No-effort photography places

Phantomas

Phantomas

Well-known
Local time
10:34 PM
Joined
Oct 15, 2008
Messages
1,076
I just got back from 2 week trip to Cuba. The place is amazing, well known fact of course. One thing that occurred to me is how easy it is to get good photos in Havana. You don't need to think, you don't need to observe (of course these things should not be ignored, but) just point and shoot - you'll get great results, guaranteed.
Surprisingly I did just the opposite :D I didn't shoot at all. I had a 5-months old baby strapped to me and we were travailing across the country, so I decided to go easy on myself, forget the camera and just soak up the views, atmosphere and the wonderful mojitos. No regrets, I'll be back and this this time will be fully ready to photograph.
So like I said, Havana is by far the most "no-effort required" photographic jewel I have visited, and I have certainly traveled my share. If I am to think hard than the next in line would be Shatila refugee camp, and Nouruz celebration, both in Beirut, that I just went mental photographing just because there was so much "photographic energy" coming from those places. But Havana still stands above.

What are the places you've been to that provided such easy-pickings photographic opportunities?
 
Depends on your type of photography. My brother does macro work, so we have completely different interests.
For landscape, that would be Rainier National Park. Any day with unusual weather, or just as the sun starts to go down, and you have something worth framing for the mantle, or at least sending as a postcard.
As for street and architecture? My favorites have always been Chinatown in Boston or SF, and lower Manhattan, especially around Canal street. That's kind of a no-brainer. As is Tokyo. Essentially anywhere there's lots of people and lots of texture to the urban landscape. I've always wanted to visit your city for the same reason as well!

I hear you on taking a real vacation from photography. I posted a thread last week about my camera breaking on day two of a weeklong trip to San Francisco, but I spent a lot of time sunbathing, sightseeing, and museum-hopping. All the stuff I wouldn't have thought to do while out searching for photographs.
 
For a start:

Countries: India, Malta (see http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/pst malta.html ), Greece, Bermuda (though of course there are a few dull bits in all of them, as I'm sure there are in Cuba)

Parts of: Slovakia, most of Slovenia (especially for landscapes), Switzerland (for pretty-pretty landscapes), California (especially Pacific Coast Highway and Gold Country, though as Frances said, they soon get a bit samey), most American historical parks, especially Civil War

Cities/towns (usually just the old parts): Arles, Beijing (lots of dull bits too), Dharamsala (or any Tibetan refugee colony), Guanajuato, Istanbul, Lijiang, Lisbon, New York, Paris marginally, St. Petersburg (the real one), San Francisco, Venice

Specific subjects:Hungary for castles and spas, Spain for castles and abandoned villages, Brittany for prehistoric megaliths, Cornwall for fishing villages and coves... Mountains just about anywhere, especially the Pyrenees and Himalayas: somehow not the Alps for me, though I don't know why.

Of course a lot depends on when you're there. The first time I saw Koper (Capodistria) it was great. A decade later, after an excess of modernization: dull & overpriced, also crawling with Italian tourists. And I've not been to Bermuda in well over 40 years.

Even more depends on what interests you. Including photography. I genuinely cannot understand the idea of "a real vacation from photography". Without my camera, it wouldn't be much of a vacation.

Cheers,

R.
 
I would concur with Cuba, no effort and a lot of keepers. However when I was there it was a with SLR i didn't have my RF camera at that time.
Other places that are pretty good "no-effort" photography places are found all over my own country of Ireland and Dublin - Quebec and Peru too.
Dublin is quite fascinating - its a world onto itself, and a photographic wonderland.
 
Closest one I can think of is The Great Ocean Road in Victoria, Australia. I used my 4x5, but I could have used anything really. Point at subject, get the horizon straight, take picture, hang on wall.

Coastline of Hawai'i too.
 
It's not supposed to be easy...

Unless of course you want the standard photos of, like, Havana, old cars along the Malecón etc, the deteriorating blgs, etc.

You think Ernesto Bazán would say it was easy?
 
Roger Hicks said:
I genuinely cannot understand the idea of "a real vacation from photography". Without my camera, it wouldn't be much of a vacation.
Click to expand...

