In support of environmental photos

[Nathaniel]

I have often been confused with comments from members stating "cluttered backgrounds" etc in some of the posted photos on the forum. Today I came across these tips from a professional photographer Chris Gomersall in "Waterlife" and you will note that he says to include the environment in the photos. Please take a look at pictures 2 and 3.

img020 by Nathaniel Ramanaden, on Flickr

I would therefore like to know what members think about this advice.

I will be removing this picture from flickr soon.

Many thanks

Nat

[Richard W]

Re: In support of environmental photos

Personally, I prefer environmental images to "bird on a stick". However, that doesn't mean that the bird should be largely obscured by branches, ideally most of the "environment" should be in the background. I suspect that some competition judges go for clean, defocussed backgrounds, which might be why they are so popular. I guess it depends on what the aim of the photographer is.

[ctrollen]

Re: In support of environmental photos

I'm pretty much of the same mind as Richard.

[Nathaniel]

Re: In support of environmental photos

It would seem that the aim of the tips is to IMPROVE one's photography rather than what the photographer has in mind!! Therefore to my little understanding one has to include the environment in such wildlife photos!!!

[Tigger]

Re: In support of environmental photos

all a personal preference, but I prefer to be able to see the subject clearly and sorry Nat quoting a pro tog really means nothing, its about what you like not others

[the black fox]

Re: In support of environmental photos

Sometimes the environment can't be avoided ,statements along the lines of I don't take the picture unless the background is clear are at best dubious as these days it's easy to clone out unwanted items .so unless your a expert you can't tell what's been re.touched .
Personally I like a bit of environment in the shot ,but everything should leave at least 95% of the subject in clear view .each to there own and to there abilities as some will know if your local I will always try to get you pop round for a this is how it's done session or if to far away I do my best to help re the telephone ,but a lot depends on how far each person is willing to go to get what they class as better shots

[El Sid]

Re: In support of environmental photos

Clutter and the environment are not the same thing... In example 2 on that page the image is cluttered with items in random orientations that intersect and even partially obscure the subject - the fact that they are part of the environment is irrelevant, they are simply a mess... Compare that with example 3 where the environment is behind the subject, is not intrusive and does not detract nor distract - it tells you where the subject is without becoming the subject itself...

Remember too that he is also only stating his opinion not an absolute truth and that a professional photographer is only someone who manages to sell his pictures - it doesn't guarantee that he is better than you technically or artistically...

[H2OJunkie]

Re: In support of environmental photos

It is not the inclusion of the environment one should be looking at hard. It is the interaction of the environment with the image. Does it enhance the image? Does it aesthetically add to the image or does it aesthetically detract from the image? Art is subjective and therefore opinions will vary.

[rcarca]

Re: In support of environmental photos

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...

Depends on your purpose in creating the image. None of my work recently has been about creating a photojournalistic record, so I couldn't give a flying toss what some professional thinks. If he wants environment then fine, if you don't then fine. Listen to him and others, but make up your own mind. You are an experienced enough photographer to have your own valid point of view!