David Ward - Landscape Photography - Into The Light

Highlight this Comment Colin Griffiths18/07/2009, 18:49

You struck a chord with this post David, I know exactly what you mean. It puts fun into picture making doesn't it? Though I seem to be able to do the same thing with my 5D and zooms, just letting the situation take me where it will. With respect to the LCD I use a small bellows unit with a magnifying lens mounted in it on my G10 ~ works just like a dark cloth!

Highlight this Comment Julian18/07/2009, 19:33

Well, well. All I can say is how come it took you so long? :-)

I've been having fun with an LX2 (and after it died on me at the beginning of the year, an LX3) since 2006... Addictive, isn't it?

And welcome to the club. The LX3 is a real gem.

So... does this mean the camera in your phone is now officially redundant? ;-)

Highlight this Comment David18/07/2009, 20:08

Hi Colin,

Welcome to Oceans of Instants.

A participant on the Provence workshop had a Hoodman rubber viewer which seemed to work very well for viewing the screen post-shooting, not a solution to seeing whilst shooting though. I need to get a G10 for that!

David

Highlight this Comment David18/07/2009, 20:15

Hi Julian,

All I can say is how come it took you so long? :-)

Well, being a bit of a photographic dinosaur does mean I'm a little slow on the uptake sometimes...

The camera phone was lost in action last autumn; I was making an image on the Northumberland coast when a rather large wave soaked me and the TK. A quick mop down with my hanky fixed the Linhof but sadly the Sony Ericsson, which was in my trousers, didn't recover from being soaked in seawater. The LX3 has proven to be a very worthy replacement, though sadly I can't ring up the Chinese and order my dinner with it...

David

Highlight this Comment Jane Goodall18/07/2009, 20:38

Hi David,

It was only when I bought the G10 this spring that I realised that I still need to look more at the different possibilities that are available to me; the tripod had almost become a millstone. I appreciate I should have been surveying the location a lot harder without the camera, just seeing, without dragging all the gear about to hold me back. Having the G10 has let me explore a lot more, trying many more possibilities, using the live view as the window on the scene. I had such fun around the quay at Eigg, picking on subjects that I wouldn’t normally have tried before;

Steel Drum & Stones and Frayed Knot

I positioned the camera exactly where I wanted it because it was so easy to do so handheld. I am sure you never compromise your camera position due to 'tripod issues' but I don’t think I have been fussy enough.

Now I realise that I have to make the tripod do exactly as I want (I am such a rookie). I know we have discussed before on location that a few inches can make a huge difference! Our leader Duncan was looking a bit disapprovingly at my obsession with my point and shoot camera during the tour on Eigg, I don’t know if he thought I was taking it seriously enough unless I got my Canon gear out (probably my paranoia).

Are we allowed to have fun with photography? I have always told my friends that I don’t go on Light & Land holidays to enjoy myself. I was seriously in danger of doing so on Eigg.

Best regards,

Jane

Highlight this Comment Dave Kosiur18/07/2009, 20:46

I've been using the Leica DLUX-4 for much of this year, often instead of my Nikon DSLR, for much the same reason -- it's more fun!

I use a Hoodman Loupe with the DLUX-4, even for framing and shooting, not just "chimping"; it's a bit like a large "optical viewfinder" as far as I'm concerned.

Dave

Highlight this Comment Peter19/07/2009, 07:26

Hi David,

I returned from Provence a month ago. It was a holiday, so wasn't a 'full on' 5x4 tour. I did manage squeeze in my Panasonic G1. I mention the G1 because I also own a couple of LX's (must get around to selling the LX2) I bought the LX3 late last year...

The G1 is a great camera for many of the reasons you mention. When I walk, cycle, or care to attempt my Henri Cartier-Bresson 'moments' I use the LX3. The G1 is different of course, but you should try it. It (or the GH1 if you wish to double your money), has the same 'have a go it's fun' feel to it...it's perhaps a mix of LX3 & 5D.

Sadly, another Provence holiday is a year away for me once more. I've been weening myself by watching TV coverage of Le Tour De France for the last two weeks...just one more week left though, so I better start booking!

Come late December I can see myself watching the G1's results - 'Pete's Provence 2009 Slide Show' to warm me up after a golden autumn on the hills with the Wista :o)

Best wishes & thanks

Peter

Highlight this Comment Jason Theaker19/07/2009, 09:51

It’s refreshing to hear your views here. I feel that too many people put far too much emphasis on the equipment. I’m looking forward to a time when you can make a long exposure of several seconds hand held and pin sharp, with a camera that can slip into a pocket... oh the joy it would be leaving the tripod in the car...

