Does location matter to you?

sirch

sirch

Lu-Tze
Admin
Messages
104,470
Name
The other Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
Just musing, does it matter to you where a photograph is shot or is one shot as good as another? For example are you happy to travel to anywhere to get, say, a tree in the mist shot or a good street scene or do you like to shoot what ever you can get in a specific places. Some photos such as certain species can only be shot in specific locations, would you travel just to get the shot or would you not bother preferring to shoot whatever wildlife is in your favorite areas? And why?
 
I don't go out looking for specific photographs, I just go out wherever I am, looking. Full stop. On that basis, location doesn't matter. On the other hand, some places encourage me to look more than others, so location plays a part. I suppose some locations stimulate me, and others don't.
 
Last edited:
In the past I have travelled and stayed away for wildlife photography, e.g. The Farne Islands, Bempton Cliffs, Skomer Island and for landscape I've travelled to and stayed at Skye, North Wales, Dungeness Beach etc etc. However I would normally only travel a short car-ride and be away for the day, most of it being spent on photography rather than travelling ... I've never driven for hours on the off-chance of seeing a rare species, (but have photographed a number of rare species locally :) )
 
50/50 I guess for me.

Sometimes we'll just pick a woodland or area to walk and capture whatever takes my fancy. Other times we'll travel locally for a certain tree or because there's more chance of fog etc I have taken trips to Wales for the waterfalls and mountains. Same for the Quantocks or Glastonbury Tor etc
 
Anywhere for a shot? No (in a word!)! Maybe an hour's drive and even then, it'll be as a trip out rather than specifically for photography.
 
The exotic doesn't interest me, I'm fascinated by the parochial so I can find plenty to photograph within walking distance or a short drive of home. But there are some location specific subjects for which I'll make a car journey of more than fifteen minutes. All depends how motivated I am at the time.
 
I think it depends on the purpose of my photography, for instance I have travelled from Devon to Skye, Holy Island, Scotland generally, Wales, Lake District all on special trips to get specific types of shot. For me the most important element of an image is the subject, followed by composition and light. Agreed you can get great subjects from a short walk/drive from home and I do that mostly to look for good subjects but as I said there have been times w(and hopefully will be again) where I have travelled considerable distances to get subjects (Old Man of Storr, Lone Tree at Snowdonia, Buttermere Lone Tree etc). My next project will concentrate on Dartmoor which will be location specific and although I live on the edge of the Moor it is 366 square miles so driving distance will certainly be required once I have identified my subjects.
 
Wait for a leap year, then it's a shot per square mile per day!
 
Location is everything to me. I like big view mountain type landscapes. Woodland etc isn't my bag so location is the very definition of my photography. You need to be in a certain place, at a certain time for my images.

And I actually like driving so to me an hour or twenty in the car is actually a pleasure.
 
Last edited:
Yes and no, I enjoy scoping out a location in advance, looking for angles on maps and where the sun will rise / set. I like Astro so this can be particularly important if you want stars or the Milky Way in a certain place.

That said, you can’t know or find out everything from planning, and I still get spontaneity “on site”.

I think I have to feel there is potential, then take it from there.
 
This is not whether location matters. This is "do you ever go out and shoot whatever" or "do you go out with an intended subject matter in hand:"

That should give you the answer.

Yes I have taken the camera out and shoot whatever that came my way. But when I went out to shoot something that the journey there my camera doesn't come out.
 
I'm mostly not interested in travelling to get a picture. The point of taking a picture for me is to take a picture of something that means something to me, a person, a place or scene or even just a flower, leaf or detail I stop to look at.

I can understand people who want to photograph polar bears or the like needing to go to a place where they exist and similarly I'd like to see and photograph the northern lights one day. Other than that needing to go there to see it and whilst there photograph it experience good luck to those who simply must take their own picture of the Wanaka tree or any other thing and if I was there I'd take the picture but I wouldn't specifically set off to go there to take it.
 
