Thanks for watching everyone! If you want access to my new, FREE, Lightroom Preset, 'Seasonal Shift' all you need to do is sign up to my Newsletter 📬: www.chrisharvey.co/newsletter
I found a local spot that I had never seen photographed so started taking some shots over a period of months and posting them on a local page, i took a friend once, within weeks access to the location was closed due to damage done by other people going there to photograph. Track damage by 4wd and intentional damage done to foliage to get "better" shots, rubbish left behind. Never again will I share a location with others as they destroyed it for everyone.if others don't have the "benefit" of time or other reasons, that problem belongs to them and I am under no obligation to provide them with opportunity or learning experiences. That might sound harsh but I don't want to feel responsible for damage to a beautiful place because of even 1 irresponsible person.
I agree with this 100% I’ve been exploring my native Scotland for over forty years and have just returned from my latest trip to show my wife some of the outstanding beauty of my homeland. Whereas previously I could go to these spots and take in and enjoy the scenery, it’s now saturated with thousands of tourists, many of whom have no respect for the landscape. In particular I’m referring to the Fairy Pools and the Quiraing on Skye and areas now taken in on the dreaded North Coast 500.
Agree totally. The respectful, careful photographer is a rarity. Most people trash the countryside in order to get more “likes” for their vain personalities. Look at Snowdon, a mess, caused by excessive people who just dont care.
I like photographing all those things other photographers spend ages editing out of their pictures. There's nothing more powerful than a club photo exhibition attended by those in local government that openly displays the mess they're making of our local environment. This really ugly stuff is readily available near you.
It’s really got nothing to do with helping other photographers. The sole consideration should be to consider what would happen to an area if it gets popular among tourists with cameras. Wildlife, property owners, fragile ecosystem, historically significant ruins, etc can all be negatively impacted. It’s just not a big deal to let people find their own places to shoot.
Came to echo this. I remember a video about that mirrored obelisk that got put up in the US somewhere in the middle of nowhere. The huge amount of people flooding to a non maintained area was destroying it so a group took it away.
I have some extended family living in Suffolk, and whenever visiting I often visit The Abbey Gardens in Bury St Edmunds, usually finding something different every time. However bearing in mind it is very much a public location, one shot that your comment brings to mind is one of an old enamelled notice which always brings a smile to my face, "ANYONE FOUND DAMAGING THE RUINS WILL BE PROSECUTED", under the circumstances what do we define as DAMAGE, does that include littering???
100% agree! I also find a big part of the joy of landscape photography is discovering places for myself. It’s part of the process. I don’t expect to have locations handed to me. That just feels like a lazy approach. Go out and explore!
Hi Chris, I'm an angler who is also interested in photography. In angling, sharing a location can often lead to it completely trashed. Many angling clubs now have rules about not sharing locations and catches on social media. If you knew you could share locations either fishing spots or photographic locations with like minded folks it wouldn’t be a problem. Unfortunately that's not the world we live in.
I completely understand but I’m not really referring to sharing locations online. It’s more on a personal level in private conversations etc. I’ve come across too many gatekeepers who believe they own these landscapes. It’s discouraging to beginners who want to respectfully visit a woodland, leave no trace, but are instead tarred with the same brush as vandals. It’s very hard to grow the artform of photography with that attitude because people are just going to feel that the community are combative and selfish
Imaging those of us who are old enough (I’m 71) to remember when we didn’t rush home with our photographs to upload them for viewing by all 5,000 of our closest friends to look at. We usually made prints and put them on the walls in our homes, or, in my case, in a newspaper for which I was a staff photographer. We didn’t get “likes” from people we had never met. Thousands of people didn’t know where we shot the photo if we didn’t want them to know. We didn’t know if we got a good photograph until we got home, or to work, and developed the film and made a contact sheet. Or for the general public, took the roll of Kodak film to the Rexall Drug Store for development and printing - to be picked up 4-5 days later. I love digital photography and wouldn’t gladly go back to shooting film. But let’s all admit that there truly was a difference in pace when one had a 36 exposure roll of Agfa film and had to carefully think about what to photograph - rather than blasting-away with a mega-pixel blunderbuss. Times change.
You appeared in my feed, and with such a title I couldn't resist watching! Your question sits on the horns of a dilemma - public places that are maintained for some footfall, I'd share any time, the more out of the way places, maybe just a general area. Like others commenting here, it is far to common to see litter in places that attract visitors, which is sad. for me, bing a bit old and not able to clamber up hills & mountains, vacariously visiting interesting sites through youtube is excellent. Great 'thinking' video, thanks.
I live in the US and have spent 25+ years documenting Amish country. I do my very best to treat the Amish with great respect. Many don’t. I hesitate to give specific locations, to protect the privacy of the Amish.
It seems to me two things that seem to contradict each other can actually be perfectly valid. 1. Except perhaps on private land (but that’s a whole other discussion!) no-one owns a view or has exclusive rights over it. 2. As photographers we’re all free to share as little or as much about our work as we want.
I recently went on an RPS Talk Walk Talk visit to Cannock Chase, an area I had never been to before. Our guide was most generous with his information and tips for there and the local area. I can though see how some “ honey spots” might suffer from too many visitors, but then these locations are in almost every photo guide book that you can buy. I think that the essence is common sense and also a desire to find your own images because even if another photographer shares a newly found spot then be creative and find something special of your own.
Lets everybody find the locations for themselfs. Nowdays all the touristic locations, popular viewpoints are overcrowded, closed and trashed...so keeping the nice untouched locations secret is crucial. Lets pick for example iceland... nowdays wildcamping is forbidden and for good reason. The ammount of people visiting that country is huge... and as you mentioned in the video stunning photogenic and untouched places in woodlands are super rare (everywhere in EU). So I totally get it why photographers dont want to share their locations, especially with someone who they dont know. And lets face it... the biggest thrill and fun of landscape photography is not the photography part its the part when you explore places with no expectations and stumble up on a stunning view, etc. Replicating photos from the same locations as other photographer is nice when you starting out but if you dont learn nothing from it its useless. Nowdays there are so many tools to explore places whitouth being there, like google earth pro, hiking maps with countour lines, flipping old hiking books, magazines like sidetrack. There are just so many resources to find the perfect location that I think asking for the exact spot from the photographer is just stupid at this point. Im not a pro landscape photographer but I totally get it why they just ignore these kind of questions.
The trouble with tourism, is tourism. In fact, a number of well known Landscape photographers do 'Landscape' Photography Tours, for example, Iceland. Ooops.
I'm only 2:34 into the video, but to share my thoughts on this: Personally, I'm fine with sharing my locations. Since I’m not a well-known photographer, my photos don’t tend to go viral. However, for popular photographers, especially those with large Instagram followings, sharing a stunning location can lead to an influx of visitors. Unfortunately, this often results in environmental damage, such as excessive foot traffic or littering. In those cases, I feel it's not a good idea to share specific spots.
Absolutely share the on location if the photograph is being shared in the public domain. If for whatever reason a particular location needs protection, then don't share the image 👍🏼😊 A good balanced and well thought out video.
It is a difficult one, living in North Wales when so many places are over visited. When I do find something new I must say I like to keep it to myself, at least for a little while. Maybe see you out there one day
I think sharing locations is good, I don’t have much time to explore so it’s nice to know if an area is worth a visit. I think most photographers are respectful, there is nothing worse than finding litter in a location so they don’t tend to add to it.
This is a great topic and it's good to hear the opinions of others on this. I say no for two reasons, the first being like a lot of others here that I don't want to see an area bombarded with photographers denigrating it (which they will, unintended or not); and I also don't think it's fair on any local homeowners etc that like their peace & quiet. I have been asked a few times in the past and I generally just give a general area not an exact spot, and even this is too much info sometimes. The second reason, and this may sound a little vain, is that if someone were to go to a spot I have given them and photographed virtually the exact same photo as I have and shared it around and it somehow went viral, or they entered it into a competition and won a considerable amount of money and/or exposure I would feel a little dejected to be honest. Don't take that the wrong way, by no means do I see myself as a worthy photography but it only takes one shot right; and that being the case if it was something original that I took and someone else was getting rave reviews all over the place for the same photo, at the spot I gave them and I was way back in the shadows, well, you know .... Good topic, thanks for raising it. 😉
Great video mate and a really interesting topic! If it wasn’t for RUclips I don’t think I’d have found so many of the incredible places I’ve been too recently so I definitely see the benefits of it. The amount of times I’ve driven past that little tea room on the bridge as well it’s such a cool little spot! 📸 you know your about to hit the mountains when you reach it 😍
I just discovered your channel, thank you for sharing. I agree that all of Nature is in the public domain. I am in (and photograph exclusively) southwestern Idaho in the States-if I can affect even one other person to get "out there" that is cool. I readily share where each photo is taken, as an early morning person there are few (if any) others out when I am. Thanks for sharing this philosophy.
Thank you Terry! Really appreciate you checking out the video and for leaving such a thoughtful comment! You have a really refreshing perspective on this topic which is so great to see 👍🏻
Hi. I came over this in the feed. Nice video. I have noticed this is more common in UK than where I live, Norway. I guess.more people and pressure on locations and nature are some of the explanation,
Not sure what the legal situation in Norway is regarding 'Right to Roam'. England and Wales have access to 8% of the land. Scotland has 99% access to the land with a smaller population, so the footfall isn't such a problem. Different law system in Scotland... thank goodness !
I have nothing against photographers who go to other photographers found places! but I like to find my own places and take pictures of subjects that no one has taken pictures of, I try not to copy people or go on so called workshops, but each to their own of course I am not a landscape photographer but I do shoot landscapes they are just part of my photographic journey which has been a long one, from my back garden to around the world and back, travel will always be part of my picture taking, I am very much a senior now so its all local stuff from now on which I find as interesting as a picture taken in the lake district or wherever. You last picture place which I have seen a million times but I have never been there, is a lovely place to be and I prefer the landscape crop rather than the upright. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and pictures with us!
I have all ways wanted to photograph on the coastline of Maine, some years ago I took a weekend trip to the southern coast of Maine, the first day I photographed the Portland Head lighthouse and the Pemiquid lighthouse, it is the lighthouse on the back of the Maine quarter. The following day i did a sunrise to sunset photo shoot with a group of five other photographers, a professional photographer John Solina was leading the group, John runs photography tours/shops in different locations and also has a few single day trips to different areas of the New England states of Maine and Vermont. The single day trips are dedicated to photographing different locations during the day with a break for lunch, meals are usually at a local restaurant, his fee does not include food and lodging on the one day trip. The first location was a cove to photograph the sunrise and many more locations during the day. On these trips he will give you as much help and instructions as you require but because we start before sunrise it would be best to know how to use your equipment in those conditions. This was with out a doubt the best single day of photography i had, the locations chosen and the time of day gave me the opportunity to shoot some memorable photos, the one day fee was well worth it, because the area is so vast to find all the locations that we photographed that day and the best way to get to each one would not be easy with out his work putting together this trip. So if have an opportunity to do a single day shoot, then do it it's a great experience.
