Landscape Photographer of the Year - Collection 02

I was sorting out my bookshelves the other day when I came across the above book. [AA Publishing 2008]. I can't remember how I got it and have not looked at it since then. There are some impressive images and each carries a comment from the photographer and an index giving all the camera settings etc. A lot of the photographers' comments made reference to the adverse conditions that pertained at the time the image was taken as though in some way this added to the value of the picture. I have noticed this phenomena before where we are invited to join with the photographer and in some vicarious way suffer the same conditions. The fact that I am sitting in comfort in a centrally heated house rather undermines the illusion that I am there .

Whilst I would recommend the book to anyone interested in landscape photography I was left wondering how far we are influenced by text that accompanies any photograph in judging the image's worth. Something as apparently innocuous as a title has an impact but the text that accompanied these images seemed to go much further and probably designed to influence the thought processes of the viewer. Is this a legitimate exercise or does it raise the same ethical issues as image manipulation? It certainly has the same difficulty in deciding whether, in the opinion of the viewer, some feathered (50 px or more!?) ethical boundary has been crossed.

The Guardian usually carries a double page spread of a photograph in the centre of the main section. The caption is frequently in a different place on the page and not obvious. I look at the image and try and decipher what it is about. I find myself judging it simply as an image and the response I have to it including its technical competence. Then I search for the caption, read it and often have the reaction - 'Didn't think of that'. I then look at the image again and am conscious that my response has changed. Sometimes it is only marginally but sometimes the change is quite significant. I am influenced by what I read and I believe that, for me and perhaps others, this is my usual reaction.

A similar happening is what I call the 'halo' effect. The effect arises when someone gains a reputation for very high quality work. From then on whatever is produced by that person is not judged on its merits but is deemed to be good because it is by that person. It is as though the person can never again produce something that it is not of the same high standard. Our critical thinking is constrained by the signature on the work.

As a student I am encouraged to look at other people's work (I have never been absolutely sure why. It is one of those things that is deemed to be 'good'. Has anyone questioned its real value?) Is it better to look at work that is text free so that I may form an opinion about my reaction or is it helpful to have some written clue about the photographers intent? I am not of the school that says that a photograph should speak for itself and not be filtered by additional material but sometimes I would like to form my own opinion then discuss that reaction with others who have had an equally uncluttered view. At least then I can test my opinion against that of others. That way I may learn much more both about myself and my approach when I have a camera in my hand.

Why did I write this blog? Because I am growing tired of being corralled into thinking in whatever is the fashion of the moment. Fashions come and go. Landscape is a classic case. Some 18 months ago I was fortunate to attend a talk by a well known and much exhibited landscape photographer. I thought his work was stunning. However his most recent work had changed. Although his genre remained landscape he had heavily manipulated the images so that it was the clever wizardry that was designed to catch the viewer' imagination. He stated that he had done this because he had found that landscape images were no longer being accepted. Suddenly he was out of fashion. Twelve months later I listened to a conversation between several exhibited photographers who said that landscape photography was making a return. Should the quality of an image be decided by what is fashionable or, what is the same thing, what the assessors aren't bored with.