Interesting set of replies. Part of the reason for asking is that I have sometimes thought, for example, that I might go and shoot misty mornings on the fens inspired by some of the photos I have seen from there but then I have a feeling that its not my area, I might come back with some pretty pictures but I wouldn't have a real connection to them. That said, I have been to Scotland and Wales specifically to shoot landscapes and I suppose I feel more at home there because I have spent a lot more time there and I regularly shoot mountain landscapes.

For whatever reason a tree photo from around where I live would mean more to me than one where I had driven to an area that I didn't usually frequent just to photograph a tree, even if I could get a better tree photo elsewhere.
 
sirch said:
For example are you happy to travel to anywhere to get, say, a tree in the mist shot or a good street scene
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that I've ever done this.

Generally I enjoy developing a relationship with a place, whether it's for birdwatching, walking or photography and prefer going to the same local places on multiple occasions. I like the feeling of seeing some fresh buds, or new badger pad marks, that I know weren't there yesterday, or how the feel of a place changes depending on whether its raining or sunny, or across the seasons. Making photographs is part of that experience and enjoyment.

I also like travelling to more distant places with nice scenery or interesting birds, but I realise, when thinking about this post, that although I still take photographs (many which I like), the driver to go to those places is the nice scenery, interesting birds, or fascinating history, not the desire to take photographs.
 
I have traveled to many places SPECIFICALLY to get a shot I have in my head, but some of these are not "original", sometimes they are of work that I have seen others have done and I want one for myself. Pretty much like most famous landscapes shots, I want that shot from that angle but I want to take it myself.

1IEyhHN.jpg


yECH9b8.jpg


11ShwXV.jpg


Q8olIeN.jpg


IunjQUX.jpg


0aeYxZP.jpg


HyfqrKy.jpg
 
Last edited:
Nod said:
Wait for a leap year, then it's a shot per square mile per day!
Click to expand...

This book is called Dartmoor 365 which has a section where the National Park is sectioned into 365 squares with an extra square not in the Park but where the Dartmoor National Park Offices are for the 366th location and it is where I have done most of my current research from to date so you aren't far off with your comment Nod. (y)

Project Prep-1PS Adj.jpg
 
Topsy said:
This book is called Dartmoor 365 which has a section where the National Park is sectioned into 365 squares with an extra square not in the Park but where the Dartmoor National Park Offices are for the 366th location and it is where I have done most of my current research from to date so you aren't far off with your comment Nod. (y)
Click to expand...

This sounds a really interesting project
 
Topsy said:
This book is called Dartmoor 365 which has a section where the National Park is sectioned into 365 squares with an extra square not in the Park but where the Dartmoor National Park Offices are for the 366th location and it is where I have done most of my current research from to date so you aren't far off with your comment Nod. (y)

View attachment 310727
Click to expand...


Paul. That looks like a lovely camera and lens you've got there. Please don't post any more pictures of it.

Thanks.
:D
 
That book is beside me as I type. Sadly, the same can't be said for the camera!
 
sirch said:
Interesting set of replies. Part of the reason for asking is that I have sometimes thought, for example, that I might go and shoot misty mornings on the fens inspired by some of the photos I have seen from there but then I have a feeling that its not my area, I might come back with some pretty pictures but I wouldn't have a real connection to them. That said, I have been to Scotland and Wales specifically to shoot landscapes and I suppose I feel more at home there because I have spent a lot more time there and I regularly shoot mountain landscapes.

For whatever reason a tree photo from around where I live would mean more to me than one where I had driven to an area that I didn't usually frequent just to photograph a tree, even if I could get a better tree photo elsewhere.
Click to expand...

See - I am the opposite. Why take a picture of something just because you happen to live near it. Take a picture of something you want to take a picture of - even if it is far away.

The pictures out of all mine that mean the most are probably the ones from the Spanish and French Pyrenees, followed by some from Chamonix. All over 1100 miles drive from here.
 
Topsy said:
Indeed it will be, don't want to derail this thread but keep an eye out for a thread once I can get out freely and start the project. It'll take 2 years and will culminate in a book.
Click to expand...
I will.
 
