Len Philpot
Well-Known Member
Thank you and I get what you're saying, Intellectually, at least. But when it comes to "feeling it", I struggle. I think part of it, in fact quite possibly the bulk of it, is that -- as embarrassing (and kinda depressing) as it may be to admit -- I've lived in Louisiana for all of my life. For. Nearly. Sixty-five. Years... So "familiarity breeds contempt" has settled in quite firmly. The gloss has worn off. Or to borrow a phrase from B.B. King:Len, I feel you do yourself a disservice. Your images amply portray the quiet beauty to be found in your neck o' the woods.
The thrill is gone
The thrill is gone away
The thrill is gone, baby
The thrill is gone away from me
So when I see nice landscape images of nice places, it's difficult to "compete" (for lack of a better term). It's not that I want to compare myself to other photographers, really. Well, yes... it is, to a degree but not in a "superior / inferior" sense. Rather it's for the purposes of learning and growth and I think that's legit.
But making a photo is a sum-total game in a sense. There are all kinds of "ingredients" (mental, physical, logistical, visual, technical, etc.) that come together to make an image. So if one ingredient is weaker, sometimes another can be stronger and therefore, compensate. But the fact remains that any weakness of any ingredient is an detriment to the final (i.e., sum) result. The more strong ingredients you have, the better the image will be in most cases. Of course no image is completely perfect, 100% strong in every regard. But in my case, starting with dull(er) subject matter just means there's less "fuel in the tank", so to speak. Quite aside from my own shortcomings, I'm starting from a disadvantaged position.
At least that's how it feels. But your and others' input is absolutely welcomed and appreciated.