There is a strong parallel with 'spots' in skateboarding. Some skateboarders take inspiration from other people's tricks at certain street spots (locations) and then ask for the location or track it down on street view. For some skateboarders the fun is also in the hunt for new, untouched spots. The time and dedication for going out and finding unique new spots has to be respected, particularly if you aren't yourself bringing any new ones to the table. Some spots are kept on the down-low because some other skaters may not respect the spot (they then share its location, land owners, security, littering, tagging, behaviour, etc.) Another parallel is that skateboarders try to not do an ABD (Already Been Done) trick at a spot that has already been filmed/photographed there. This unwritten rule really only applies to professional skateboarders, but keeps things fresh, and drives innovation. People have different opinions on where the line is drawn but for me, it's important to show due respect/props to the person who opened the door to that spot for you and inspired you, and to also show respect to the spot itself so that it stays a spot, rather than a bust (where security kicks you out).
Nice video Chris. This is always an interesting topic. I take your points for disclosing locations, but I am not convinced by the arguments. Firstly, why would anyone think they will become a better photographer - even a beginner - if they go to a place and copy someone else's work? As a landscape and nature photographer, the chances are the conditions you are photographing in at a copied location will be sub-optimal and you will come away disappointed anyway. The very idea says that good landscape and nature photographs are more a product of location than the photographer. Some locations may offer more opportunities, but I suggest knowing where a photograph has been taken is not going to help you much. Getting to know one or two locations intimately and experimenting is much more important. The location could be your local woods or the beach, it doesn't have to be iconic. Secondly, the idea that most landscape photographers are responsible stewards of the environment is perhaps true, but unwittingly they can still cause damage. Basically if you have lots of people going to one location then the natural environment will be impacted if not changed. There is no getting around this. Either you have to build infrastructure to support a larger number of visitors to protect the wider environment, and this in itself impacts the area, or you accept a degree of damage to the local environment. Personally, I think we just need to get over the idea that you need to go to locations that other people have photographed because this is your best chance of getting good images. I am of the strong belief that we shouldn't be sharing locations to a wide audience if this is going to have a detrimental impact on an area. We are only ruining it for future generations and I am doubtful it teaches photographers much if anything.
I understand and agree with the sentiment of your points but I would argue that beginners can learn an awful lot from copying other photographers. It helps you understand composition and what makes a good composition, it also gives you a potentially decent image that you can then edit and learn about post processing. Take musicians for example, when you learn to play guitar, you often imitate other guitarists, learn their songs, and eventually you develop your own style. I think stewardship of the environment is important and I believe the natural world can be enjoyed and visited responsibility. If a photographer was so worried about the fragility of a location and therefore unwilling to tell anyone where that location was, then why did they feel they could go there in the first place? By that argument, surely they too have caused damage...
I prefer the cropped version of the photo. And I couldn't agree more about how you feel regarding keeping places a secret. What are these people afraid of - that someone can do it better?
Not quite sure the message is clear in this video as it feels a bit mixed but if you’ve some kind of expectation that experienced photographers ‘should’ be disclosing locations out of some sort of communal responsibility, it’s rather naive. Nobody has a responsibility to anyone to share this information as some kind of public service, it’s up to photographers themselves to exercise enough nous and field craft to find unique images, it’s a skill in itself and always has been. If a photographer is time limited then there’s plenty of guide books etc anyway. The only people who ever talk about ‘gatekeeping’ in my experience are not focused enough on their own shortcomings as photographers.
Thanks for sharing your perspective on this. I don't think I was really trying to present a definitive message, rather just raising the topic and sharing the opinions i've come across over the years in the hope it starts some discussion around, what I feel, is a very nuanced topic. I agree that we shouldn't feel obligated to geo-tag our images on social media etc, I don't think I articulated that point clearly. I was intending on referring to sharing locations on a more personal, individual basis, photographer-to-photographer. I think when people are just getting into photography, they may want to exercise field craft but lack the resources and knowledge to know what that entails and how to exercise it. I feel for photographers in this situation who want to innocently ask the whereabouts of a certain location to visit but feel they are unable to ask out of fear of a stand-offish response. I came across this on a couple of occasions when I was getting started and it can be discouraging.
I'm basically with everything you've said Stuart but I think the last sentence is a bit harsh. If people wish to share locations I won't criticise them. If they're already in the field and the gate's wide open for anyone to walk through I'm happy to point the way but if the gates closed I ain't opening it for them, they can work that out for themselves. Less metaphorically, the well known sites that are already in the public domain there's no point in trying to keep quiet about, you just always end the conversation with 'respect the environment and leave no trace'. The issue of mere footfall is a more problematic issue.
@@iainmc9859 I just think the idea of gatekeeping in photography is nonsense. Nobody, especially these days with the mountain of resources available to them, is being held back from anything. I won't criticise folk for disclosing locations either, but the tone of this video seemed to insinuate that if you're not disclosing locations then those people are somehow elitist or 'gatekeepers' which is utter nonsense. If someone isn't producing interesting or compelling imagery the last thing I'd be pointing the finger at is people not telling me where to shoot.
Thoughtful and provocative post, Chris. Not a simple equation. My sense is that those who are reluctant to share locations are concerned w/copies that dilute the commercial value of their compositions, like special waterfalls. Location spoilage a valid point, but not topmost in mind, IMO. Iconic venues are fair game for all - good for practice but difficult to render as special. Good compositions are everywhere all the time - better to learn how to make the best of any venue than to replicate or approximate the pics of others. More than photo sites, I’d like to know where more practical things are to be found, like restrooms😊. You seem to be an ace at finding comfortable seating (tree stump and bench)😊. My pref is for the tighter composition that more clearly hones in on cottage and bridge leading to it. BTW, do you prefer single or variable ND filters? Choice and reasoning might make a good video. Minor suggestion: update channel pic to a color version. Cheers!
Different for wildlife photography, but I guess woodland might come under the same rules to an extent, where sharing locations can be to the detriment of the subject. Recent article on the Guardian titled "‘You could single-handedly push it to extinction’: how social media is putting our rarest wildlife at risk" might be of interest.
It definitely depends, if a place is setup and has the infrastructure for public use feel free to share, if it does not and the possibility of hundreds of visitors would cause damage or disruption whether it’s private land or local places without public infrastructure then don’t share or share what is comfortable. Everyone is free to do their own research, but not every place is meant for social media. Lots of places in the US have been shutdown or blocked to the public because of social media use.
Location sharing is a double edged sword. Just off the top of my head, I can think of numerous locations that have either become impossible to visit or much harder to visit because they became Instagram famous. The Wave in Arizona, Chocolate Falls on the Navajo Nation, Antelope Canyon, Maroon Bells, & Horseshoe Bend to name a few. Chocolate Falls is closed to everyone because it became popular & people didn't respect the area. The Wave now has limited day passes & you have to win a lottery to get one. Antelope Canyon no longer does photo tours because its become so popular. And so on. I, personally, don't have a problem sharing location information, but I do it more selectively these days
I went to Llanrwst a month ago for the day. We lived there for a year so know it well. I prefered the horizontal photo. Sometimes sharing a location can spoil it for everyone if getting to the location causes parking problems.
Thanks Robert, I really appreciate it! I like the horizontal composition too. It's a lovely location, i'm sure you'll have taken a few photos of this subject. I'd like to capture it in different seasons.
It's nice that you are sharing your location, but you being where you are and me being in the east coast of the United States, the chance of someone like myself going there is not going to happen, so when someone reveals a location they might consider how many people might have access or travel to the location of North Wales.or any place else. Enjoyed your video. One last comment, i live in a some what rural area of NYS and there is a park near my house that I walk my dog 🐕 in the morning, it is a public are but the morning hours is fairly quite, most every day i pick up other people's garbage, the park has several trash containers in different locations and people still chose to be pigs and leave the trash on the ground or picnic tables.
I always share my locations, I hate the gatekeeping in the community. Sometimes people are just amateurs who want a neat photo and don't have the time/knowledge to do all the searching that pros/youtubers do.
My thoughts exactly! Whilst I understand the argument of places becoming too popular, I’m not so arrogant as to believe that my influence is going to make a great difference. I like to believe that allowing others to enjoy a landscape will help people become advocates of protecting that landscape.
Great topic Chris. Overall I don’t agree with sharing locations. Not everyone is like us in respecting the landscape and being aware of the potential damage to the ecosystem. As is often the case, the masses spoil it for the mindful. I preferred the second shot. My eye kept getting drawn to the bridge in the first shot.
I would love to have seen a shot much closer to the bridge as a long lead-in to the house, however I love the vertical shot. I think it's a bit arrogant to think that another competent photographer, while never viewing a copy of a particular photo or composition, could not produce a similar photographic composition. Mother nature is forever changing, and you can not reproduce that point in time. However, those well versed in photo editing software may well make a good shot at reproducing a particular scene, buts that's a different story.
I much prefer the landscape shot of the house. Slightly less sky that the portrait version and the house and colours are more central to the shot. Thanks
Hi Chris, For me both images have their merits, I rather like the idea of portrait format landscape images, they tend to make you think a little more of the scene before you. However, I think I would have used a wider frame with the house placed roughly in the top right segment using the Rule of Thirds, rendering less sky and more of the bridge on the left. As regards the question of sharing locations, is it not a matter of who you share with, another photographer you know and trust, I believe is fine, your colleagues in a camera club, yes. But then you have the Photographic Workshops, a business venture, now that is a different matter entirely.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the photos Geoff! It’s a tough location to compose because the foreground on the bank is very messy in places bringing in more of the bridge would have also brought in more mess to the foreground! I totally agree with your ideas compositionally! In terms of sharing locations, your view is exactly the nuanced and measured attitude id like to see more of from this community. Thanks for weighing in!
I have no issue in sharing locations for Icon spots. However if I find a hidden gem or a location off the beaten track I won't share the location. Mainly because I like to go back to these locations repeatedly and I don't want to run into anyone. I enjoy taking friends or fellow photographers to these locations but I won't place these locations on social media.
That’s absolutely fair enough! I think we all have places like that. I think I just take issue with photographers who are overly dismissive of the notion of sharing a location with a fellow photographer (not shouting about all over social media, but rather just sharing it in a personal, private conversation). The gatekeeper mentality of ‘this is my landscape, not yours’ is an attitude I’m just so tired of.
As the third most densely populated country in Europe (excluding the tiddlers) there is zero opportunity to avoid helping to manage the pressure on locations. Given there are enough “classics” documented and geolocated for beginners to practice on, the next phase in landscape photography is discovering the fleeting and ephemeral and working on the novel and, in doing this, spreading the load evenly. For this region is enough detail, Eryri, Dolomites, Hebrides, etc. The focus is then on desktop or in field “visualisation” (if I go over there x,y,z will align, the light will be here), compositional skills, technique, timing, patience, exploration, experience, learning, field craft and luck. Go forth and discover!
I think some photographers find their own work so important they don't want anyone else knows where the pictures were taken. Other photographers really think that disclosing the location will harm the place, even when probably only people with an interest in landscape photography will watch their movies and pictures, people who themselves probably don't want rubbish in the frame. I'm more a person who likes to include the location unless to protect the privacy of the property of certain locations, such as a private house in a scene.
I always share my locations, but never seen anyone takes the same style of pictures like mine. I think it’s all about how a photographer see and represent the view
It’s the vertical image for me, I like the effect in the water and the house is less important but adds to the scene. By the way, I don’t know North Wales at all so no idea what you are saying, is it Langoose?
I think the only reason to keep a location secret is if its a site of sientific intrest and has rear plants or spesies of animal for instance some times country file has been asked to keep a site of speshial intrest secret so the plant or prodgect can flurish with out disterbenc hope this helps .
Many photographers are aware of the damage that can be done by sites that have been publicly "outed" and therefore are reluctant to name locations. The Nature First organisation also ask photographers not to disclose locations.
Then why do they feel they can visit these locations themselves? Are they not causing an environmental impact? It’s the whole ‘one rule for us, another rule for them’ mentality that I think needs to change. There’s a real opportunity in landscape photography to promote advocacy for the protection and appreciation for the environment but if we limit people’s abilities to experience these locations then we limit their potential to form connections with the natural world. It’s a far more nuanced argument than ‘people damage the environment’ because if that’s the argument, none of us should be enjoying the landscape. I think a more measured, less dismissive approach is needed. Sure, don’t post your coordinates on social media, but if a beginner photographer is innocently asking for a location that inspires them then I have no issue sharing it with them because I believe for people to care about the natural world, they need to experience the natural world and form connections with these places.
@@chrisharveyphotography as a fellow landscape phptographer you hope that most of our community are responsible and aware of the fragility of the environment they are in. However the promotion (through social media etc) of what have become "honeypot" locations into tourist attractions is causing significant damage by increased footfall and sometimes by blatant stupidity and disregard. There are enough examples for the case to be proven that disclosing locations will cause increased numbers, initially photographers and then others less respectful of the environment.
In theory I don't mind sharing locations and it wouldn't be an issue if everyone had respect for the location and some basic consideration. The issue however is for some it's get the photo at all cost or simply a tick list for some who aren't even exploring beyond the actual scene they've come to photograph. I used to do a little grey seal photography at Donna Nook and you could walk right out to sea and get amazing images. It was obvious which seal pups and mothers were unfazed by your presence and which ones to keep your distance. When I returned another year a saw a semi circle of photographers all photographing the same pup and distressing it and now the area tries to limit photographers to an area close to the car park. It can be the same with many hobbies. I used to hike a lot and organised a few Three Peak Challenges for small groups (6 maximum). For the first couple you had Scafell Pike to yourself in the dark. The last couple of times though minibuses doing it for charity turned up shouting to each other, leaving plastic water bottles in the car park. The hike leader even placed glow lights on the path on the way up to make it easier for the group to find their way down. They seemed to jog down and didn't pick up the glow sticks. Selfish people will ruin it for everyone.
At last, someone giving this subject its due importance. Readng some of the other comments already on here, it's fair to say that there is a good case for preserving the ecosystem from certain types who have no rrspect for the countryside, spoiling it for others. Using the same argument however, you might as well close up all National Trust and English Heritage sites for fear of Tourists spoiling the properties also. Heck why not go further and ban outsiders from visiting Cotswold villages for example. Maybe a certain country code with additional bylaws to protect an area, depending on what and where, with Rangers patrolling those areas might not be a bad idea. On the other hand, who says that those with more time and money (not to mention the sponsorship), have any more right to take photographs from the same place. Unfortunateley, some of the well known photographers with large followings on RUclips also have big ego's. How can you determine plagerisim in one's composition. Even if someone photographed the same site, and in the same place, the likllyhood is that the final image will be different from another in any case, bearing in mind that with Landscape photography, images are invariably post editied which makes the photographers image fake as it is not as it was shot. There is also the fact that those getting the accolades (as well as the Patrion income) are to a degree, earning a living by selling their images to other photogrphers of all standards. Why should we not be allowed to visit and perhaps take our own shots of that same view.
I have no secrets, but I absolutely don't see the point of sharing a location at all with anyone. The joy of photography often is in the journey rather than in the results. Any one of us is free to roam the world. Why not take advantage of this freedom and go scout locations all by yourself?
my view point is that unless someone is stood in the exact same spot, at the exact same time, on the exact same day, looking in the exact same direction with exactly the same gear and settings, then its never going to be MY composition. that said, i'm conscious about sharing some locations, because areas that i've been to that have become popular and have been damaged, vandalised etc, some of this by photographers. as a result some of these locations are now no longer accessible. it's a fine line between making places open to people or risk having them closed to everyone
Always keep your locations private. People are crap and will destroy anything nice they run across. In 55 years I have yet to see an exception to the rule.
Unfortunately we need to be careful with unknown locations as if they go viral and are easily accessible then the entire area can get destroyed with a sudden hi influx of traffic. This can also cause chaos for small villages if they are suddenly filled with tourists.
I think your comment that photographers are sensible enough to preserve these locations is true, however users of Tik Tok and Instagram sadly are not. They just want clicks and followers so care little or nothing of the impact they have on the location.
Too many “influencers “ that care nothing about the place or the environment, but only about likes and views, in my opinion I would opt to protect the place.
Absolutely, but I wouldn’t sharing with those sorts of people and I’m sure those sorts of people wouldn’t be interested in my photography 😄. I’m more referring to fellow photographers on a personal level.
What is wrong with discovering something yourself. I have lived near some spectacular locations but that also happen to be in fairly ordinary areas. But over the past few years these have attracted attention and have become swamped with people looking for a quick instagram post. Most of these people don’t contribute to the local economy, they clog up the roads which become damaged, and worse they can put some very vulnerable and precious areas at risk. By all means come and take photos but maybe follow the example of more and more photographers who advocate - and practice - exploring their local area for material. This also has the benefit of enhancing technique while creating work that is more original and interesting than yet another image of the Fairy Pools or some seaside lighthouse. Plus it cuts down on over tourism and excess travel.
I liked the landscaped shot vs the portrait shaped shot, as I felt it showed too much of the foreground water at the expense of cutting out the interesting bridge.
Shari g any geolocation - for me - is a mega problem. Since I was swatted several times I m afraied to share anything that could possibly result in further psychological issues. I liked to be a co-operative member of communities ... but after my first dead caused by peoples madnes I am sorry ... no data ...
Coming from the world of wildlife photography I do not consider many to be truly responsible for their environment, they treat keep out and no entry signs as invitations to go and investigate, I have seen the damage caused many times locally. I find many guys talk the talk but when it comes to getting the shot then anything goes. I therefore fully understand reluctance to share locations. There is nothing worse than hiking to your remote location only to find the remains of a disposable BBQ and empty cider cans everywhere, ( Yes I did pick it all up a carry it about three mile on the rest of my hike)
Photographing the same location, even if done with the same equipment isn't plagiarism. To qualify as that they'd have to take a copy of the photograph you took and claim it as their own, either directly or after editing it. What they are doing is just photographing the same thing, but not at the same time, or in the same light. I'm trying to photograph a set of concrete decorations/figures on the side of a theatre before they get enclosed in glass next year. The wall they're on is curved and getting them all in one 6x17 film image is stupidly hard. I've been going back and trying again week after week, and I can't get my own tripod in the same position each time, so how could anyone copy me?
I feel that you don’t necessarily need to shout from the rooftops, but if someone asks you then I don’t see why you wouldn’t tell them. However, I don’t see any issue with keeping a couple places to yourself if they haven’t been discovered by the general populace.
I wouldn't share my location. Not because I have a problem with anyone repeating my photo. Instead it's because I want that location to be as quiet as the first time I was there. A bit selfish? Maybe so, but I enjoy my peaceful spots.
When everybody goes to the same places,everybody have the same pictures. Peggy's cove Nova Scotia has over a million pictures of it taken every year,no one wants to see them any more, because everybody has some. Go your own way and find your own pictures and every one will marvel about how you get such unique pictures.
Sharing locations on social media leads to overcrowding and destroying the the beauty of the location. Case in point; look at any state or national park in the USA.
I once engaged with a photographer on the internet who wanted people to send in GPS coordinates of their favorite shooting locations to be published in a book or website. His argument was that by giving people coordinates of great shots, it would spread out the mass of photographers heading to (and overrunning) iconic locations. I disagreed, and told him that it would just destroy these locations (a sentiment shared by some of the commenters here). My feeling is that photographers shouldn't be encouraged to go 'trophy hunting', but should rather experience the joy of their own discoveries. I disagree with your comment that some photographers don't have enough time or resources to get great pics, and sharing great locations helps them. That, I think, degrades the efforts and experience of photographers who have invested the time and effort to explore and photograph a location. Having said all this, I'm guessing that my view will be in the minority, but I had to say it.
I say "go find your own landscape treasures". A lot of the time you will come across those sites which are photographed by many, anyway. Wanting to encourage others into a wild, remote location is inviting gas guzzling, boot trampling, littering louts, and I can't be responsible for other photographers. In the UK at least, there is enough natural beauty out there, around every corner, and to be honest, it's the clever, innovative photo of something just around the corner that's as breathtaking as our more dramatic scenery. So no, I will only give the vaguest of hints as to where I was. And only if I want to for my own reasons.
I live on an island and I don't mind amateur photographers copying my compositions. I do however find it annoying when professional photographers go to the exact same place I have taken my photo with the same light, tide and focal length sell it on their website. I also find it irritating when photographers copy my photos and enter them in competitions, especially when they win, not cool !
I’m on the side of those who don’t share location for many of the same reasons, trash, environmental damage, etc. In addition I sometimes go to a place for solitude, a place where I know I have taken many good photos and don’t expect to take anything really new. I can sit and enjoy my surroundings for an hour and not be bored or feel guilty for not taking a photo. There aren’t many of those places so why would I want to share? Would I leave that place feeling refreshed if I had to spend that hour talking to other five photographers in the same area about gear and lighting and time of year? Could I just ignore them? No. My time, my quiet place and alone even if only a short distance from home.
Information should always be shared, otherwise it will be lost. And to be honest, just because of the amount of cameras in the world these days there is always a good chance that regardless of what you are photographing you might not be the first one. So, I think it is silly to ever think something that just exists out in the world is exclusive to you. Where I disagree is the idea that copying other people's photos does anything for you. Understanding how it was done, what the photographer was thinking, what the challenges were and so on ... that's all super interesting. But going to the same place because I saw another photographer shoot there is something I would have no interest in.
Really appreciate your considerate view on this topic. I do believe beginner photographers can learn a lot from honeypot locations, copying an iconic composition provides a great learning experience, if not technically in the creative process of taking the image, but in the technical aspects of editing. Having a well executed image to edit provides a solid foundation for learning when it comes to editing. It also helps you understand composition and focal length. When you learn to write, you copy the letters, when you learn to draw, you trace and image or draw something you can see. When you learn a musical instrument, you learn and imitate songs. This provides the foundation for your own creativity and you can use these experiences to develop your own taste and style and ultimately, your own creative expression.
Yep, I've come across this attitude here in Australia. My response is to give explicit directions to places I go to. ruclips.net/video/7J3IbUAsJNQ/видео.html
Photographers would be well advised not to reveal locations. Part of photography is discovery and seeking out - rather than riding on someone else's discovery. Look what has happened in the USA since the days of Ansel Adams. Locations such as Maroon Bells are now ruined. I used to name locations through detailed captions - but now go for a more general description so as not to reveal the exact location. Many thanks for such an interesting video and raising the issue.
My opinion, for what its worth, is that if its already well known there's no point in trying to keep it a secret. I'll give you an example. I live close to 'The Devil's Pulpit', made famous by the Highlander series - (load of unhistorical crap, yeah, I know its fiction). If someone asks how best to take photo's of it I'll give them detailed information, appropriate parking, safety advice, what not to miss etc, with a plea to take a plastic bag along and pick up some rubbish on the way back to the car. There are other places, within walking distance, that are not known about and I keep my mouth absolutely shut about them. Reason being that in Scotland we are in a different legal position to England and Wales, essentially we can walk and camp on 99% of the land; with that precious right comes a responsibility not to damage the property or the livelihood of the landowner. Unfortunately we all know this is not always adhered to. Even if, like any other responsible photographer, you strictly adhere to 'leave no trace' mere repeated footfall damages the environment. The path at the Devil's Pulpit that used to be narrow and semi-grassed over has now become meters wide of baked earth in the summer or meters wide of slushy mud ... in the summer, its Scotland ! Don't feel guilty about keeping a location you've stumbled upon to yourself, allow other people the pleasure of discovery, guide books just delete adventure.
I think there are three good reasons why a photographer shouldn't share their location. 1. The loss of UNIQUENESS. If others merely follow your footsteps and take the same image, that's an image you have worked on, waited for, published etc. AND adjunct to that, to follow in someones footsteps so closely that you need to go to the same locations suerly demonstrates a lack of your own creativity. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL, if a published image gains popularity and the location becomes know, not only with that image be 'done to death' but the photographer traffic may present an environmental problem into the future. 3. SECURITY. lets face it, most landscape locations only work at a certain time of the year, and at a certain time of the day. A lone photographer (especially the female photographers I'm aware of) wouldn't want to be confronted with a plethora of 'subscribers' attempting to meet and copy their photography 'hero'. I could point you in a direction of very renown and widely published pro who had an amateur photographer 'stalker' that followed his very footsteps, sometimes turning up in the same locations at the same time. All perfectly harmless I'm sure, but a little disturbing none the less. Personally, I like to choose my locations and believe they are unique to me, I also like to practice photography mindfully, alone and undisturbed. I don't do youtube, I'm not good enough, but I'm also reluctant to 'invite' others along on MY journey......maybe I'm just not the caring and sharing type, even though I'm very happy Chris, to watch many who are! I know, a far too long winded response.....I promise shorter in the future.
I do visit locations where others have been just to see it for myself and I do look to see if I can take it another way, I always use google maps to look at where I want to go, where to park etc. The final part of your video shows the lovely covered house, we visit Mid and North Wales regularly and I've always looked for a spot to walk to take pictures of that bridge and house but didn't realise until your video that there is a path there One thing I'm beginning to hate, I'm a member of a camera club and submit to competitions, surprising how many judges expect your photos to be manipulated with photoshop or lightroom, want the fine art look. This needs to stop, not everyone can afford the price of this software so they make do with what they have
The motivator is damage. It happens and ruins locations and access. Examples of this are enough that it should be really clear. Take a look at Nature First as a movement that has spent a lot of time thinking about this. Many photographers start thinking sharing is innocuous but after a while, they will experience an example of having a location damaged or closed due to pressure of people visiting
Great video again mate, but I personally think that sharing locations is perfectly fine. It allows us photographers to visit amazing places that inspire us to get out of the house and shoot when we probably aren't feeling it or stuck. I always find it tricky to plan a trip that no one has ever been to unless you have time for a reki. But most of the time that's not the case. I do agree with making differences to a photograph of a popular location though then again not every day is the same especially in the UK. The weather changes a lot ahahah.
If you find anothers composition it may not be the same as the original. The sky will be different a sunset will be different every day. So, even in the same spot the images will differ.
The problem with this thinking is that people are just to lazy to go out in all weathers and trudge miles and miles curry combing the mountains, hillsides, woodlands and river courses to find really good perspectives. Copying scenes is a lack of imagination and photo sharing sites are full of these same scenes. I live in Snowdonia not far from the 'lonely tree' and wannabe photographers arrive in the same place in their cars, queue up to get the same shot, sometimes fight each other for the best spot and then they leave all their crap behind rather than put it in the bin a hundred yards away.
I totally appreciate honeypot locations with single compositions are to be avoided. However, I think the argument is nuanced, if I see a location featured in a photo, say it’s woodland photo, then I wouldn’t be asking for the location because I want to copy that photo. I have no interest in that. I would, however, be interested in exploring that woodland for myself to find my own compositions, knowing it’s a location that has potential. Perhaps there’s too much ego amongst certain photographers, where they feel if someone asks about their photo it’s because they believe the person asking is hoping to copy it. I think people need to check themselves and remove this arrogance because it does nothing for this community.
I wouldn't want to take the same photo as someone else, but I think there's a distinct difference between asking for a location because you see the potential and want to explore it for yourself (which is what I would do) compared to asking for a location because you just want to recreate the same photo. I think regardless, either is valid, beginners can learn a lot from copying other photographer's compositions, but this assumption that asking for a location means you want to copy a composition is shortsighted and needs to change. You can visit an iconic location and still have a unique photography experience if you try hard enough and exercise some creativity.
@@chrisharveyphotography This is true. I mostly shoot wildlife and I rareley share my spots due to the animals safety and well being. But that is diffrent from landscape photography I guess.
I’ve visited honeypot locations and it’s always nice to get the shot in the bag before trying to find my own composition. But I’ve see locations where flowers, heather and the like, looks like it has been deliberately vandalised to stop others from replicating the photo. Kinda sad and you wonder who has done this cause I always treat any area I visit with respect and leave it as I found it. But if I’m looking at an image I do like to know what I’m looking at.
Agree with some other as I'm not real sure what your actual point is. Seems to be all over the place. You do mention the problem of too many people coming to a location. And not that you suggested it, but I find the idea that no one should be able to come to a location....except me, because I'm a good person, to be utterly hypocritical. I also think the notion of closing a location in order to protect it to be backwards. Protect it to what end? Its like locking a great painting in a vault forever so that it doesn't deteriorate. Pointless. Sure, it might need time for restoration. It might need rules. It might even need limits. But if nature is not for us to enjoy then it really has no meaning at all. As to sharing locations, well, that's up to the individual isn't it? I have no problem sharing locations but that doesn't mean I'm more kind or noble than someone who doesn't.
Overuse of trails and remote locations can have a negative impact on the ecosystems in which they exist. With regard to photographing birds and other wildlife, this can also impact their habitat and have a negative impact on them. I have seen trails and locations that were once pristine destroyed by garbage, irresponsible fire use, trampled vegetation and recreational vehicles because they became so popular. Sometimes it’s best to NOT share a location for that reason alone.
I feel if we share locations there is not so much exploration left. Also shared locations lead to concentrated crowding in countries like india, where almost everyone then just heads to that particular city, forest, Location and not exploring anything else. It may disturb the balance of the place
(1) I don’t care where other photographers shoot a photo, thus I don’t need to play follow the “leader”… (2) I don’t care if you keep your locations a “secret” as there are plenty of other locations to shoot… (3) Learn to shoot in your own area, we don’t need hundreds of photos of the same place… (4) Quit following and start thinking for yourself.
I’m in the US. We have a few more acres here, so I think we have a different perspective on “spoiling the land,” since we have a bit more of it. For me, if the location is truly fragile and cannot handle a lot of traffic, I’ll share it offline on an individual basis, but not blasted out publicly. I think the only real reason photographers won’t share their spots is because they’re afraid of someone else going there and taking a better photo.
I was in agreement with your comment until you said why people don't share locations ,I don't think people are concerned about some one taking a better photos. i was part of a group of 6 people photographing on the southern coast of Maine, we were with a professional photographer John Solina for a sunrise to sunset photo shoot. The cove that we first stopped at before first light was an area that I always wanted to photograph, i was surprised how quickly John moved the group to another location from where we stopped, myself and one other photographers stayed behind ,I knew that it would not be long before sunrise and I wanted to make the most out of the location we were at. My decision to stay proved to pay off when the sun 🌞 broke the horizon, and the sea was flat calm ,i positioned my self between the a leafless tree and where the furthest part of the cove curved ,the sun's reflection came across the water to where i had my camera on a tripod giving me the best photograph of the day. Once I had more light I moved down to rocky shore photographing different rock formations and pools of water. Even though the six of us started at the same location, we walked away with different photographs because of the decisions that we made that morning.
I dont share locations because most people l met are selfish about what they do. So l keep most things to myself. I dont mind helping but it would had to be the right person/people
I find there's an important distinction between visiting a location where a photo was taken and recreating that photo. Quite often, woodlands are full of great photos and if I wanted to know the location of a particular photo, it's more because i've seen potential in that location and I want to explore it for myself and find my own images, not because I want to copy the image i've seen.
don't think it needs changing at all as where ever they go would soon be ruined by being done to death. i believe Nigel Danson was given permission to shoot on some private woodland so obviously will not say where that is. the other point is why should you, me or anybody else sponge off others efforts to find those places, get out and find for ourselves
I think there’s more nuance to the argument than that. I completely agree with the point about private property, but I don’t agree that photographers wishing to visit a location are doing so to copy an image they’ve seen from that location. You can visit any location and create your own image and something unique. Often I’ve seen a woodland photo and seen potential in exploring that area, perhaps because of the species of tree for example, and whilst that composition has prompted that realisation, I certainly wouldn’t have any interest in copying the same composition. I’d want to explore for myself, knowing I’m in a location that has potential.
Thanks for watching everyone! If you want access to my new, FREE, Lightroom Preset, 'Seasonal Shift' all you need to do is sign up to my Newsletter 📬: www.chrisharvey.co/newsletter
I don't know if I would call it free, tbh. I don't have anything against the practice but "you need to do X" is the price then, right?
I found a local spot that I had never seen photographed so started taking some shots over a period of months and posting them on a local page, i took a friend once, within weeks access to the location was closed due to damage done by other people going there to photograph. Track damage by 4wd and intentional damage done to foliage to get "better" shots, rubbish left behind. Never again will I share a location with others as they destroyed it for everyone.if others don't have the "benefit" of time or other reasons, that problem belongs to them and I am under no obligation to provide them with opportunity or learning experiences. That might sound harsh but I don't want to feel responsible for damage to a beautiful place because of even 1 irresponsible person.
I agree with this 100% I’ve been exploring my native Scotland for over forty years and have just returned from my latest trip to show my wife some of the outstanding beauty of my homeland. Whereas previously I could go to these spots and take in and enjoy the scenery, it’s now saturated with thousands of tourists, many of whom have no respect for the landscape. In particular I’m referring to the Fairy Pools and the Quiraing on Skye and areas now taken in on the dreaded North Coast 500.
Agree totally. The respectful, careful photographer is a rarity. Most people trash the countryside in order to get more “likes” for their vain personalities. Look at Snowdon, a mess, caused by excessive people who just dont care.
I like photographing all those things other photographers spend ages editing out of their pictures.
There's nothing more powerful than a club photo exhibition attended by those in local government that openly displays the mess they're making of our local environment.
This really ugly stuff is readily available near you.
It’s really got nothing to do with helping other photographers. The sole consideration should be to consider what would happen to an area if it gets popular among tourists with cameras. Wildlife, property owners, fragile ecosystem, historically significant ruins, etc can all be negatively impacted. It’s just not a big deal to let people find their own places to shoot.
Came to echo this. I remember a video about that mirrored obelisk that got put up in the US somewhere in the middle of nowhere. The huge amount of people flooding to a non maintained area was destroying it so a group took it away.
Sharing a remote and beautiful location is it's ultimate death. 🏔️ 📸 🤳 👣 ⚰️
I have some extended family living in Suffolk, and whenever visiting I often visit The Abbey Gardens in Bury St Edmunds, usually finding something different every time. However bearing in mind it is very much a public location, one shot that your comment brings to mind is one of an old enamelled notice which always brings a smile to my face, "ANYONE FOUND DAMAGING THE RUINS WILL BE PROSECUTED", under the circumstances what do we define as DAMAGE, does that include littering???
100% agree! I also find a big part of the joy of landscape photography is discovering places for myself. It’s part of the process. I don’t expect to have locations handed to me. That just feels like a lazy approach. Go out and explore!
Hi Chris, I'm an angler who is also interested in photography. In angling, sharing a location can often lead to it completely trashed. Many angling clubs now have rules about not sharing locations and catches on social media. If you knew you could share locations either fishing spots or photographic locations with like minded folks it wouldn’t be a problem. Unfortunately that's not the world we live in.
I completely understand but I’m not really referring to sharing locations online. It’s more on a personal level in private conversations etc. I’ve come across too many gatekeepers who believe they own these landscapes. It’s discouraging to beginners who want to respectfully visit a woodland, leave no trace, but are instead tarred with the same brush as vandals. It’s very hard to grow the artform of photography with that attitude because people are just going to feel that the community are combative and selfish
Imaging those of us who are old enough (I’m 71) to remember when we didn’t rush home with our photographs to upload them for viewing by all 5,000 of our closest friends to look at. We usually made prints and put them on the walls in our homes, or, in my case, in a newspaper for which I was a staff photographer. We didn’t get “likes” from people we had never met. Thousands of people didn’t know where we shot the photo if we didn’t want them to know. We didn’t know if we got a good photograph until we got home, or to work, and developed the film and made a contact sheet. Or for the general public, took the roll of Kodak film to the Rexall Drug Store for development and printing - to be picked up 4-5 days later. I love digital photography and wouldn’t gladly go back to shooting film. But let’s all admit that there truly was a difference in pace when one had a 36 exposure roll of Agfa film and had to carefully think about what to photograph - rather than blasting-away with a mega-pixel blunderbuss. Times change.
You appeared in my feed, and with such a title I couldn't resist watching! Your question sits on the horns of a dilemma - public places that are maintained for some footfall, I'd share any time, the more out of the way places, maybe just a general area. Like others commenting here, it is far to common to see litter in places that attract visitors, which is sad. for me, bing a bit old and not able to clamber up hills & mountains, vacariously visiting interesting sites through youtube is excellent. Great 'thinking' video, thanks.
I live in the US and have spent 25+ years documenting Amish country. I do my very best to treat the Amish with great respect. Many don’t. I hesitate to give specific locations, to protect the privacy of the Amish.
It seems to me two things that seem to contradict each other can actually be perfectly valid. 1. Except perhaps on private land (but that’s a whole other discussion!) no-one owns a view or has exclusive rights over it. 2. As photographers we’re all free to share as little or as much about our work as we want.
I recently went on an RPS Talk Walk Talk visit to Cannock Chase, an area I had never been to before. Our guide was most generous with his information and tips for there and the local area. I can though see how some “ honey spots” might suffer from too many visitors, but then these locations are in almost every photo guide book that you can buy. I think that the essence is common sense and also a desire to find your own images because even if another photographer shares a newly found spot then be creative and find something special of your own.
Lets everybody find the locations for themselfs. Nowdays all the touristic locations, popular viewpoints are overcrowded, closed and trashed...so keeping the nice untouched locations secret is crucial. Lets pick for example iceland... nowdays wildcamping is forbidden and for good reason. The ammount of people visiting that country is huge... and as you mentioned in the video stunning photogenic and untouched places in woodlands are super rare (everywhere in EU). So I totally get it why photographers dont want to share their locations, especially with someone who they dont know. And lets face it... the biggest thrill and fun of landscape photography is not the photography part its the part when you explore places with no expectations and stumble up on a stunning view, etc. Replicating photos from the same locations as other photographer is nice when you starting out but if you dont learn nothing from it its useless. Nowdays there are so many tools to explore places whitouth being there, like google earth pro, hiking maps with countour lines, flipping old hiking books, magazines like sidetrack. There are just so many resources to find the perfect location that I think asking for the exact spot from the photographer is just stupid at this point. Im not a pro landscape photographer but I totally get it why they just ignore these kind of questions.
The trouble with tourism, is tourism. In fact, a number of well known Landscape photographers do 'Landscape' Photography Tours, for example, Iceland. Ooops.
I'm only 2:34 into the video, but to share my thoughts on this: Personally, I'm fine with sharing my locations. Since I’m not a well-known photographer, my photos don’t tend to go viral. However, for popular photographers, especially those with large Instagram followings, sharing a stunning location can lead to an influx of visitors. Unfortunately, this often results in environmental damage, such as excessive foot traffic or littering. In those cases, I feel it's not a good idea to share specific spots.
And who pays for those photographers to go on their jaunts... Patrioon subscribers
Absolutely share the on location if the photograph is being shared in the public domain. If for whatever reason a particular location needs protection, then don't share the image 👍🏼😊 A good balanced and well thought out video.
It is a difficult one, living in North Wales when so many places are over visited. When I do find something new I must say I like to keep it to myself, at least for a little while. Maybe see you out there one day
I think sharing locations is good, I don’t have much time to explore so it’s nice to know if an area is worth a visit. I think most photographers are respectful, there is nothing worse than finding litter in a location so they don’t tend to add to it.
This is a great topic and it's good to hear the opinions of others on this.
I say no for two reasons, the first being like a lot of others here that I don't want to see an area bombarded with photographers denigrating it (which they will, unintended or not); and I also don't think it's fair on any local homeowners etc that like their peace & quiet.
I have been asked a few times in the past and I generally just give a general area not an exact spot, and even this is too much info sometimes.
The second reason, and this may sound a little vain, is that if someone were to go to a spot I have given them and photographed virtually the exact same photo as I have and shared it around and it somehow went viral, or they entered it into a competition and won a considerable amount of money and/or exposure I would feel a little dejected to be honest.
Don't take that the wrong way, by no means do I see myself as a worthy photography but it only takes one shot right; and that being the case if it was something original that I took and someone else was getting rave reviews all over the place for the same photo, at the spot I gave them and I was way back in the shadows, well, you know ....
Good topic, thanks for raising it. 😉
Great video mate and a really interesting topic! If it wasn’t for RUclips I don’t think I’d have found so many of the incredible places I’ve been too recently so I definitely see the benefits of it. The amount of times I’ve driven past that little tea room on the bridge as well it’s such a cool little spot! 📸 you know your about to hit the mountains when you reach it 😍
I just discovered your channel, thank you for sharing. I agree that all of Nature is in the public domain. I am in (and photograph exclusively) southwestern Idaho in the States-if I can affect even one other person to get "out there" that is cool. I readily share where each photo is taken, as an early morning person there are few (if any) others out when I am. Thanks for sharing this philosophy.
Thank you Terry! Really appreciate you checking out the video and for leaving such a thoughtful comment! You have a really refreshing perspective on this topic which is so great to see 👍🏻
Hi. I came over this in the feed. Nice video. I have noticed this is more common in UK than where I live, Norway. I guess.more people and pressure on locations and nature are some of the explanation,
Thanks for watching I really appreciate it! I also really appreciate you sharing your views!
Not sure what the legal situation in Norway is regarding 'Right to Roam'. England and Wales have access to 8% of the land. Scotland has 99% access to the land with a smaller population, so the footfall isn't such a problem. Different law system in Scotland... thank goodness !
I like the horizontal shot
I have nothing against photographers who go to other photographers found places! but I like to find my own places and take pictures of subjects that no one has taken pictures of, I try not to copy people or go on so called workshops, but each to their own of course I am not a landscape photographer but I do shoot landscapes they are just part of my photographic journey which has been a long one, from my back garden to around the world and back, travel will always be part of my picture taking, I am very much a senior now so its all local stuff from now on which I find as interesting as a picture taken in the lake district or wherever. You last picture place which I have seen a million times but I have never been there, is a lovely place to be and I prefer the landscape crop rather than the upright. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and pictures with us!
I have all ways wanted to photograph on the coastline of Maine, some years ago I took a weekend trip to the southern coast of Maine, the first day I photographed the Portland Head lighthouse and the Pemiquid lighthouse, it is the lighthouse on the back of the Maine quarter. The following day i did a sunrise to sunset photo shoot with a group of five other photographers, a professional photographer John Solina was leading the group, John runs photography tours/shops in different locations and also has a few single day trips to different areas of the New England states of Maine and Vermont. The single day trips are dedicated to photographing different locations during the day with a break for lunch, meals are usually at a local restaurant, his fee does not include food and lodging on the one day trip. The first location was a cove to photograph the sunrise and many more locations during the day. On these trips he will give you as much help and instructions as you require but because we start before sunrise it would be best to know how to use your equipment in those conditions. This was with out a doubt the best single day of photography i had, the locations chosen and the time of day gave me the opportunity to shoot some memorable photos, the one day fee was well worth it, because the area is so vast to find all the locations that we photographed that day and the best way to get to each one would not be easy with out his work putting together this trip. So if have an opportunity to do a single day shoot, then do it it's a great experience.
I vote for the landscape orientation of the last photo as it includes more of the bridge and areas around the house.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, I really appreciate it! I like that aspect of the landscape image too!
There is a strong parallel with 'spots' in skateboarding. Some skateboarders take inspiration from other people's tricks at certain street spots (locations) and then ask for the location or track it down on street view. For some skateboarders the fun is also in the hunt for new, untouched spots. The time and dedication for going out and finding unique new spots has to be respected, particularly if you aren't yourself bringing any new ones to the table. Some spots are kept on the down-low because some other skaters may not respect the spot (they then share its location, land owners, security, littering, tagging, behaviour, etc.) Another parallel is that skateboarders try to not do an ABD (Already Been Done) trick at a spot that has already been filmed/photographed there. This unwritten rule really only applies to professional skateboarders, but keeps things fresh, and drives innovation. People have different opinions on where the line is drawn but for me, it's important to show due respect/props to the person who opened the door to that spot for you and inspired you, and to also show respect to the spot itself so that it stays a spot, rather than a bust (where security kicks you out).
