Originality in Landscape photography

Here is a take on the iconic view of Liathach from the littoral of Loch Clair, at dawn. It wasn't quite the weather I'd been hoping for after several very wet days and whilst it wasn't from the 'classic' viewpoint, it is still very recognisable as the view of Liathach from Glen Torridon, not very far from the road. The view has been and will continue to be heavily photographed, which means that by any measure of originality, this image falls well short and in hindsight, I really should have made more of an effort and headed elsewhere, alas I took the easy option, lesson learned.

Iconic landscape ~ Loch Clair littoral and Liathach, Glen Torridon

A popular definition of originality is

noun 

the ability to think independently and creatively.

the quality of being novel or unusual.

I value highly the originality of a landscape photographer, it shows that someone has left a comfort zone and applied their vision to making landscape images that fail to satisfy Edward Weston's criteria of a photogenic landscape. My definition of originality isn't whether a 10 or 16 stop filter or how many ND Grads have been used, nor how many vertical images were stitched with a 200mm prime lens or even how many images were taken to get the necessary focus stack. Neither do I define originality as the clever compositional play of lead in lines, curves, zig zags, symmetry, asymmetry, juxtaposition of elements, if the view is of an iconic landscape. Nor is originality conferred on an iconic landscape view that fulfils to artistic perfection the core conceptual expression of a photographers philosophical framework and has been photographed with 16"x20" LF,  printed on the Turin Shroud and framed using relict pieces of Noah's Ark. Even if an iconic location is photographed and events at the time 'brought tears of joy' to the photographer or will 'elicit a sublime connection of natures beauty with the viewer', sadly it will not and never will be an original landscape photograph, imho.

In simple terms, originality means an image of landscape scenery that is not usually photographed and since even a blind squirrel occasionally finds an acorn, originality should be demonstrated for a number of locations. The adage that 'every image tells a story' has some truth to it, as it reveals something about the landscape photographers preference with location choice and weather. So a landscape photographers portfolio or image galleries are better indicators for defining a landscape photographers comfort zone with weather and location. A portfolio and galleries of  iconic views and subjects, with fair weather, suggests to me a tightly constrained comfort zone, whilst at the other extreme are the elevated and remote locations in adverse weather at the ends of the day/night which suggests an altogether different philosophy and motivation for photographing the landscape. The landscape views away from the comfort and shelter of the car, require a certain philosophical outlook to accept the disappointments and on the more rewarding trips, mindfulness of the fickle nature of good fortune.

An iconic landscape location 
Elgol, Skye
Credit - Google 

How important originality is perceived for a landscape photographers work, can be demonstrated by Michael Kenna claiming copyright infringement against Korean Air's use of a landscape photograph, an image taken by an amateur no less, in an advertising campaign. Though having seen Kenna's image and the Korean Air image, I do wonder if court proceedings were instigated as of result of Korean Air employing the defence of Arkell v Pressdram 1971 to Kenna's initial enquiry for damages.

Nonetheless, “It is most disturbing to me and profoundly disappointing,” Kenna told The Korea Herald. “A company of the stature of Korean Airlines should set a standard for others and support originality.” He also said, “It greatly surprises me that instead of using my original art work, somebody from Korean Airlines chose a derivative image.” emphasis added, as Kenna seems to think that originality is an desirable quality for a landscape photograph and the use of the word derivative, implies a lesser image.

Regrettably and as is so commonly the case with acclaimed landscape photographers, there is 'talking the talk' and a failure of 'walking the walk' as in a report of the court proceedings -
"Korean Air cited the concept of fair use in arguing that anyone can take landscape photos and that Kenna has no right to claim a copyright, as many people had taken pictures of the pine tree island before him. Lawyers for Korean Air presented Kenna with dozens of photographs that came up on an Internet portal site through a search for “pine tree island” and asked him to select those that he thought infringed his copyright. Kenna called it a “hypothetical question” and declined to answer. "

Some have noted that Kenna was wise to decline answering in court, as the photographs presented by Korean Air defence team, may well have all been taken before Kenna's image in 2007.

Attraction of roads and derivative images by landscape photographers

Kenna lost the case and then lost the appeal too. After winning the appeal, Korean Air were reported as considering suing for defamation.

But aside from the schadenfreude, some other pertinent points from the court case were :

• I'm incredulous that a landscape photographer could believe that a photogenic grove of trees would not have been photographed before, especially so when there was a road nearby and that road leads from a major highway to a beach. 

• After the announcement of the copyright litigation, there was hardly any reporting or commentary on the court case in the landscape photography media, which is odd when one of the acclaimed 'elite' was in a court to 'set a standard for others and support originality'. It raised questions in my mind of the landscape photography media closing ranks and actually who are the landscape photography media that report the news and frame the agenda.

An iconic landscape location.
Durdle Door, Dorset
Credt - Google 

To bring myself up to speed with the current status of originality in landscape views, I have recently looked at the landscape portfolios of professionals, enthusiasts, amateurs and browsed the landscape groups on photo sharing communities. There is compelling evidence as of August 2015, to suggest that most landscape photographers do not photograph locations that require walking any distance from the car and that iconic landscapes are mostly photographed. Which is not to denigrate photographing the iconic landscape locations, they are very popular destinations for good reasons - aesthetically photogenic, weather resilient and convenient to the car. It seems apparent that to gain recognition in the popular landscape media and photography competitions, it is de rigueur to submit images of iconic landscape views or iconic subjects.

Edward Weston's quote might very well have to be amended to "anything less than 500 yards from the car, just isn't original".