Highlight this Comment adamp19/07/2009, 10:03

Throw the tripod away? What? Only a few years ago in Tuscany that was the height of treason! In fact David, you instilled such fear into me that I have been using my LX3 almost exclusively on a tripod…

I have to say though, that whatever the camera, it’s the seeing eye which matters: your shot of the two juxtaposed tree trunks (brown in the light and blue in the shade, Horseshoe Meadow – I can't see it on your website) was hugely inspiring and persuaded me to try the LX3. And the importance of seeing the picture is further evidenced in your experimental portfolio, for example photos 2, 6 and 11.

The ability to switch formats from one shot to another is great fun, though I still need to develop my eye for vertical panoramics – a difficult genre I find. I do agree that a real lacuna is the rather short focal length, but for perhaps 80% of my shooting it doesn’t matter.

Best wishes, Adam

Highlight this Comment David19/07/2009, 10:14

Hi Jason,

Ah, pin sharp without a tripod... actually, in this instance, I was trying to show that unsharp can be good. Perhaps I failed!?

David

Highlight this Comment David19/07/2009, 10:16

Hi Dave,

But how do you juggle loupe and camera if you're trying to make an image in an awkward position? Do you fix the loupe to the Leica in some way? Any tips gratefully received!

David

Highlight this Comment David19/07/2009, 10:40

Hi Adam,

Thank you for your kind words about my "seeing eye", though it did make me feel a little a Cyclops! ;-)

Well a tripod is still vital when one is being serious (something that I have been known to be) and I did spend most of my first trip with the LX3, to Death Valley last autumn, using a tripod. Partly this was because my early exposures seemed really unsharp. Then I realised that I was being unfair expecting the Lumix's images to compare with a 5x4, and specifically not taking into account things like colour noise at ISOs above 80 or lens aberration. I've now come to realise that one of the best things about the camera is that because it is so small it can fit into spaces that would be impossible for a DSLR never mind a 5X4, viz this image taken in Cornwall a few weeks ago;

I loved the reflections but immediately realised that it would be impossible to make this image unless the camera was both tiny and handheld.

One of the features of the Panasonic that I really like is that it offers multiple aspect ratios. I find myself using 4:3 and 16:9 but only very rarely 3:2. I find that vertical panoramics are great fun to experiment with, though you're right that subjects that suit this treatment aren't that common.

David

Highlight this Comment David19/07/2009, 11:32

Hello again Adam,

...your shot of the two juxtaposed tree trunks (brown in the light and blue in the shade, Horseshoe Meadow – I can't see it on your website) was hugely inspiring and persuaded me to try the LX3.

I've been rooting around in my hard drive and found this Lumix image, was this the one you meant?

Highlight this Comment Jason Theaker19/07/2009, 20:00

David,

For me this is one of your best images I’ve seen in some time...the reason? Well I must confess, I have been doing very similar things with movement and reflections, so I would say that. I think this image works on a few different textural levels. Yes there is the dappled light filtering itself through the trees, down into the water and beneath. But then there is the sharp (or nearly) tree branches, giving a wonderful juxtaposition to the softness in the movement. There is also the subtle curve of the dark/light that picks out the depth well...I would go on but time is short....

Anyway if you could have a look through my experiments just lately, you would see some images like this;

But I’ve been using my tripod...not that I’m obsessive with pin sharpness, I hope you know me well enough now, (or my thoughts anyway) to know that I’m not fanatical about the so called ‘rules’...

Highlight this Comment Sandy Wilson19/07/2009, 21:27

Hi David,

I hope your not turning into a gear junkie. Most conversations on photography these days end up talking about the pros and cons on which camera you use I use etc. It all gets a bit boring in the end. Don't get me wrong, I have come across a few photographers in my time whose first question is, "What kind of camera do you use?" My answer usually is one that makes pictures. Does it really matter? The answer is "Yes!" as you use the camera best suited to you and your type of image making.

However your rock and sea image, I like very much as the juxaposition of the image elements give it a very dynamic effect. The slightly elongated vertical format certainly adds to the overall strength of the image construction. You see too many horizontal images these days. I always look at the subject both as a vertical or a horizontal format, sometimes making an image of my intended subject using both formats. During the post-visualization stage I decide which I like best and print the image which is the strongest for that particular subject. There, is it not nice to be back talking about an image instead of just camera gear?

