This is when you post your photo of the fox in Yellowstone National Park.
2 Likes
4 Likes
See @Brent_Clark… this is @Alex_Noriega’s attempt at capturing something he was super excited about and wanted to show other people.
3 Likes
@TJ_Thorne LOL! The watermark! 
This is about on par with my past shots I was referring to, as well.
2 Likes
How I see intimate vs grand landscape imagery. It has little to do with the scale of presentation. It’s about intimacy, as in an intimate relationship.
Intimate landscapes:
Ivan Shishkin
Grand landscapes:
Albert Bierstadt
Some of Bierstadt’s work is intimate but it’s not what he’s known for.
That comparison makes sense to me. Some of Shishkin’s paintings include the sky and are “complete scenes,” but they definitely seem more intimate in that he’s clearly got a relationship or some sort of obsession with the forest, and the works are generally quieter and smaller than Bierstadt’s. But by that metric, who’s to say that Bierstadt didn’t have an intimate relationship with the mountain scenes he was painting? Does the viewer need to know about such a relationship in order for the composition to be considered intimate? Does a subject’s bold color or form disqualify an artist from having an intimate relationship with it?
It can. It’s a question of honesty. When imagery becomes theater it’s value is diminished. And that’s true of large or small landscapes. Viewers have become so used to theater these days that anything less leaves them unmoved.
I can agree with that, images made purely to impress lose their value for me.
I should clarify that the way I was writing in the article, about how I want the imagination of “the viewer” to be sparked, etc - that’s really just how I want myself to feel when I look at my own work. I can only create from my own point of view, and then leave people to interpret how they will.
If I emphasize a bold form or use strong color or shoot dramatic light, it’s only because I liked it personally, not because I think it will impress others. Using that as an example, I don’t think that disqualifies such an image from being intimate to its creator.
I do still think this is all very subjective and there is a lot of gray area for varying interpretations of the concept. There are also clear examples of “intimate” and “grand” as opposing concepts that are more black and white. I appreciate your elaboration on your view of it. All of this is why my portfolio isn’t organized by image type–I wouldn’t even know where to draw the line.
1 Like
Alex, @Igor_Doncov, @Matt_Payne, @Martin_Gonzalez, @Stan_Rose, and others: A beautifully written personal essay that many of us can relate to and identify with, and a very fine discussion of the finer points of its contents, terms, meanings, and interpretations. These sorts of discussions about the creative process and subjective nature of art are exactly why I subscribe to NPN and provide all the value of my subscription. Thanks to everyone who contributes.
As for my take on the subject of intimate landscapes, I, too, find a tighter framing of elements of the landscape to be a more personal expression of my interests in nature than broad, sweeping images. I have always thought others seem to make the grand landscape images better than I can anyway, although I keep trying. In the beginning of my photography career my role model was Eliot Porter, although I was not his contemporary. He made unique images that I had never seen before and that moved me. He expressed his own view of the world and inspired mine.
One last point: Alex makes the point that photography is an exclusionary art - by excluding elements that don’t support the subject we make our images more powerful and perhaps more mysterious. I think this expresses the same idea about painting as an inclusionary or additive art - painters only paint what supports the subject and composition. So I have adopted this as my mantra for photography: exclude everything that doesn’t support the subject and include only those elements that do. I think that is especially important for intimate landscapes.
3 Likes
Thanks for reading and for your thoughts, @Matt_Lancaster - I’m glad you feel that this article and discussion are examples of the value of an NPN subscription! I agree that a more focused composition tends to result in a more personal expression, as more deliberate decisions are being made on the part of the artist. Exclusion is a crucial tenet of good photography that at times seems to have fallen by the wayside with the advent of social media. Eliot Porter is a great choice for inspiration, particularly in the realm of the intimate landscape!
1 Like
Love the flow of the article @Alex_Noriega and your explanation of why your work has grown to the “intimate" shots. I too am trying to expand my photography to include more “intimate" shots. Which is one of the reasons I recently took the photography trip with you and @TJ_Thorne . I wanted to see the how’s and why’s that you selected in a certain scene, when nature presents so many at any given time. As you may or may not know, I am a “big landscape” photographer and a waterfall lover. My most recent shot for example, has a multitude of “intimate” shots within in it. At least that is what I find, as my processing skills improve, so does my attention to detail. And as a result the length of time to process gets longer and longer. Such as, is the water flow represented best here and there and everywhere. Is there proper exposure on the walls, the snow and the icicles. How about separation between the drifting snow, the icicles, the wall and everything else. For the most part each one of those areas you want to separate can be their own “intimate” shot. Which leads me back to why I enjoyed the article and the photo tour with you and TJ. I think I am getting closer to getting my mind wrapped around the more intimate shots. My next step is to pick out of my “big landscape” scenes the “intimate” scene I want to portray. I will probably read your article at least one more time to help narrow my focus and watch the videos one more time also - from the photo tour. If for no other reason the desire to shorten my processing time per image. I do know that I now have an urge to pull out the Zabriskie point shots as opposed to some Badwater shots. Just hope I can do them justice.
1 Like
A great Intimate Landscape photographer. Notice the personal treatment of subject matter. Very restrained processing.
@Alex_Noriega thanks for such an inspiring, thought provoking article.
You’ve given me ideas on how I can adapt my approach and continue to learn! Now I’m off to go and shoot to see what I can find. Thanks again
@Igor_Doncov thanks for sharing Pete’s work, I was not aware of him! I agree those are all tastefully restrained and undoubtedly intimate images.
Off the top of my head, some more inspiring photographers with similar styles include: Birgit Potthoff, Krista McCuish, Ross Brown, and Charles Cramer.
@Nathan_Klein I’m happy you enjoyed the article and that it’s sparked some ideas for you! I look forward to seeing what you find.
@Greg_Stokesbury Thank you for your detailed thoughts! I did pick up that you’re interested in grand landscapes on the trip, and there’s nothing wrong with that! I’m happy that you’re spending more time with details and slowing down - I think this in general will lead to more personal images. You’re right that you can kind of “pick the intimates out” of a grand scene - just start focusing on a detail that interests you! I hope the article helps you with how to begin thinking and seeing this way.
Thanks @Alex_Noriega that I will do.
Alex
Really like your Colorado ‘Impressions’. The power of reflections isn’t used enough in todays landscape world.
But tell me it is upside down! (which is fine by me).
Cheers
Thank you @phil, yes - it’s an upside-down reflection shot! I thought that flipping it so the trees were upright actually made it more abstract, in that it’s not immediately obvious that it’s a reflection and that it looks like an impressionistic painting.
Well composed article. It puts into words why grand sweeping landscapes so often have no attraction for me and I just skim past them. I think the intimate compositions reflect something about the photographer as much as the they do about the landscape context in which they were taken.
Thanks for reading @Chris_Baird! I agree, intimate compositions allow a photographer to show something of themselves, rather than simply what “was” at the scene.