Difficult to say really. I'm a relative newbie. But I think wherever you go you have to form a sort of relationship with it for it to mean something to you. Personally I'm just enjoying my local photography at the moment. I like to go back to an area if it has promise and can usually find something to whet my appetite. That might all change once we are free to travel again, but I'm not sure. Grand vistas are all very well, but I prefer to keep it intimate, for want of a better word.
 
SFTPhotography said:
See - I am the opposite. Why take a picture of something just because you happen to live near it. Take a picture of something you want to take a picture of - even if it is far away.

The pictures out of all mine that mean the most are probably the ones from the Spanish and French Pyrenees, followed by some from Chamonix. All over 1100 miles drive from here.
Click to expand...
I suppose that is part of my dilemma, why wouldn't I go and get the shot. As I said it's not really about distance, between lock downs last year I did an 800 mile round trip to the Inverness area but they were UK mountains in UK weather. I suppose its that I just don't know what works in a new type of area and it would probably take my many visits to feel confident that I could get a worthwhile shot.
 
sirch said:
Just musing, does it matter to you where a photograph is shot or is one shot as good as another? For example are you happy to travel to anywhere to get, say, a tree in the mist shot or a good street scene or do you like to shoot what ever you can get in a specific places. Some photos such as certain species can only be shot in specific locations, would you travel just to get the shot or would you not bother preferring to shoot whatever wildlife is in your favorite areas? And why?
Click to expand...

It's not a simple either/or situation.

I live in a naturally beautiful area and exercise by walking once or twice a week, plus have lunchtime strolls around where I work. The territory is familiar and I look for interest that others might pass by.

We also love to travel, to visit new places and see new things. It's fantastic to get to experience new cultures and situations that are completely different from home.

And it's great to be able to visit 'classic' spots occasionally too: Dirdle Door on Boxingday waiting for the sunrise through the arch (didn't happen) or Chesterton mill in Warwickshire etc.

My photography is almost entirely driven by 'seeing'. I see a scene as I walk past that catches my eye and I pause to photograph it, and that also applies if I travel to a specific spot for a particular scene or if we're walking through local fields. I can and do sometimes work the scene, but often the first image is the best.
 
sirch said:
I suppose that is part of my dilemma, why wouldn't I go and get the shot. As I said it's not really about distance, between lock downs last year I did an 800 mile round trip to the Inverness area but they were UK mountains in UK weather. I suppose its that I just don't know what works in a new type of area and it would probably take my many visits to feel confident that I could get a worthwhile shot.
Click to expand...

Indeed - so return, return and return again.

My best images never come from my first time anywhere ;)
 
This really depends on your aim, Most places can work depending on what you want to achieve. However, if you're doing something like Landscape photography I'd recommend travelling around and finding something aesthetic.
 
benc98 said:
There is something incredibly satisfying about getting an absolute banger of a shot locally. If I could do it regularly, there would be little need to travel
Click to expand...

I am sure this is true - however it's also highly satisfying to get out the car, after a through the night red bull fueled drive, and get a cracker of a sky, perfect reflections and light all in one.

I love a plan when it all comes together.

_DSC3850 by Stephen Taylor, on Flickr

_DSC2202 - 1x1 - Version 2 by Stephen Taylor, on Flickr

I actually like driving though - to me it's all part of the fun. But I don't like to see £50 of fuel and and a sleepness night evaporate for nothing. When you get shotz like this - the feeling is immense.
 
I don't generally go looking for a shot. I shoot what I see that happens to be where I go.
But location is still important I can't shoot mountains round here (I'm fairly sure there are none in 200 miles).
Even with a simple 'tree in the mist shot' the tree MUST look good, this might mean simple walking another 1/4 mile or it might be not taking that style of shot on this occasion.
When circumstances allow I travel to locations where I expect to see interesting subjects. This might be as a family holiday, or a day trip to a specific place or event (race meeting or airshow)...
I would love to spend a day photographing low flying aircraft on their training flights in the welsh mountains - but driving right across the country for this is more than I can justify. Sadly on the rare occasions when I do find myself in the area I can't make time for the experience.
There are typically 3-4 weekends a year where I get to travel to more distant parts of the country for work, but on each of these I'm working nearly all the daylight hours - a brief side trip or halt on the way there is all I can manage - but this still opens up new locations I couldn't justify otherwise, even if some places are always closed when I can get there ;(

Whether its a day trip or a detour while working I'll hardly ever travel much more than an hour out of my way to get to a location to shoot.
 