By the way have any of you thought about using an interchangeable DSLR and using only one lens? That is what I do if I do not want to cart a bag full of gear around. You might find that you can do a hell of a lot with just using one lens. I do this quite a lot using a 100mm macro lens on my DSLR. Doing this teaches you to really see in a different way. The range of this lens is from about four inches to infinity. I also use a 150 to 450mm lens in this way, and found the flattening effect produced some very pleasing images. Before you ask, yes I use a tripod as it is a must with technique, particularly using the longer focal length lens.

I used this technique when I was in Cornwall two weeks ago on holiday. I have to say some of my abstract images are unusual. Could be next stop Tate Modern - but only if I enlarge them to 10 ft x 16ft as they seem to like their photographs to be big to be classed as works of art.

Regards

Sandy

Highlight this Comment adamp20/07/2009, 12:48

I do believe that this is the one Mr Ward, though my recollection from the LX3 monitor was that the sunny trunk was much more red – but that could be short term memory problems or that the screen I have here is not properly calibrated.

That reflections shot is a cracking one, I am still not sure that I have properly deciphered it!

If I may demonstrate my attempts at vertical panos, have a look on my ephotozine page, here and here

Highlight this Comment David20/07/2009, 15:10

Hi Jason,

Thanks for sharing one of your experimental shots with us, I think it's really interesting. I hope that you won't mind me saying that it strongly reminds me of a manipulated SX70 Polaroid. I feel that experimentation or getting out of your comfort zone or playing (however you want to put it!) is such an important part of the creative process. So more power to your elbow!

David

Highlight this Comment Jason Theaker20/07/2009, 19:04

Hi David,

As you already know, I’m not totally happy with the image on view and offered it to illustrate some of my though processes that seem to coincide with the main image you started this thread with.

I feel it’s too busy and needs a cleaner composition, probably with longer exposure to create some kind of graphic structure from the scum trails. I also feel that the light is too harsh, but the penetrating light that made it to the bottom of the river, interests me here. I also love the different levels of canopy reflections, surface scum (movement) and beneath the waters interesting colours which intrigues. I’m also fond of the sharp reflected branches, but would like to include some more subtle delicate ones to give it a textural contrasting depth... anyway I did say earlier that I’d be brief... (As I said work in progress).

It’s funny how sometimes I’m inspired by topics and feel a deep need to follow them through to a distant sometimes elusive conclusion...I’m not sure what it is, but I get a gut feeling that it’s the correct path to be taking... some kind of subconscious evaluative voice.

Highlight this Comment Sheila21/07/2009, 12:37

You really should send the first two paragraphs of this blog to Panasonic along with some of your pictures. They could use it on their website or sales brochures. They might even pay you for it!

Highlight this Comment David21/07/2009, 13:03

Hi Sheila,

Well, it wasn't meant as an ad, just as praise for a piece of kit that I really enjoy using and as a description of how changing formats has really inspired me... It's nice to give praise where praise is due I think.

David

Highlight this Comment Alice Strange21/07/2009, 14:12

"Mucking around" is wildly underestimated as a valid artistic activity so go for it, you wild, crazy, impetuous thing! But beware the slippery slope... today the Lumix, tomorrow the camera in your mobile phone, and before you know it, you'll be capturing images with pencil & paper and joining the ranks of us proper artists ; )

Highlight this Comment David21/07/2009, 14:18

Hi Alice,

Oh no! What a fool I've been! I appear to be doing things in the wrong order... I started with pencil and paper, then went to Instamatic, then an SLR, then a 5X4 then a mobile phone and now a compact camera. At least three of those appear to have been in the wrong order! Mucking about with the established sequence of media and equipment does seem to be a little mad and impetuous... ;-)

David

Highlight this Comment Robert M. Teague22/07/2009, 02:34

What about 35mm? Much more enjoyable than a 5D.

Highlight this Comment David22/07/2009, 08:40

Hi Robert,

The great thing about film is that if you get it right in camera you don't need to do anything except admire your handiwork when you view the images. Whereas using a DSLR always, in my experience, involves one in further work on the image to get it to look how one envisaged it. Now perhaps this is just me being lazy, and I know that monochrome workers are always prepared to put in lots of post-production work, but I would rather be happy with my photographic results when I first view them and not feel disappointed because I need to do a lot of work just to make it how I envisaged the image.

David

Highlight this Comment Sheila23/07/2009, 09:52

I might be being oversensitive here, but it seemed like your response to my suggestion reflected that you thought my comment sarcastic. Not at all. I agree it is good to say something is good if it is. I think Panasonic are producing some excellent cameras with lots of novel and useful features. I have a Panasonic TZ7 myself and am finding it great fun to use. But I’ve been using compact digital cameras since 2002, and the fun does wear off a bit after a time. The tendency to snap away as if the pictures are free does lead to a lot of digital clutter on your hard disk and eventually the need to purchase additional zigabytes of storage.

