Register here - as a registered user you get more features and fewer ads.
I appreciate and agree with what's been said here. And I would add this - there is a greater power about these places than meets the eye. That is what inspires us as photographers. But how do we represent the unrepresentable, for that is what we are trying to do - to show a greater dimension of experience rather than merely a flat mechanical image. We have a vision of the place and that is what we try to show.
Also, I'd like to say something about the photographic image, which, as has been remarked, is not equivalent to human eyesight. Sometimes it reveals qualities the eye doesn't see. In my version of Castlerigg for example, the curving horizon is a product (not a distortion) of the camera being mounted on a panoramic tripod head directed downwards in the centre of the pan sequence and hence at a tilt at the peripheries. Likewise the colour change from pink to blue of the sky from the east (left of picture) to west (right of picture) is truthfully recorded by setting the white balance for the centre point of the view. Our eyes are so adept at balancing light temperature that we don't normally notice. So I consider the photograph to be a truthful representation even if one not usually seen with the eyes.
Something is not right. This message is just to keep things from messing up down the road