until recently) and I admit I have been lurking around this Regional group for awhile - - - I like your style and critique . . .
Let me say I am astounded at the quality of work in the UK and Eurpoe - Top notch . . . Outstanding images . . .
Funny we (In the US spend a great deal of time planning trips FOR PHOTOGRAPHY to the UK . . .
I think I just might post to this forum - if you will take a yank from Memphis, Tennessee . . .
Dewey
Well if it has a lighthouse in it or anything to do with man, its a loser! All the sites, no matter where you go will all report about a 3% or less views to comments ratio, its just appalling. It is very rare for me to photograph things without some level of mankind in it these days and because of that I would have to say 95% of my work never surfaces online except in my photo.net portfolio. Literally all the work I sell has something man made in it. I love lighthouses as the make great focal points, but it is rare for an image to get anywhere near the appreciation of a straight mountain or wilderness shot. Perhaps I should PS out the lighhouses in future and post in ES&S.
Yes I do agree the dramatic and moodier the better, our good old buddy Tristan does very well as he is the genuine Lord of Darkness, but I am realising part of the problem is how do I create a cracking looking image so it also looks good as a thumbnail??! Loads of work doesnt get a look in if the thumbnail doesnt justify the shot, but thats another issue....
Dewey get posting, we're all cool here, but remember its wildeness or your out!
Can't see any thumbnails on here David
All best,
Dave
This is the type of debate and duscussion that really makes this forum - along with the stunning UK images we get to see as well!
Mark
That said I love David Clapps work - on Photo net - so am I just confused?
The generalism I would make is that Americans like to be independant - i.e. all goods should be able to be sourced in America, where as us Europeans tend to be somewhat more cosmopolitan... so maybe the trick is not to premote your differences and blend to all markets.
Dewey - you are most welcome.
T
but one of the benefits of travel is that you come fresh to the subject. I'm sure there are plenty of americans taking our landscapes and selling them over our meagre efforts!
One of the strengths of NPN is it's global reach and this gives some nice contrasting styles and emphasis IMHO.
Enough mad ramblings.
Cheers
Paul
As has been said before, this is one of the beauties of this forum - you get both local and global perspectives and I believe that can only be a good thing for all of us.
Personally, I thought the safari van comment was targetted at our US colleagues, who last time I went to Kenya far outnumbered the Brits, but I'd be guessing. There's no doubt that the proliferation of camps and numbers of tourists in the Maasai Mara make it far less attractive as a destination these days.
Actually the Wadhurst talk was a fantastic evening, as the alternating of 5-6 images by Joe then 5-6 by Andy with commentary from both a technical and artistic point of view , highlighted a lot of similarities in their approach to composition despite completely different technical equipment. And it did illustrate how hard both photographers have had to push to find new views of their subject matter when it is all too easy these days to be jaded because we've seen it all before. So yes, you can go along to Yosemite and take good pictures from your car (though Ansel didn't have that luxury I'd say), but it is hard to take something truly original.