But what I meant by my previous comment was to remind you that as an acclaimed and influential professional photographer your words have more value than the average snapper like me. No need to poo-poo this, it is a fact. People who admire your pictures, your words or yourself are more likely to buy the cameras you enthuse about. Panasonic might like to use your words and might like to reward you for writing them. One of the new micro four thirds cameras would be good to play with, I should think.

Highlight this Comment David23/07/2009, 10:20

Hi Sheila,

Thank you for clarifying your position. I'm afraid that I did think that there was a veiled criticism of my praise of the LX3 in your previous comment.

I guess I'm a little sensitive about the suggestion that I might be making a post in order to get into a manufacturer's good books. My recommendation of a product may well be worth more to Panasonic than a member of the public's but I wouldn't write an endorsement of a product that I wasn't convinced was great and would never write anything on this blog solely with the intention of personal financial gain. I now understand that you didn't mean to suggest this and apologise for my slightly intemperate response.

It's sometimes difficult to judge the author's intentions when communicating via email or on a web forum so I find the use of emoticons really helpful!;-)

Thanks, anyway, for your flattering assessment of my stature :-))

David

Highlight this Comment Jason Theaker23/07/2009, 13:17

With such profound emphasis on equipment in the photographic community, did you find this post in any way difficult to admit to? Do you think some people will think any less of you for using a “Digital Camera”? Do you think this image has a lower value (commercially/ artistically) because it’s not on film? Do you think this ‘attitude’ will change when more and more established photographers use this technique?

Looking to the future, when digital cameras can indeed match the quality, but make it much easier to produce images, will the equipment snobbery subside? Or do you have to work really hard and suffer for your art, to produce worthwhile images? Will creativity and insight be enough?

Highlight this Comment David23/07/2009, 14:23

Hi Jason,

You're obviously in an inquisitive mood! ;-) Here goes...

With such profound emphasis on equipment in the photographic community, did you find this post in any way difficult to admit to?

No, I didn't find it hard to admit to using a digital compact. I've already admitted to using a phone camera so how hard could it be!

Do you think some people will think any less of you for using a “Digital Camera”?

If people think any less of me for using a digital camera that's their problem not mine. I've always said that the means of capture is less important than what is captured. I still prefer film but am happy to use digital when the circumstances suit.

Do you think this image has a lower value (commercially/ artistically) because it’s not on film?

Commercial value isn't something that I worry too much about but, in my opinion, a good image is a good image irrespective of what medium it was made on.

Do you think this ‘attitude’ will change when more and more established photographers use this technique?

It seems to me that since the majority of images are now made digitally so images made on film are more likely to be devalued than those made digitally. This is certainly an attitude that I have come across on workshops.

Looking to the future, when digital cameras can indeed match the quality, but make it much easier to produce images, will the equipment snobbery subside?

If one is talking about resolution then digital backs (such as a Phase One P60) and high end DSLRs (such as the Canon 1Ds Mark III or Nikon D3) already match film for quality for all practical purposes. Yes, you could make larger prints from a drum scanned 5X4 but how many of us do. The largest prints that most people would want are probably A2 size and the cameras and back that I mentioned will make excellent prints to this size and beyond. If one thinks of quality in terms of nuance or feel rather than acuity then there is still a difference between digital and film and I suspect there always will be because of the different physics and chemistry involved. Whether this difference is important or not will depend upon individual taste.

Will equipment snobbery subside? I doubt it! It's been there right since the beginning of photography (Leica vs any other brand for instance) and it's apparent in almost every field of human endeavour (e.g. Porsche vs Ferrari). The emphasis may change but human nature dictates that snobbery will never go away. It's generally a sign of insecurity, people feel the need to champion their brand in order to show their superiority. Of course that doesn't apply to me and Linhof, though those Ebonys are nasty wooden cameras! ;-)

Or do you have to work really hard and suffer for your art, to produce worthwhile images?

You have to work really hard to do anything well. The accepted benchmark seems to be that 10,000 hours of practice are necessary in order to become accomplished in any field whether it be as a footballer or a concert pianist. I read a comment from a violin teacher somewhere on a forum recently. He said that some of his students complained to him that what he was asking them to do was too difficult. He simply waited a few moments and then said, "Yes, it is. Shall we get on?" Whether you have to suffer for your art or not is a moot point. Personally I find photography so interesting that I don't really notice any pain... ;-)

Will creativity and insight be enough?

Creativity and insight are prerequisites but two other factors are also critical; the application of craft and the acquisition of requisite technical ability. In other words, if you get out lots, look at as many possibilities for images as you can and make only the ones you have faith in you'll get there in the end!

David

Highlight this Comment Jason Theaker26/07/2009, 08:55

Hi David Sorry it’s been a few days in answering your post, but here goes...

Admit to using a digital compact

What I was getting at with my question here, was questing just how the overwhelming snobbery impacted on your thinking. Maybe because of your personality, or success, or maybe even just maturity, (I mean that in a good way by the way(o:) that you have banished the insecurities associated with this. (Maybe it reflects more about me) anyway moving on quickly...

Commercial value isn't something that I worry too much about but, in my opinion, a good image is a good image irrespective of what medium it was made on.

I’m very puzzled by this David. You are a professional photographer! Do you not have to pander to commercial demands, or are you in the lucky position not to have to... (This is a very personal question and I respect you for not answering in such a public way) but how the hell does a professional photographer not have to pander to commercial forces (in some way)...you don’t do weddings on the side do you?

Since the majority of images are now made digitally so images made on film are more likely to be devalued than those made digitally

Well this isn’t the attitude that I’ve observed, but then again I have used film and digital over the years and I see the advantages of both.

Yep the technology will offer us some wonderful advancements, but will it advance “quality in terms of nuance or feel”? I bet it will, even considering the different physics involved. But then again it’s the eye for the subtleties that can recognise the ‘feel’ that’s going to be the interesting part.

Or do you have to work really hard and suffer for your art, to produce worthwhile images?

I take your point about having to put the time in to be good at photography, or indeed the violin, (my wife certainly needs some more hours with the violin) but this is where photography is misunderstood. I mean we only press a button and the camera does all the work for us, doesn’t it! But to illustrate my question to you, there is a general perception that to be of value, a piece of ‘art’ has to be worked at. I remember thinking the very same thing when I first came to modern art when I was a student. I mean a couple of brush strokes, and some big canvas was so easy to produce...I didn’t consider the hours, days, weeks, years of effort and development they had to go through to get to that place.

On a final note, yes the technical ability to craft an image is important, but for me the real skill comes when you can disentangle the creative, when you can reflect on the experiment, when you can synthesize subtle ideas and find new (to you) areas that inspire. (And when I manage all that, I’ll let you know)

Highlight this Comment Tony Shaw06/08/2009, 21:46

Well it is the photographer not the camera - but I bet you wish you had one or two of those shots on the big L.

Anyway who wants to be adult yet?

Highlight this Comment Nigel Simmonds12/08/2009, 21:12

Hi David,

You (and everyone else) are right about being able to enjoy oneself with whichever format suits viz your jokey comment about using the TK when being adult vs using the LX3. One feature that struck me when I was looking at your Provence pictures is that the landscape-oriented shots are more in the nature of studies and seem to be more akin to your usual portait-oriented shots. Compare this, for example with the Ebb and Flow gallery where the landscape shots seem to be, well, landscapes. It's just occurred to me, the landscape shots from Provence don't have a horizon, an interesting tension in the image. I think you discuss such ideas in your "Landscape Within" book but I don't recall seeing it in your work recently.

Highlight this Comment bonnie13/08/2009, 00:38

Your pictures of "horse" skulls are really elk. Note the lack of top teeth.

Highlight this Comment David13/08/2009, 06:42

Hi Bonnie,

Thanks for the observation on my skull image. I bow to your knowledge about the skulls not being horses but as far as I know there aren't any elk in Iceland. Could they be reindeer? There aren't any wild reindeer there but there might be some domesticated herds.

David

Highlight this Comment steve france01/10/2009, 12:33

Hi David,

Very interesting thread.

This compact craze is something I haven't yet turned to, but I see you are enjoying it, and that is all that matters.

My insecurity of 'missing the light' and not capturing an image in its decisive moment, due to not being professional and out in the field all the time, I guess is what leads me to not do this.

I hardly get out, so taking a small camera with me and leaving my primary camera behind sounds like madness lol!

But... your discovery of enjoying landscape without your buddy Linhof is very endearing...and very liberating.

And I take my hat off to you, and thank you for sharing this with us. Gives us budding photographers things to think about, and step back, and not just chase 'images' but always challenging ourselves to discover new ways of seeing, as well as enjoying what we do.