Drone photography isn't landscape photography, IMO. It should be in a separate category. Any drone shot looks striking because it's from an unusual vantage point. This gives it an unfair advantage.
Dear Simon, I understand your concern, but I’m not sure I fully agree.
Every major tool in photography has changed what was possible: telephoto lenses compressed distance, wide-angle lenses exaggerated space, long exposures revealed things the eye could not see, and aerial photography existed long before drones. Each of these gave photographers a new way of seeing.
A drone is certainly a different tool, and sometimes it can make an image feel striking simply because of the unusual viewpoint. But the same could be said about many techniques when they are used only for effect.
For me, the question is not whether the camera was on the ground or in the air. The question is whether the photograph has composition, light, timing, feeling, and intention. A weak drone photograph is still weak. A strong one can absolutely be landscape photography, I think.
But I agree with Simon - I never saw a weak drone photo, also as I never saw a weak photo, for example, of an aisberg. The adventive location, as well as an unusual racurs, is 90% of success.
The purest photo art, his B&W pieces are on a level few ever attain. I must agree with Tomasz when it comes to drone photography, another tool in the the camera bag of the modern photography.
Drone photography isn't landscape photography, IMO. It should be in a separate category. Any drone shot looks striking because it's from an unusual vantage point. This gives it an unfair advantage.
Dear Simon, I understand your concern, but I’m not sure I fully agree.
Every major tool in photography has changed what was possible: telephoto lenses compressed distance, wide-angle lenses exaggerated space, long exposures revealed things the eye could not see, and aerial photography existed long before drones. Each of these gave photographers a new way of seeing.
A drone is certainly a different tool, and sometimes it can make an image feel striking simply because of the unusual viewpoint. But the same could be said about many techniques when they are used only for effect.
For me, the question is not whether the camera was on the ground or in the air. The question is whether the photograph has composition, light, timing, feeling, and intention. A weak drone photograph is still weak. A strong one can absolutely be landscape photography, I think.
But I agree with Simon - I never saw a weak drone photo, also as I never saw a weak photo, for example, of an aisberg. The adventive location, as well as an unusual racurs, is 90% of success.
I think so too. A drone is a tool. The issue is whether it is well used.
The purest photo art, his B&W pieces are on a level few ever attain. I must agree with Tomasz when it comes to drone photography, another tool in the the camera bag of the modern photography.
What an eye for natural geometry. Stunning!
Truly gorgeous, poetic work. One has to appreciate the amount of time, research, patience and skill needed to make such photographs.