Location is everything really.
I have travelled to lots of countries.
Planned trips last year and this year though cancelled to Nepal and Mexico City because of this crisis which was really disappointing because there was a lot of money, thought and planning involved.
I love photographic holidays and I shoot people and culture rather than landscapes.
 
I go places, I take the camera. Usually end up having the wrong lens for the occasion but that just means I have to go back again another time.

Every trip out is a location scouting opportunity - I might be there in tipping rain but think it's worth a revisit when it's sunnier (or vice versa).

Biggest regret is not taking a camera on more work trips where I knew I'd be at a loose end evenings or weekends.
 
SFTPhotography said:
But I don't like to see £50 of fuel and and a sleepness night evaporate for nothing.
Click to expand...

If I’m travelling more than an hour or so then I’ll make it a day out. Snowdonia is a 90 minutes drive for me if I get a tractor and dawdler free run at it. I wouldn’t do that just for a shot of the lone tree and then drive back home, I’d want a nice few hours walking the mountains as well. If the photography was a disaster, (with me it often is :p ), at least I’ve got a nice walk and some fresh air out of it.

I‘ve really got to appreciate the Shropshire Hills over the last year for obvious reasons. From my front door I can be on the summit of Caer Caradoc in 40 minutes or so. I know the place pretty well now and the shots I’ve got there have improved quite a bit over the last few months.
 
Last edited:
JasonPC said:
If I’m travelling more than an hour or so then I’ll make it a day out. Snowdonia is a 90 minutes drive for me if I get a tractor and dawdler free run at it. I wouldn’t do that just for a shot of the lone tree and then drive back home, I’d want a nice few hours walking the mountains as well. If the photography was a disaster, (with me it often is :p ), at least I’ve got a nice walk and some fresh air out of it.

I‘ve really got to appreciate the Shropshire Hills over the last year for obvious reasons. From my front door I can be on the summit of Caer Caradoc in 40 minutes or so. I know the place pretty well now and the shots I’ve got there have improved quite a bit over the last few months.
Click to expand...

Snowdonia is 5 hours for me so it has to be a long weekend at least to make it worth it, and, that lone tree..........

Lone Tree of Snowdonia Dawn Shot.jpg
 
SFTPhotography said:
See I would. I drove 4hrs to Skye, walked 3 mins from the car...shot this after 45mins wait for the light then drove home :D

_DSC0561 by Stephen Taylor, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Certain a fantastic shot Steve, that may have needed a very early start, but whilst there you could at least have walked up to the old man & taken some close up shots too.
 
Petrochemist said:
Certain a fantastic shot Steve, that may have needed a very early start, but whilst there you could at least have walked up to the old man & taken some close up shots too.
Click to expand...

Left home around 3am - there for sunrise. Light took a bit of time to come though...straight home and quick stop for petrol in Ft William.

And if I wanted to walk up there - I would have. I have done in the past and never gelled with it. And even if I had - the best of the light would have gone so it would be been a waste of time and energy - so I'd have to go back another time. In actual fact the day before I took that picture I drove to Skye through the night, took a few shots then drove straight home in time for lunch and powernapp

_DSC0523 by Stephen Taylor, on Flickr

If it's higher views you like on Trotternish then the better one is the Quiraing. Nicer view and less man made clobber visible on the walk. See below.

Left home at 12pm - there for 345am - done by 5:30am and home before 11am...

That's how I roll. Drive, arrive, shoot and scoot...:D

_DSC1286 by Stephen Taylor, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top