Why What Works (Luminous Landscape), a comment

Lucky you if you have a father that doesn't do ordinary landscapes.

I don't agree however about LL. Most of their pictures are good, they have a good structure, in the American naturalist tradition.

Are they avant-garde? Landscape is not really about being so, unless you do urban environments, where tensions are palpable, and culture is in a flux. Is Nat Geo, better than that?

However as you notice, the article is really about what to teach, besides gear. Ph/phy is not about mechanics, assembling parts, as most seem to believe here. Therefore *not anything goes*.

So better choose some down to Earth rules that can improve one's *communication skills* from the start.

I could fight for the Triangle of Exposure, or Composition in Depth, but another Trivium is fine with me.

BTW LL is not so lame: theirs is a devilishly interesting paper about Oriental landscape art:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/the_synthesis_of_chinese_landscape_painting_and_photography.shtml

I am sure most here know v. little about.

My point however was still different: it was about having a punctus - pardon the pun.

In my picture it is a Beheading. So really *a Gesture*. Tones however contribute, and composition too: the head of the fish replaces that of the fishmonger.

Am.

--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric