Environmental protection and landscape photography

[vieri]

Ladies and gentlemen, I just published a new blog article about something I deeply care about and that I have been thinking about for a long time now. As landscape photographers, we love the environment: however, we also contribute in no small part to its destruction. In the blog article below you can find my thoughts about this conundrum and about what we could do to start helping instead:

https://www.vieribottazzini.com/2019/05/environmental-protection-and-landscape-photography.html

Looking forward to your thoughts, ideas and opinions on this. Best regards,

Vieri

 

[Bugleone]

I'm no longer a 'photographer' although for most of my life I was.....I started with the proverbial Box Brownie and moved on to old cameras of various types and then to Rollieflex's and MPP's (4x5), Sinar, hassy etc .......Had work published across the world and was a TV/film stills, press and military photog. along the way. Now i can't really justify the cost of digital back/medium format digital and have become disillusioned with photography in recent years although I keep up an interest.....

The main problem i see in photography is the attitudes so often prevalent, especially in the top range gear world like medium format digital....most of this stuff is owned by the 'go-getters' and the moneyed dilittantes who, as well as being unpleasantly competitive, are frequently the poorest respectors of the environment. Why, on earth would a real photographer have such a thing as a 'bucket list' of sites or make his/her way across the world to shoot the exact same view as a previously published shot unless highly competitive ...the word; 'hackneyed' comes to mind.

Unfortunately, I know several 'keen' camera owners and they are not people I generally want to mix with socially, let alone have artistic coversations with as their attitudes and selective opinions are very strong and their artistic abilities limited!.......So WHY would these people respect either the attitudes of others or the environment at large?

 

[dave.gt]

Ladies and gentlemen, I just published a new blog article about something I deeply care about and that I have been thinking about for a long time now. As landscape photographers, we love the environment: however, we also contribute in no small part to its destruction. In the blog article below you can find my thoughts about this conundrum and about what we could do to start helping instead:

https://www.vieribottazzini.com/2019/05/environmental-protection-and-landscape-photography.html

Looking forward to your thoughts, ideas and opinions on this. Best regards,

Vieri

Thank you!!!!

Vieri,

We are on the same track from two different backgrounds. I will check the link later when I have some time but I thank you for bringing this up. I have hesitated for some reason but my background in City and Regional Planning, both in academia and professional work, has left me with a huge sense of frustration after working 40 years in the field of Environmental Planming, Design and Development.

I will get back with you, I have a lot to say!:thumbup:

 

[dave.gt]

I'm no longer a 'photographer' although for most of my life I was.....I started with the proverbial Box Brownie and moved on to old cameras of various types and then to Rollieflex's and MPP's (4x5), Sinar, hassy etc .......Had work published across the world and was a TV/film stills, press and military photog. along the way. Now i can't really justify the cost of digital back/medium format digital and have become disillusioned with photography in recent years although I keep up an interest.....

The main problem i see in photography is the attitudes so often prevalent, especially in the top range gear world like medium format digital....most of this stuff is owned by the 'go-getters' and the moneyed dilittantes who, as well as being unpleasantly competitive, are frequently the poorest respectors of the environment. Why, on earth would a real photographer have such a thing as a 'bucket list' of sites or make his/her way across the world to shoot the exact same view as a previously published shot unless highly competitive ...the word; 'hackneyed' comes to mind.

Unfortunately, I know several 'keen' camera owners and they are not people I generally want to mix with socially, let alone have artistic coversations with as their attitudes and selective opinions are very strong and their artistic abilities limited!.......So WHY would these people respect either the attitudes of others or the environment at large?

Well... I don't have time for a discussion but maybe later... for now, I can only say that I understand where you are coming from and from my perspective, it is easy to become disillusioned with the way things are going in this world and people are both good and bad. And then there are those of us in between. I have learned and often remind myself not to be negative, although it is easy.

I prefer now, at this point in life to use photography for change. It is a powerful medium and many before us have done a great job, but there is a need for us all to do a lot more for environmental concerns. A cursory review of world population and migration will both amaze anyone and scare everyone who has a desire for a better world.

So, I will come back to this thread in due time. Right now, there is no opportunity, I must get back to work.:salute:

Thank for your input, and, Vieri, thanks again for you!

 

[dougpeterson]

I think frequently about this topic, especially as relates to the workshops that I have (and will) be part of.

Providing a good workshop experience (enjoyable, educational, pictorially fruitful) while respecting the beautiful natural world that we benefit from... it sounds easy (insert some simplified slogans like "leave no trace", but in practice it can be a challenge! Even the more so as the quantity of visitors to such places seems to keep going up!

 

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

I love your post, Vieri, and as the Past Chair of the Nature Conservancy of Canada I applaud your views - and your "rules". I teach the same ones in photography classes I conduct from time to time.

Unfortunately there is another way we are despoiling landscapes and destinations - we so often fly to them. This is CO2 intensive activity which contributes to climate change and if unchecked, will certainly destroy species and environments. Just two days ago the UN reported on this very thing.

I don't have any ready solutions, though I am driving an electric car which is fed by a solar array on my home. But I love to travel and struggle with my conscience every time I board a plane.

Nonetheless, your blog is most constructive. Thank you.

Bill

 

[Shashin]

Thanks for this post. This is an extremely important topic. Ironically, the biggest environmental impact people make is through their flight to a destination. But photography and the tourism can have positive effects by creating another value except direct use value--we may have lost our entire elephant population by now if it were not for the economic value of visiting them and photographing them rather than killing them for ivory. Still, it is still uncertain if that will be enough to prevent the extinction of the elephant in the wild.

Still, we are in a unique period of history for photographers: we can document huge changes to our natural environment and photograph some of the last members of many species before they become extinct. Sorry for such a pessimist view, but history has shown that humans will destroy their environment until the situation reaches a crisis. They will then simply learn to adapt to a degraded environment instead of trying to reverse the impact. This time however, the impacts will not be regional. This by the way is not something that will happen in the future, this is happening now. Our current extinction rate is about 1,000 times the historic norm. There is no indication that we are doing anything more than nibbling around the edges, whether that is with fishery exploitation, land and ocean degradation, deforestation, air and water pollution, waste, and a hundred other metrics. And most of this, while impacting the natural environment, directly effects the human environment, including food production.

We might as well sit back and enjoy the show.

:watch:

 

[Boinger]

Thanks for this post. This is an extremely important topic. Ironically, the biggest environmental impact people make is through their flight to a destination. But photography and the tourism can have positive effects by creating another value except direct use value--we may have lost our entire elephant population by now if it were not for the economic value of visiting them and photographing them rather than killing them for ivory. Still, it is still uncertain if that will be enough to prevent the extinction of the elephant in the wild.

Still, we are in a unique period of history for photographers: we can document huge changes to our natural environment and photograph some of the last members of many species before they become extinct. Sorry for such a pessimist view, but history has shown that humans will destroy their environment until the situation reaches a crisis. They will then simply learn to adapt to a degraded environment instead of trying to reverse the impact. This time however, the impacts will not be regional. This by the way is not something that will happen in the future, this is happening now. Our current extinction rate is about 1,000 times the historic norm. There is no indication that we are doing anything more than nibbling around the edges, whether that is with fishery exploitation, land and ocean degradation, deforestation, air and water pollution, waste, and a hundred other metrics. And most of this, while impacting the natural environment, directly effects the human environment, including food production.

We might as well sit back and enjoy the show.

:watch:

Almost all species that have ever existed on earth are now extinct. The current natural world is a tiny percentage of the diversity throughout history.

And believe me when I say humans aren't going to be the exception to the rule.

All species on earth will eventually be extinct when looking on from a geological time scale.

The objective for humanity should be to extend that out as long as possible, but our current world affairs seems to be set on the exact opposite goal.

I have children and I don't think when they are my age that there will be any wildlife left just whatever we have domesticated.

 

[bab]

Actually there was a study in Africa regarding arid and desolate land that was once fertile but due to hunting and removal of animals the earth below turned to dust. When the Elephants and other animals were brought back the dust became a oasis.
Yes you guessed it the animal dung fertilized the soil grew the plants and retained the water which brought back the cycle of life.

Most of the prime areas in national parks in any country are destroyed compared to what they looked like twenty years ago.

As a photographer I don’t feel my footprint is doing much harm in fact I know that ten of me wouldn’t do as much damage as one unconcerned tourist/camper is capable of.

Because of super growth on the west coast this year I’m sure fires will change our landscape this season for many years to come.

 

[dave.gt]

Vieri,

Perhaps a single basic change in thought might make a difference.

With the greatest photographic tools in history available, more of us should ask why are we, in the "photographic community", making images of those beautiful places in the first place? For fun? For personal enjoyment? For a living? Why are we not using the skills and technology to help change the impacts on our environment?

I never see images of the crowds in Iceland. Or the National Parks. I never see images of trash and garbage in those places, or the detrimental effects we all have in those places. Why not? Even human impacts on Mount Everest photos are now being published on CNN...

And closer to home, I have been struggling for months to get a single good Night Sky image and I have failed each time because there are no dark skies in our little world unless I dedicate at least two days to drive to the Okefenokee Swamp, spend the night in a crappy motel and drive back the next day. Light Pollution is that bad. But wait, I can always shoot the beauty of our environment close to home right? Wrong. No one here can say that they have opportunities to do that... just more urban and suburban sprawl, traffic and continuing degradation in every possible form. A study in Atlanta around the year 2000 confirmed that drivers in the metro area drive 93 million miles/day! How much more do they drive now? Urban sprawl is out of control and will never be reigned in short of a catastrophe.

Human migration is as old as our human history. It will never stop.

So, what to do? Has anyone here besides me looked at the population projections over the next 50 years? The crowds at National Parks will be several times larger than we have today if there is a way they can be accommodated. How about our "wonderful" environmental programs? Recycling. Meh... retrieving plastics from the oceans... really? How about something more than feel-good objectives?

I love the idea of electric cars... oh, but they use cobalt, right? A resource from poor countries that strip mine and use child labor... and disposal of yet more cars and components. Maybe green is the way to live by NOT having everything disposable every three years?

Electric cars, recycling, and all the present initiatives are a great idea but certainly not a perfect solution, and they are but a small step toward a day of reckoning. Sound pessimistic? No, reality sucks and it takes a lot to face the facts.

So where do we go from here? Contact our politicians? Yeah, right! The Moon? Sure... meet you there for an espresso one day as we discuss the next "mining" impacts by the various countries looking to exploit the cratered orb we see in the night sky..:ROTFL:

It is sad.

Unfortunately, there are no solutions. Yet. Maybe never. But we can do our part as an individual, changing one person or one thing at a time. As skilled photographers, why not?

At least that would separate us from the social media selfie crowd and make a real difference in the world... I hope.

 

[dave.gt]

Stop!

Right now, stop and imagine you are on the Moon... seriously, for a poetic perspective, like the lyrics of the Grateful Dead song, "Standing on the Moon" (or looking at our bigger "home", our Milky Way, from a vantage point very far away) and think about what is happening on the blue marble upon which we live.

In a few months, we will celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the Apollo Moon mission. What have we done to make our environment better? Really better? Seriously, the Environmental Awakening of the 70s did wonderful things, but it was just a start. Social and political nightmares continue as well. So we turn our heads to our own little space and lives.

Look up the song (above) and read the lyrics online for a perspective outside of our little existence. There are many songs and writings like that. Think of all that has happened just from news headlines that you remember and from your own life experiences. And, still, the world goes on.

For an overall historical perspective, watch this, among many other available resources:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PUwmA3Q0_OE

Can there be any doubt that our environment is in danger just from the sheer numbers of humans on this planet? What do we do, kick the can down the road as we have always done? Can we not change?

The power of the photograph... where is it?

 

[vieri]

Gentlemen,

thank you very much for sharing your thoughts. I think we face (at least) two different level of challenge here.

- The "larger" challenge of the sustainability of human presence on Earth at large;
- The "smaller" challenge of saving the environment and the photographic locations we love from being overwhelmed by inconsiderately behaving tourist / photographers, while preventing newly found photographic locations from meeting with the same end;

I am an optimist by nature, and believe that with enough thinking and putting in enough effort, (almost) any problem can be solved. However, I am also a realist, and I'd rather put my direct, personal effort into problems that I, personally, might truly have an impact on. For those issues that I care about, but haven't any chance to be effective in fighting personally, I'd rather support organisations that I trust (financially or otherwise) and have them "fight by proxy" on my behalf.

There is one extremely interesting thing in what Dave said - why don't we show the "behind the scene" of what we do? I paused, and my first thought was that this would be a reporter's job, not a landscape photographer's. Thinking about it a bit more, for me this is definitely the same kind of issue, while much less dramatic in terms of immediate "life or death" scope, that war photographers face: take photos of the dying child, or help him? When I go working somewhere, my mind is set towards the task at hand: create beautiful images of the landscape in front of me. Not only photographing a crowd doesn't come to mind, but the very presence of a crowd puts me so much out of my "zone" that I normally find myself not even start working, if a place is too crowded. Therefore, I normally don't go to crowded places. Even when I go to Iceland, which is as today the most crowded place I go, until now I managed to find spots with little enough people to allow me to work in (relative) peace.

I will organise a trip with a reporter friend, not to do the usual "idyllic" backstage videos we all see on the web and used to sell Workshops and the like, but to do a serious reportage on the "state of the union" of landscape photography in ultra-popular locations. This would ensure that the photos are made by someone that professionally does reportage, and not by me, and will also make the storytelling easier, since we'd already have a story and a leading character (as non-photogenic as I am, I am afraid!).

That aside, I think that on the "larger" issue we could:

- try and minimise our carbon footprint as much as we could;
- put pressure on politicians and such to pass environmentally-friendly legislation;
- support organisation that do so;

While on the "smaller" issue, we could:

- do what I propose in the article, which seems to be ok for everyone so far;
- use our skills as photographers (at large, even if perhaps not our personal skills!), the "power of photography", to document the damages done to the environment by, paradoxically, other (and too many) photographers;

Is this a good summary of what has been said so far, and does that make sense?

 

[Bugleone]

"..The power of the photograph,...where is it?"

In case you have not noticed it's been devalued like everything else of real value in this world....In western countries (and increasingly in non-western ones as well) we are bombarded by photography in growing amounts daily. Most of this 'photography' is rubbish both visually and contextually, in fact most of the population does not have either the time or the ability/interest to discern good image work......

........."the whole world is clicking a camera"

I'm sorry to say this; but I actually know people who think that their photos should gain recognition simply becasue they were made with very expensive equipement.......

 

[dave.gt]

Gentlemen,

thank you very much for sharing your thoughts. I think we face (at least) two different level of challenge here.

- The "larger" challenge of the sustainability of human presence on Earth at large;
- The "smaller" challenge of saving the environment and the photographic locations we love from being overwhelmed by inconsiderately behaving tourist / photographers, while preventing newly found photographic locations from meeting with the same end;

I am an optimist by nature, and believe that with enough thinking and putting in enough effort, (almost) any problem can be solved. However, I am also a realist, and I'd rather put my direct, personal effort into problems that I, personally, might truly have an impact on. For those issues that I care about, but haven't any chance to be effective in fighting personally, I'd rather support organisations that I trust (financially or otherwise) and have them "fight by proxy" on my behalf.

There is one extremely interesting thing in what Dave said - why don't we show the "behind the scene" of what we do? I paused, and my first thought was that this would be a reporter's job, not a landscape photographer's. Thinking about it a bit more, for me this is definitely the same kind of issue, while much less dramatic in terms of immediate "life or death" scope, that war photographers face: take photos of the dying child, or help him? When I go working somewhere, my mind is set towards the task at hand: create beautiful images of the landscape in front of me. Not only photographing a crowd doesn't come to mind, but the very presence of a crowd puts me so much out of my "zone" that I normally find myself not even start working, if a place is too crowded. Therefore, I normally don't go to crowded places. Even when I go to Iceland, which is as today the most crowded place I go, until now I managed to find spots with little enough people to allow me to work in (relative) peace.

I will organise a trip with a reporter friend, not to do the usual "idyllic" backstage videos we all see on the web and used to sell Workshops and the like, but to do a serious reportage on the "state of the union" of landscape photography in ultra-popular locations. This would ensure that the photos are made by someone that professionally does reportage, and not by me, and will also make the storytelling easier, since we'd already have a story and a leading character (as non-photogenic as I am, I am afraid!).

That aside, I think that on the "larger" issue we could:

- try and minimise our carbon footprint as much as we could;
- put pressure on politicians and such to pass environmentally-friendly legislation;
- support organisation that do so;

While on the "smaller" issue, we could:

- do what I propose in the article, which seems to be ok for everyone so far;
- use our skills as photographers (at large, even if perhaps not our personal skills!), the "power of photography", to document the damages done to the environment by, paradoxically, other (and too many) photographers;

Is this a good summary of what has been said so far, and does that make sense?

Vieri!!!!

Fantastic idea!:thumbs:

An artist like yourself in a quality production! There is the power of photography!!!

It has been done before, like this:

https://www.google.com/search?q=lud...berg&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari

Vieri, I would absolutely love to see you move forward with this. If I can possibly help, please let me know.

 

[Shashin]

retrieving plastics from the oceans... really? How about something more than feel-good objectives?

Plastics have real consequences: https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/18/asia/dead-whale-philippines-40kg-plastic-stomach-intl-scli/index.html

When you are getting to that level of plastic pollution, it is not simply a feel-good issue.

As far as population goes, it is not a simple one-to-one relationship. It is certainly a driver, but if per capita consumption goes down, then you can still have people and a healthy environment.

 

[dave.gt]

Plastics have real consequences: https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/18/asia/dead-whale-philippines-40kg-plastic-stomach-intl-scli/index.html

When you are getting to that level of plastic pollution, it is not simply a feel-good issue.

As far as population goes, it is not a simple one-to-one relationship. It is certainly a driver, but if per capita consumption goes down, then you can still have people and a healthy environment.

No doubt about plastics being a monumental problem! My opinion is grassroots solutions like having kids walking a beach and picking up plastics is too little, too late. Admirable, yes. Effective, not really. The truth is, when the problem is so huge, it will take governmental action on many levels to change the direction we are going. In other words, real commitment like has never been done before is what will be needed.

The "ifs" you mentioned is where the solution again resides with governments, because hoping for reduced consumption per capital just isn't going to happen without a broad, sweeping change in this country and I would imagine everywhere.

These are serious problems with very difficult decisions needing to be made, however, we don't seem to be getting anywhere lately. Vieri is proposing an action that I salute! We the people... can effect change but the public outcry and protests in the streets for major causes seems to be a thing of the past. We are left with whatever we can do to make things better. It starts with us as individuals.

So, I will do what I can, and I hope others in the photographic community will as well.

 

[Shashin]

The "ifs" you mentioned is where the solution again resides with governments, because hoping for reduced consumption per capital just isn't going to happen without a broad, sweeping change in this country and I would imagine everywhere.)

Yes, the ifs are big. Which is why I am not not holding my breath. But as Winston Churchill said, "I am an optimist because there is no point in being anything else."

Still, 186 signatories of the UNs Basel convention just passed a binding resolution on plastic pollution. Only one country did not sign, the US. https://www.theguardian.com/environ...s-countries-sign-plastic-waste-deal-except-us

 

[dave.gt]

Yes, the ifs are big. Which is why I am not not holding my breath. But as Winston Churchill said, "I am an optimist because there is no point in being anything else."

Still, 186 signatories of the UNs Basel convention just passed a binding resolution on plastic pollution. Only one country did not sign, the US. https://www.theguardian.com/environ...s-countries-sign-plastic-waste-deal-except-us

Yep!!!

And therein lies my point. You, me, and the rest of us in this country are pretty much alone in the struggle. We shall do what we can because I agree with Winston Churchill. :thumbs:

 

[darr]

Plastics have real consequences: https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/18/asia/dead-whale-philippines-40kg-plastic-stomach-intl-scli/index.html

When you are getting to that level of plastic pollution, it is not simply a feel-good issue.

As far as population goes, it is not a simple one-to-one relationship. It is certainly a driver, but if per capita consumption goes down, then you can still have people and a healthy environment.

I read sea salt is no longer considered healthy because plastic particles have been found in it.

--

I have travelled via airlines a considerable amount in the past and have decided this is one area I am making an effort not to do unless it is an emergency situation.

I have never been attracted to those high priced workshops abroad, especially when the country I live in is so vast and beautiful. Years ago I did the only abroad workshop with a well known photographer (now deceased) and it was the worst travel experience I ever had. Sometimes I think I am a bit too sensible financially to blow money on photography glitz.

IMO, we can all do more in our lives to help the environment if we try.

Best to all,
Darr

 

[Shashin]

I read sea salt is no longer considered healthy because plastic particles have been found in it.

Yes, that is now in the human food chain: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/...lastics-found-90-percent-table-salt-sea-salt/

Another thing we are finding in our drinking water supplied is medication because people flush their old meds down the sewer system: https://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/drugs-in-the-water

And then their is agricultural runoff, also mentioned in the Harvard Health link above. And as you know Darr, in Florida, city and agricultural runoff is feeding the red tide problem. 90% of Florida's coastal waters is hypoxic, primarily from runoff. Rising ocean temperatures is making that worse as the warmer the water, the less oxygen it contains. Coral bleaching in Florida has been on the rise as well.

But look on the bright side, water conditions don't impact off-shore oil extraction. (What could possibly go wrong?)

(I don't know if I want to laugh or cry :bugeyes: )