Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Not my words, but a friend's who shall remain namless... they've an account on here but rarely use it.
Anyway - they were used in the context of EPZ's user base and the way the galleries seem to work.
Was he being unfair?
Well, if he's going by the official definition of the word, "A blinkered person is unable or unwilling to understand other people's beliefs, and blinkered opinions or ways of behaving show an inability or unwillingness to understand other people" (Cambridge Dict.), then I can see his point. On EPZ this doesn't only apply to landscapes, btw.
My take is that he means the EPZ community are biased in favour of landscapes and won't entertain the notion that cameras can actually be pointed at things other than lakes and pretty hillsides.
Just looking at the RC Gallery which I guess is pretty representative of the tastes of the EPZ community .....
There are quite a lot of landscapes but there's a good few flowers and a smattering of nudes and other stuff in there too.
So I think that your nameless friend is on the right track but perhaps being a little unfair.
I like to think that as well as diversifying from the 'normal' landscapes i.e. rock, sea/land, sky, golden hour, I also point my camera at other things. ![]()
I think it's not a matter of an individual photographer shooting other things than landscapes, the criticism probably concerns the things people look at and comment on in the gallery.
It's true, landscapes, animals and flowers get more attention than, say, street photography, photo journalism, architecture, etc.
I've uploaded some 7 shots from a trip to Spain, and the only shot with a reasonable amount of interest was one that most resembled a landscape - an urban one, granted, but still... And this is typical for EPZ. So yes, I think I do know what he means, although as I said, the preference is for more than just landscapes.
And another thing that not everyone is very happy with, is that even in landscapes, flowers and animals, people on here tend to have a rather traditional taste. But that's a different subject, probably.
Just an observation throughout 2007.....New members to EPZ who created a forum to introduce themselves......When describing thier photographic interests......There seemed to be a greater number who included " Landscape " as a specific area of interest........![]()
There may be many reasons why landscapes are in the list.....Or the main area of interest........But as a common denominator, How many Photographers Old or New hands actually say "" I hate Landscapes "" Or have no interest in taking a landscape......We all go on holiday at some time or other......Guess that applies to the die hards of any discipline.....![]()
Quote: Would people who only took bird shots (on the whole), or sports, or portraits, be described as blinkered?
I reckon not.
I would guess though it's about the particular style of landscapes... Would Robert Adam, Jem Southam or Harry Cory Wright do very well hereabouts?
Quote: Would people who only took bird shots (on the whole), or sports, or portraits, be described as blinkered?
I reckon not.
I'm probably (on the whole) one of those!
And I don't DO landscapes ![]()
I did manage to get shortlisted in last years Landscape Photographer of the Year (there was a duck i it!) but was eliminated prior to the final because the image was taken on a camera with ONLY 3.4mp whereas the rules said 4mp.
It was a Foveon sensor!
Now that's blinkered!! ![]()
its the choclate box syndrome. most people don't live close to breathtaking vistas have to travel to see one & rarely get there when its at its best. mostly people rush around don't see further than the end of their noses work, family bills to pay, & ...
i think these people hanker after that pretty scene mountain streams, lonely dune lined beach, rolling hills wonderful sunset/rise. they eschew the ordinary & yearn for the extra-ordinary. and in this case its landscapes.
landscapes translate to travel to dreams to "wish i was there" feelings. its the same i think as in painting. abstract fails to excite most as its nebulous too transient not real. landscapes can be touched have warmth & stir emotion.
landscapes take people away from the mundane out of work away from stress. wide open spaces appeal more & thus the tendency for photographers fueling that passion & supplying that demand.
and i agree with conrad epzrs are inclined to a more traditional view on life.
people have comfort zones & rarely want to step outside the norms of their existence. landscapes are easy to interpret.
people who specialise do so for their own reasons & because they do it could be seen as blinkered but hey they know what they like & this applies to all specific genres of this art. excuse the pun but birds of a feather & all that.
to like something it has to appeal in some shape or form. landscapes achieve this as i have already said because they stir emotions. similarly nudes generate a broader audience for the same
well i mean different reasons (use your imagination here).
whatever floats your boat as they say! i doubt you or any of us will alter this. it can be frustrating posting pictures daily to get such little attention but we follow the path that we feel best able to handle that interests us most that suits our pockets that is within easy reach.
you could argue that the op's mate is the blinkered one principally because he is coming from the point of view that what he does is better & should get more attention. unfortunately it doesn't work that way. the only solution is to find some birds to flock with if thats how he feels.
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.




