Nice video Chris. This is always an interesting topic. I take your points for disclosing locations, but I am not convinced by the arguments. Firstly, why would anyone think they will become a better photographer - even a beginner - if they go to a place and copy someone else's work? As a landscape and nature photographer, the chances are the conditions you are photographing in at a copied location will be sub-optimal and you will come away disappointed anyway. The very idea says that good landscape and nature photographs are more a product of location than the photographer. Some locations may offer more opportunities, but I suggest knowing where a photograph has been taken is not going to help you much. Getting to know one or two locations intimately and experimenting is much more important. The location could be your local woods or the beach, it doesn't have to be iconic. Secondly, the idea that most landscape photographers are responsible stewards of the environment is perhaps true, but unwittingly they can still cause damage. Basically if you have lots of people going to one location then the natural environment will be impacted if not changed. There is no getting around this. Either you have to build infrastructure to support a larger number of visitors to protect the wider environment, and this in itself impacts the area, or you accept a degree of damage to the local environment. Personally, I think we just need to get over the idea that you need to go to locations that other people have photographed because this is your best chance of getting good images. I am of the strong belief that we shouldn't be sharing locations to a wide audience if this is going to have a detrimental impact on an area. We are only ruining it for future generations and I am doubtful it teaches photographers much if anything.
I understand and agree with the sentiment of your points but I would argue that beginners can learn an awful lot from copying other photographers. It helps you understand composition and what makes a good composition, it also gives you a potentially decent image that you can then edit and learn about post processing. Take musicians for example, when you learn to play guitar, you often imitate other guitarists, learn their songs, and eventually you develop your own style.
I think stewardship of the environment is important and I believe the natural world can be enjoyed and visited responsibility. If a photographer was so worried about the fragility of a location and therefore unwilling to tell anyone where that location was, then why did they feel they could go there in the first place? By that argument, surely they too have caused damage...
I like the flow of the water so favor the vertical shot
Thank you so much! That’s an aspect of that composition that I really enjoy too! Adds a lot more depth to the foreground
I prefer the cropped version of the photo. And I couldn't agree more about how you feel regarding keeping places a secret. What are these people afraid of - that someone can do it better?
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, I really appreciate it.
Not quite sure the message is clear in this video as it feels a bit mixed but if you’ve some kind of expectation that experienced photographers ‘should’ be disclosing locations out of some sort of communal responsibility, it’s rather naive. Nobody has a responsibility to anyone to share this information as some kind of public service, it’s up to photographers themselves to exercise enough nous and field craft to find unique images, it’s a skill in itself and always has been. If a photographer is time limited then there’s plenty of guide books etc anyway. The only people who ever talk about ‘gatekeeping’ in my experience are not focused enough on their own shortcomings as photographers.
Thanks for sharing your perspective on this. I don't think I was really trying to present a definitive message, rather just raising the topic and sharing the opinions i've come across over the years in the hope it starts some discussion around, what I feel, is a very nuanced topic. I agree that we shouldn't feel obligated to geo-tag our images on social media etc, I don't think I articulated that point clearly. I was intending on referring to sharing locations on a more personal, individual basis, photographer-to-photographer. I think when people are just getting into photography, they may want to exercise field craft but lack the resources and knowledge to know what that entails and how to exercise it. I feel for photographers in this situation who want to innocently ask the whereabouts of a certain location to visit but feel they are unable to ask out of fear of a stand-offish response. I came across this on a couple of occasions when I was getting started and it can be discouraging.
I'm basically with everything you've said Stuart but I think the last sentence is a bit harsh. If people wish to share locations I won't criticise them. If they're already in the field and the gate's wide open for anyone to walk through I'm happy to point the way but if the gates closed I ain't opening it for them, they can work that out for themselves.
Less metaphorically, the well known sites that are already in the public domain there's no point in trying to keep quiet about, you just always end the conversation with 'respect the environment and leave no trace'. The issue of mere footfall is a more problematic issue.
@@iainmc9859 I just think the idea of gatekeeping in photography is nonsense. Nobody, especially these days with the mountain of resources available to them, is being held back from anything. I won't criticise folk for disclosing locations either, but the tone of this video seemed to insinuate that if you're not disclosing locations then those people are somehow elitist or 'gatekeepers' which is utter nonsense. If someone isn't producing interesting or compelling imagery the last thing I'd be pointing the finger at is people not telling me where to shoot.
Thoughtful and provocative post, Chris. Not a simple equation. My sense is that those who are reluctant to share locations are concerned w/copies that dilute the commercial value of their compositions, like special waterfalls. Location spoilage a valid point, but not topmost in mind, IMO. Iconic venues are fair game for all - good for practice but difficult to render as special.
Good compositions are everywhere all the time - better to learn how to make the best of any venue than to replicate or approximate the pics of others.
More than photo sites, I’d like to know where more practical things are to be found, like restrooms😊. You seem to be an ace at finding comfortable seating (tree stump and bench)😊.
My pref is for the tighter composition that more clearly hones in on cottage and bridge leading to it.
BTW, do you prefer single or variable ND filters? Choice and reasoning might make a good video.
Minor suggestion: update channel pic to a color version. Cheers!
Different for wildlife photography, but I guess woodland might come under the same rules to an extent, where sharing locations can be to the detriment of the subject.
Recent article on the Guardian titled "‘You could single-handedly push it to extinction’: how social media is putting our rarest wildlife at risk" might be of interest.
Na, you have just been reading too much WEF propaganda
It definitely depends, if a place is setup and has the infrastructure for public use feel free to share, if it does not and the possibility of hundreds of visitors would cause damage or disruption whether it’s private land or local places without public infrastructure then don’t share or share what is comfortable. Everyone is free to do their own research, but not every place is meant for social media. Lots of places in the US have been shutdown or blocked to the public because of social media use.
Location sharing is a double edged sword. Just off the top of my head, I can think of numerous locations that have either become impossible to visit or much harder to visit because they became Instagram famous. The Wave in Arizona, Chocolate Falls on the Navajo Nation, Antelope Canyon, Maroon Bells, & Horseshoe Bend to name a few. Chocolate Falls is closed to everyone because it became popular & people didn't respect the area. The Wave now has limited day passes & you have to win a lottery to get one. Antelope Canyon no longer does photo tours because its become so popular. And so on. I, personally, don't have a problem sharing location information, but I do it more selectively these days
I went to Llanrwst a month ago for the day. We lived there for a year so know it well. I prefered the horizontal photo. Sometimes sharing a location can spoil it for everyone if getting to the location causes parking problems.
Thanks Robert, I really appreciate it! I like the horizontal composition too. It's a lovely location, i'm sure you'll have taken a few photos of this subject. I'd like to capture it in different seasons.
It's nice that you are sharing your location, but you being where you are and me being in the east coast of the United States, the chance of someone like myself going there is not going to happen, so when someone reveals a location they might consider how many people might have access or travel to the location of North Wales.or any place else. Enjoyed your video. One last comment, i live in a some what rural area of NYS and there is a park near my house that I walk my dog 🐕 in the morning, it is a public are but the morning hours is fairly quite, most every day i pick up other people's garbage, the park has several trash containers in different locations and people still chose to be pigs and leave the trash on the ground or picnic tables.
I always share my locations, I hate the gatekeeping in the community. Sometimes people are just amateurs who want a neat photo and don't have the time/knowledge to do all the searching that pros/youtubers do.
My thoughts exactly! Whilst I understand the argument of places becoming too popular, I’m not so arrogant as to believe that my influence is going to make a great difference. I like to believe that allowing others to enjoy a landscape will help people become advocates of protecting that landscape.
@@chrisharveyphotography that’s a fantastic way to look at it!
Great topic Chris. Overall I don’t agree with sharing locations. Not everyone is like us in respecting the landscape and being aware of the potential damage to the ecosystem. As is often the case, the masses spoil it for the mindful. I preferred the second shot. My eye kept getting drawn to the bridge in the first shot.
Thank you Alan! I really appreciate you taking the time! Definitely thought this was a topic worth mentioning as it's very nuanced.
I would love to have seen a shot much closer to the bridge as a long lead-in to the house, however I love the vertical shot.
I think it's a bit arrogant to think that another competent photographer, while never viewing a copy of a particular photo or composition, could not produce a similar photographic composition. Mother nature is forever changing, and you can not reproduce that point in time. However, those well versed in photo editing software may well make a good shot at reproducing a particular scene, buts that's a different story.
I much prefer the landscape shot of the house. Slightly less sky that the portrait version and the house and colours are more central to the shot. Thanks
Thanks David! I really appreciate that! Thanks for watching!
Hi Chris, For me both images have their merits, I rather like the idea of portrait format landscape images, they tend to make you think a little more of the scene before you. However, I think I would have used a wider frame with the house placed roughly in the top right segment using the Rule of Thirds, rendering less sky and more of the bridge on the left. As regards the question of sharing locations, is it not a matter of who you share with, another photographer you know and trust, I believe is fine, your colleagues in a camera club, yes. But then you have the Photographic Workshops, a business venture, now that is a different matter entirely.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the photos Geoff! It’s a tough location to compose because the foreground on the bank is very messy in places bringing in more of the bridge would have also brought in more mess to the foreground! I totally agree with your ideas compositionally!
In terms of sharing locations, your view is exactly the nuanced and measured attitude id like to see more of from this community. Thanks for weighing in!
I have no issue in sharing locations for Icon spots. However if I find a hidden gem or a location off the beaten track I won't share the location. Mainly because I like to go back to these locations repeatedly and I don't want to run into anyone. I enjoy taking friends or fellow photographers to these locations but I won't place these locations on social media.
That’s absolutely fair enough! I think we all have places like that. I think I just take issue with photographers who are overly dismissive of the notion of sharing a location with a fellow photographer (not shouting about all over social media, but rather just sharing it in a personal, private conversation). The gatekeeper mentality of ‘this is my landscape, not yours’ is an attitude I’m just so tired of.
As the third most densely populated country in Europe (excluding the tiddlers) there is zero opportunity to avoid helping to manage the pressure on locations. Given there are enough “classics” documented and geolocated for beginners to practice on, the next phase in landscape photography is discovering the fleeting and ephemeral and working on the novel and, in doing this, spreading the load evenly. For this region is enough detail, Eryri, Dolomites, Hebrides, etc. The focus is then on desktop or in field “visualisation” (if I go over there x,y,z will align, the light will be here), compositional skills, technique, timing, patience, exploration, experience, learning, field craft and luck. Go forth and discover!
I think some photographers find their own work so important they don't want anyone else knows where the pictures were taken.
Other photographers really think that disclosing the location will harm the place, even when probably only people with an interest in landscape photography will watch their movies and pictures, people who themselves probably don't want rubbish in the frame.
I'm more a person who likes to include the location unless to protect the privacy of the property of certain locations, such as a private house in a scene.
I always share my locations, but never seen anyone takes the same style of pictures like mine. I think it’s all about how a photographer see and represent the view
It’s the vertical image for me, I like the effect in the water and the house is less important but adds to the scene. By the way, I don’t know North Wales at all so no idea what you are saying, is it Langoose?
I think the only reason to keep a location secret is if its a site of sientific intrest and has rear plants or spesies of animal for instance some times country file has been asked to keep a site of speshial intrest secret so the plant or prodgect can flurish with out disterbenc hope this helps .
Many photographers are aware of the damage that can be done by sites that have been publicly "outed" and therefore are reluctant to name locations. The Nature First organisation also ask photographers not to disclose locations.
Then why do they feel they can visit these locations themselves? Are they not causing an environmental impact? It’s the whole ‘one rule for us, another rule for them’ mentality that I think needs to change. There’s a real opportunity in landscape photography to promote advocacy for the protection and appreciation for the environment but if we limit people’s abilities to experience these locations then we limit their potential to form connections with the natural world. It’s a far more nuanced argument than ‘people damage the environment’ because if that’s the argument, none of us should be enjoying the landscape. I think a more measured, less dismissive approach is needed. Sure, don’t post your coordinates on social media, but if a beginner photographer is innocently asking for a location that inspires them then I have no issue sharing it with them because I believe for people to care about the natural world, they need to experience the natural world and form connections with these places.
@@chrisharveyphotography as a fellow landscape phptographer you hope that most of our community are responsible and aware of the fragility of the environment they are in. However the promotion (through social media etc) of what have become "honeypot" locations into tourist attractions is causing significant damage by increased footfall and sometimes by blatant stupidity and disregard. There are enough examples for the case to be proven that disclosing locations will cause increased numbers, initially photographers and then others less respectful of the environment.
In theory I don't mind sharing locations and it wouldn't be an issue if everyone had respect for the location and some basic consideration.
The issue however is for some it's get the photo at all cost or simply a tick list for some who aren't even exploring beyond the actual scene they've come to photograph.
I used to do a little grey seal photography at Donna Nook and you could walk right out to sea and get amazing images. It was obvious which seal pups and mothers were unfazed by your presence and which ones to keep your distance. When I returned another year a saw a semi circle of photographers all photographing the same pup and distressing it and now the area tries to limit photographers to an area close to the car park.
It can be the same with many hobbies. I used to hike a lot and organised a few Three Peak Challenges for small groups (6 maximum). For the first couple you had Scafell Pike to yourself in the dark. The last couple of times though minibuses doing it for charity turned up shouting to each other, leaving plastic water bottles in the car park. The hike leader even placed glow lights on the path on the way up to make it easier for the group to find their way down. They seemed to jog down and didn't pick up the glow sticks. Selfish people will ruin it for everyone.
At last, someone giving this subject its due importance. Readng some of the other comments already on here, it's fair to say that there is a good case for preserving the ecosystem from certain types who have no rrspect for the countryside, spoiling it for others. Using the same argument however, you might as well close up all National Trust and English Heritage sites for fear of Tourists spoiling the properties also. Heck why not go further and ban outsiders from visiting Cotswold villages for example. Maybe a certain country code with additional bylaws to protect an area, depending on what and where, with Rangers patrolling those areas might not be a bad idea. On the other hand, who says that those with more time and money (not to mention the sponsorship), have any more right to take photographs from the same place. Unfortunateley, some of the well known photographers with large followings on RUclips also have big ego's. How can you determine plagerisim in one's composition. Even if someone photographed the same site, and in the same place, the likllyhood is that the final image will be different from another in any case, bearing in mind that with Landscape photography, images are invariably post editied which makes the photographers image fake as it is not as it was shot. There is also the fact that those getting the accolades (as well as the Patrion income) are to a degree, earning a living by selling their images to other photogrphers of all standards. Why should we not be allowed to visit and perhaps take our own shots of that same view.
I have no secrets, but I absolutely don't see the point of sharing a location at all with anyone. The joy of photography often is in the journey rather than in the results. Any one of us is free to roam the world. Why not take advantage of this freedom and go scout locations all by yourself?
Nice shots
Thanks so much James! I really appreciate it! Thanks for watching!
my view point is that unless someone is stood in the exact same spot, at the exact same time, on the exact same day, looking in the exact same direction with exactly the same gear and settings, then its never going to be MY composition. that said, i'm conscious about sharing some locations, because areas that i've been to that have become popular and have been damaged, vandalised etc, some of this by photographers. as a result some of these locations are now no longer accessible. it's a fine line between making places open to people or risk having them closed to everyone
I always share, but also always say "take nothing but prints, leave nothing but footsteps"
Always keep your locations private. People are crap and will destroy anything nice they run across. In 55 years I have yet to see an exception to the rule.
Unfortunately we need to be careful with unknown locations as if they go viral and are easily accessible then the entire area can get destroyed with a sudden hi influx of traffic. This can also cause chaos for small villages if they are suddenly filled with tourists.
Public space should be shared.
Find your own.. a well published spot would probably make it vulnerable to over use and spoil it
I think your comment that photographers are sensible enough to preserve these locations is true, however users of Tik Tok and Instagram sadly are not. They just want clicks and followers so care little or nothing of the impact they have on the location.
This can definitely be true, I agree! But that wouldn’t stop me sharing a location if I was in a conversation with a fellow photographer
Too many “influencers “ that care nothing about the place or the environment, but only about likes and views, in my opinion I would opt to protect the place.
Absolutely, but I wouldn’t sharing with those sorts of people and I’m sure those sorts of people wouldn’t be interested in my photography 😄. I’m more referring to fellow photographers on a personal level.
What is wrong with discovering something yourself. I have lived near some spectacular locations but that also happen to be in fairly ordinary areas. But over the past few years these have attracted attention and have become swamped with people looking for a quick instagram post. Most of these people don’t contribute to the local economy, they clog up the roads which become damaged, and worse they can put some very vulnerable and precious areas at risk. By all means come and take photos but maybe follow the example of more and more photographers who advocate - and practice - exploring their local area for material. This also has the benefit of enhancing technique while creating work that is more original and interesting than yet another image of the Fairy Pools or some seaside lighthouse. Plus it cuts down on over tourism and excess travel.
I liked the landscaped shot vs the portrait shaped shot, as I felt it showed too much of the foreground water at the expense of cutting out the interesting bridge.
Shari g any geolocation - for me - is a mega problem. Since I was swatted several times I m afraied to share anything that could possibly result in further psychological issues.
I liked to be a co-operative member of communities ... but after my first dead caused by peoples madnes I am sorry ... no data ...
Coming from the world of wildlife photography I do not consider many to be truly responsible for their environment, they treat keep out and no entry signs as invitations to go and investigate, I have seen the damage caused many times locally. I find many guys talk the talk but when it comes to getting the shot then anything goes. I therefore fully understand reluctance to share locations. There is nothing worse than hiking to your remote location only to find the remains of a disposable BBQ and empty cider cans everywhere, ( Yes I did pick it all up a carry it about three mile on the rest of my hike)
Sometimes I will tell people where it is if they ask, but I won't share everything I like to keep some places for myself.
Photographing the same location, even if done with the same equipment isn't plagiarism. To qualify as that they'd have to take a copy of the photograph you took and claim it as their own, either directly or after editing it.
What they are doing is just photographing the same thing, but not at the same time, or in the same light.
I'm trying to photograph a set of concrete decorations/figures on the side of a theatre before they get enclosed in glass next year. The wall they're on is curved and getting them all in one 6x17 film image is stupidly hard. I've been going back and trying again week after week, and I can't get my own tripod in the same position each time, so how could anyone copy me?
Excellent. The wider shot definitely.
Thank you so much! I like the wider composition too! Thanks for watching 🙏🏻
I feel that you don’t necessarily need to shout from the rooftops, but if someone asks you then I don’t see why you wouldn’t tell them. However, I don’t see any issue with keeping a couple places to yourself if they haven’t been discovered by the general populace.
I think this is a very fair and considered view on the topic and I would definitely agree with this!
I wouldn't share my location. Not because I have a problem with anyone repeating my photo. Instead it's because I want that location to be as quiet as the first time I was there. A bit selfish? Maybe so, but I enjoy my peaceful spots.
When everybody goes to the same places,everybody have the same pictures. Peggy's cove Nova Scotia has over a million pictures of it taken every year,no one wants to see them any more,
because everybody has some. Go your own way and find your own pictures and every one will marvel about how you get such unique pictures.
Sharing locations on social media leads to overcrowding and destroying the the beauty of the location. Case in point; look at any state or national park in the USA.
I once engaged with a photographer on the internet who wanted people to send in GPS coordinates of their favorite shooting locations to be published in a book or website. His argument was that by giving people coordinates of great shots, it would spread out the mass of photographers heading to (and overrunning) iconic locations. I disagreed, and told him that it would just destroy these locations (a sentiment shared by some of the commenters here). My feeling is that photographers shouldn't be encouraged to go 'trophy hunting', but should rather experience the joy of their own discoveries. I disagree with your comment that some photographers don't have enough time or resources to get great pics, and sharing great locations helps them. That, I think, degrades the efforts and experience of photographers who have invested the time and effort to explore and photograph a location. Having said all this, I'm guessing that my view will be in the minority, but I had to say it.
I say "go find your own landscape treasures". A lot of the time you will come across those sites which are photographed by many, anyway. Wanting to encourage others into a wild, remote location is inviting gas guzzling, boot trampling, littering louts, and I can't be responsible for other photographers. In the UK at least, there is enough natural beauty out there, around every corner, and to be honest, it's the clever, innovative photo of something just around the corner that's as breathtaking as our more dramatic scenery. So no, I will only give the vaguest of hints as to where I was. And only if I want to for my own reasons.
I live on an island and I don't mind amateur photographers copying my compositions. I do however find it annoying when professional photographers go to the exact same place I have taken my photo with the same light, tide and focal length sell it on their website. I also find it irritating when photographers copy my photos and enter them in competitions, especially when they win, not cool !
I don't think location has anything to do with it. It's about the image. If anyone wants to comment on my image I'd have no difficulty sharing it
Share the general location but not the specifics. this allows the next person to get pointed in the direction then go out and find new perspectives
I don't think it is other photographers that are the problem with damaging locations, but the others who just go there for a look.
Same with wildlife photographers, they are often secretive too.
I’m on the side of those who don’t share location for many of the same reasons, trash, environmental damage, etc. In addition I sometimes go to a place for solitude, a place where I know I have taken many good photos and don’t expect to take anything really new. I can sit and enjoy my surroundings for an hour and not be bored or feel guilty for not taking a photo. There aren’t many of those places so why would I want to share? Would I leave that place feeling refreshed if I had to spend that hour talking to other five photographers in the same area about gear and lighting and time of year? Could I just ignore them? No. My time, my quiet place and alone even if only a short distance from home.
Information should always be shared, otherwise it will be lost. And to be honest, just because of the amount of cameras in the world these days there is always a good chance that regardless of what you are photographing you might not be the first one. So, I think it is silly to ever think something that just exists out in the world is exclusive to you.
Where I disagree is the idea that copying other people's photos does anything for you. Understanding how it was done, what the photographer was thinking, what the challenges were and so on ... that's all super interesting. But going to the same place because I saw another photographer shoot there is something I would have no interest in.
Really appreciate your considerate view on this topic.
I do believe beginner photographers can learn a lot from honeypot locations, copying an iconic composition provides a great learning experience, if not technically in the creative process of taking the image, but in the technical aspects of editing. Having a well executed image to edit provides a solid foundation for learning when it comes to editing. It also helps you understand composition and focal length. When you learn to write, you copy the letters, when you learn to draw, you trace and image or draw something you can see. When you learn a musical instrument, you learn and imitate songs. This provides the foundation for your own creativity and you can use these experiences to develop your own taste and style and ultimately, your own creative expression.
Yep, I've come across this attitude here in Australia. My response is to give explicit directions to places I go to. ruclips.net/video/7J3IbUAsJNQ/видео.html
Photographers would be well advised not to reveal locations. Part of photography is discovery and seeking out - rather than riding on someone else's discovery. Look what has happened in the USA since the days of Ansel Adams. Locations such as Maroon Bells are now ruined. I used to name locations through detailed captions - but now go for a more general description so as not to reveal the exact location. Many thanks for such an interesting video and raising the issue.
My opinion, for what its worth, is that if its already well known there's no point in trying to keep it a secret. I'll give you an example. I live close to 'The Devil's Pulpit', made famous by the Highlander series - (load of unhistorical crap, yeah, I know its fiction). If someone asks how best to take photo's of it I'll give them detailed information, appropriate parking, safety advice, what not to miss etc, with a plea to take a plastic bag along and pick up some rubbish on the way back to the car. There are other places, within walking distance, that are not known about and I keep my mouth absolutely shut about them. Reason being that in Scotland we are in a different legal position to England and Wales, essentially we can walk and camp on 99% of the land; with that precious right comes a responsibility not to damage the property or the livelihood of the landowner. Unfortunately we all know this is not always adhered to. Even if, like any other responsible photographer, you strictly adhere to 'leave no trace' mere repeated footfall damages the environment. The path at the Devil's Pulpit that used to be narrow and semi-grassed over has now become meters wide of baked earth in the summer or meters wide of slushy mud ... in the summer, its Scotland !
Don't feel guilty about keeping a location you've stumbled upon to yourself, allow other people the pleasure of discovery, guide books just delete adventure.
I think there are three good reasons why a photographer shouldn't share their location. 1. The loss of UNIQUENESS. If others merely follow your footsteps and take the same image, that's an image you have worked on, waited for, published etc. AND adjunct to that, to follow in someones footsteps so closely that you need to go to the same locations suerly demonstrates a lack of your own creativity. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL, if a published image gains popularity and the location becomes know, not only with that image be 'done to death' but the photographer traffic may present an environmental problem into the future. 3. SECURITY. lets face it, most landscape locations only work at a certain time of the year, and at a certain time of the day. A lone photographer (especially the female photographers I'm aware of) wouldn't want to be confronted with a plethora of 'subscribers' attempting to meet and copy their photography 'hero'. I could point you in a direction of very renown and widely published pro who had an amateur photographer 'stalker' that followed his very footsteps, sometimes turning up in the same locations at the same time. All perfectly harmless I'm sure, but a little disturbing none the less. Personally, I like to choose my locations and believe they are unique to me, I also like to practice photography mindfully, alone and undisturbed. I don't do youtube, I'm not good enough, but I'm also reluctant to 'invite' others along on MY journey......maybe I'm just not the caring and sharing type, even though I'm very happy Chris, to watch many who are! I know, a far too long winded response.....I promise shorter in the future.
I do visit locations where others have been just to see it for myself and I do look to see if I can take it another way, I always use google maps to look at where I want to go, where to park etc. The final part of your video shows the lovely covered house, we visit Mid and North Wales regularly and I've always looked for a spot to walk to take pictures of that bridge and house but didn't realise until your video that there is a path there
One thing I'm beginning to hate, I'm a member of a camera club and submit to competitions, surprising how many judges expect your photos to be manipulated with photoshop or lightroom, want the fine art look. This needs to stop, not everyone can afford the price of this software so they make do with what they have
The motivator is damage. It happens and ruins locations and access. Examples of this are enough that it should be really clear. Take a look at Nature First as a movement that has spent a lot of time thinking about this. Many photographers start thinking sharing is innocuous but after a while, they will experience an example of having a location damaged or closed due to pressure of people visiting
Also, there are so many locations that are easily found that there is no reason to share more because of accessibility for beginners.
Great video again mate, but I personally think that sharing locations is perfectly fine. It allows us photographers to visit amazing places that inspire us to get out of the house and shoot when we probably aren't feeling it or stuck. I always find it tricky to plan a trip that no one has ever been to unless you have time for a reki. But most of the time that's not the case. I do agree with making differences to a photograph of a popular location though then again not every day is the same especially in the UK. The weather changes a lot ahahah.
In my opinion everybody has to find their own places. When certain places are visited by the masses they simply get destroyed.
If you find anothers composition it may not be the same as the original. The sky will be different a sunset will be different every day. So, even in the same spot the images will differ.
I agree! 100% true! Thanks for watching and for leaving your thoughts on this!
The problem with this thinking is that people are just to lazy to go out in all weathers and trudge miles and miles curry combing the mountains, hillsides, woodlands and river courses to find really good perspectives. Copying scenes is a lack of imagination and photo sharing sites are full of these same scenes. I live in Snowdonia not far from the 'lonely tree' and wannabe photographers arrive in the same place in their cars, queue up to get the same shot, sometimes fight each other for the best spot and then they leave all their crap behind rather than put it in the bin a hundred yards away.
I totally appreciate honeypot locations with single compositions are to be avoided. However, I think the argument is nuanced, if I see a location featured in a photo, say it’s woodland photo, then I wouldn’t be asking for the location because I want to copy that photo. I have no interest in that. I would, however, be interested in exploring that woodland for myself to find my own compositions, knowing it’s a location that has potential. Perhaps there’s too much ego amongst certain photographers, where they feel if someone asks about their photo it’s because they believe the person asking is hoping to copy it. I think people need to check themselves and remove this arrogance because it does nothing for this community.
Finding a spot is part of the charm it self in my oppinion and why would you want to go and take the exact same photo as someone else?
I wouldn't want to take the same photo as someone else, but I think there's a distinct difference between asking for a location because you see the potential and want to explore it for yourself (which is what I would do) compared to asking for a location because you just want to recreate the same photo. I think regardless, either is valid, beginners can learn a lot from copying other photographer's compositions, but this assumption that asking for a location means you want to copy a composition is shortsighted and needs to change. You can visit an iconic location and still have a unique photography experience if you try hard enough and exercise some creativity.
@@chrisharveyphotography This is true. I mostly shoot wildlife and I rareley share my spots due to the animals safety and well being. But that is diffrent from landscape photography I guess.
I’ve visited honeypot locations and it’s always nice to get the shot in the bag before trying to find my own composition. But I’ve see locations where flowers, heather and the like, looks like it has been deliberately vandalised to stop others from replicating the photo. Kinda sad and you wonder who has done this cause I always treat any area I visit with respect and leave it as I found it. But if I’m looking at an image I do like to know what I’m looking at.
Agree with some other as I'm not real sure what your actual point is. Seems to be all over the place.
You do mention the problem of too many people coming to a location. And not that you suggested it, but I find the idea that no one should be able to come to a location....except me, because I'm a good person, to be utterly hypocritical.
I also think the notion of closing a location in order to protect it to be backwards. Protect it to what end? Its like locking a great painting in a vault forever so that it doesn't deteriorate. Pointless. Sure, it might need time for restoration. It might need rules. It might even need limits. But if nature is not for us to enjoy then it really has no meaning at all.
As to sharing locations, well, that's up to the individual isn't it? I have no problem sharing locations but that doesn't mean I'm more kind or noble than someone who doesn't.
Overuse of trails and remote locations can have a negative impact on the ecosystems in which they exist. With regard to photographing birds and other wildlife, this can also impact their habitat and have a negative impact on them. I have seen trails and locations that were once pristine destroyed by garbage, irresponsible fire use, trampled vegetation and recreational vehicles because they became so popular. Sometimes it’s best to NOT share a location for that reason alone.
Thanks for your thoughts. Sharing locations is the decent thing to do.
Thanks for watching Martin 🙏🏻
I feel if we share locations there is not so much exploration left. Also shared locations lead to concentrated crowding in countries like india, where almost everyone then just heads to that particular city, forest,
Location and not exploring anything else. It may disturb the balance of the place
(1) I don’t care where other photographers shoot a photo, thus I don’t need to play follow the “leader”…
(2) I don’t care if you keep your locations a “secret” as there are plenty of other locations to shoot…
(3) Learn to shoot in your own area, we don’t need hundreds of photos of the same place…
(4) Quit following and start thinking for yourself.
Sadly places can’t be ‘undiscovered’. Keep it quiet for the Keeled Skimmers.
Pro Photographers copyright there Images and they do not want to divulge any info what so ever , also many amateur Photographers with hold this info.
I’m in the US. We have a few more acres here, so I think we have a different perspective on “spoiling the land,” since we have a bit more of it. For me, if the location is truly fragile and cannot handle a lot of traffic, I’ll share it offline on an individual basis, but not blasted out publicly. I think the only real reason photographers won’t share their spots is because they’re afraid of someone else going there and taking a better photo.
I was in agreement with your comment until you said why people don't share locations ,I don't think people are concerned about some one taking a better photos. i was part of a group of 6 people photographing on the southern coast of Maine, we were with a professional photographer John Solina for a sunrise to sunset photo shoot. The cove that we first stopped at before first light was an area that I always wanted to photograph, i was surprised how quickly John moved the group to another location from where we stopped, myself and one other photographers stayed behind ,I knew that it would not be long before sunrise and I wanted to make the most out of the location we were at. My decision to stay proved to pay off when the sun 🌞 broke the horizon, and the sea was flat calm ,i positioned my self between the a leafless tree and where the furthest part of the cove curved ,the sun's reflection came across the water to where i had my camera on a tripod giving me the best photograph of the day. Once I had more light I moved down to rocky shore photographing different rock formations and pools of water. Even though the six of us started at the same location, we walked away with different photographs because of the decisions that we made that morning.
I dont share locations because most people l met are selfish about what they do. So l keep most things to myself. I dont mind helping but it would had to be the right person/people
Why would I want to know where someone else takes their photographs?
I want to create my own images, not copy someone else's.
I find there's an important distinction between visiting a location where a photo was taken and recreating that photo. Quite often, woodlands are full of great photos and if I wanted to know the location of a particular photo, it's more because i've seen potential in that location and I want to explore it for myself and find my own images, not because I want to copy the image i've seen.
don't think it needs changing at all as where ever they go would soon be ruined by being done to death. i believe Nigel Danson was given permission to shoot on some private woodland so obviously will not say where that is. the other point is why should you, me or anybody else sponge off others efforts to find those places, get out and find for ourselves
I think there’s more nuance to the argument than that. I completely agree with the point about private property, but I don’t agree that photographers wishing to visit a location are doing so to copy an image they’ve seen from that location. You can visit any location and create your own image and something unique. Often I’ve seen a woodland photo and seen potential in exploring that area, perhaps because of the species of tree for example, and whilst that composition has prompted that realisation, I certainly wouldn’t have any interest in copying the same composition. I’d want to explore for myself, knowing I’m in a location that has potential.