I generally hold exactly the same sentiment. Photography enhances my travels enormously and makes me go further and deeper to discover things. That's why I often prefer to do such travels on my own, not to burden my company with my sudden fascination with what might look like an uninteresting place from a touristic perspective.
I actually initially was planning to travel to Ethiopia, to photograph of course. But, realisation that I now have a little son who even at 5 months looks like ready to hit the road (and he did!) I made last minute change to Cuba. No stroller (too cumbersome for island-wide trips) I had him strapped to me, making logistics slightly more difficult. Of course I took pictures! (In some cases he was a good assistant commanding good predisposition of bystanders) just not exactly in the manner and intensity I'm accustomed to so I didn't exactly considered it a "serious photography" trip. That will come once he's old enough to be my lens-carrying assistant :D
I do, however, agree that there are situations where letting go of camera helps with different interaction on new terrains. I did have one such case, keeping the camera in the bag for a wonderful opportunity. But I bet it would develop differently if I did pull it out. That's a whole different story though.
 
Pablito said:
It's not supposed to be easy...

Unless of course you want the standard photos of, like, Havana, old cars along the Malecón etc, the deteriorating blgs, etc.

You think Ernesto Bazán would say it was easy?
Click to expand...

No. But Havana Centro (not even the popular Vieja) provided plenty for the eye to find without looking too hard. Beautifully energetic urban life. Full-on life on the streets. And while not aiming for the typical cliches of old cars and crumbling yet colourful facades, I'm also realistic enough to know my place in comparison to Bazan :) I just felt a click, I knew how and what I would shoot there.
(For example, I went to Costa Rica a couple of years ago, and while certainly a wonderful country, I just couldn't find my photographic angle on it. So I gave up, went into the jungle and enjoyed all the fine things country could provide).
 
Pablito said:
It's not supposed to be easy...

Unless of course you want the standard photos of, like, Havana, old cars along the Malecón etc, the deteriorating blgs, etc.

You think Ernesto Bazán would say it was easy?
Click to expand...

Why can't it be easy sometimes? Sometimes a game of golf, snooker, tennis can be won with an easy shot, sometimes a hard one.

Are pictures of old cars bad photos just because they are popular? How many times does a subject have to be photographed before it becomes uninteresting?

I like the idea of putting in a lot of effort and getting the reward at the end, but sometimes it's just not required.
 
People/Urban - Mexico City, Cairo

Nature/Landscapes/Wildlife - Alaska, Canadian Rockies (just driving up and down Icefields Pkwy)
 
Cuba certainly is not easy for me but then no where is. I have spent somewhere around 250 days in Cuba with about 180 of those devoted exclusively to photography. I have been the length of the island and 13 of the 15 municipalities in Havana Cuidad. And photographing there is not easy, either physically or mentally. I have found myself physically exhausted from walking 7-8 hours a day and mentally drained from looking constantly for unique photos plus spending days in areas where no one speaks English and my Spanish is not good. You can see what I captured at my website.
 
Photography is never easy, but some places are easier than others. In my own neighborhood, there's a small business district, not a lot of people out and about at all hours, and people are generally warier of cameras. When I go downtown, there's always something to see. Not necessarily portfolio-worthy, but something worth pointing the camera at.

I'll also politely disagree about vacations without photography: searching for photographs often leads me down offbeat paths, like exploring the northern reaches of Philadelphia last month. But at the same time, not focusing on photography allows me to enjoy time with people I'm visiting with, or lingering in museums without worrying about missing light, as I did on the same trip.
My grandfather was a very competent landscape photographer, and my mother often talks about how on the transcontinental road trips her family took he was often absent, or too tired from carrying around an 8x10 monorail everywhere. Sometimes it pays to take a break, at least for part of a trip.
That said, I'm definitely going back to California in the summer, now that I've scoped out where I want to photograph.
 
The more unfamiliar, the easier for me.

Its only difficult to shoot the environment which you see every single day.
 
Harry S. said:
The more unfamiliar, the easier for me.

Its only difficult to shoot the environment which you see every single day.
Click to expand...

I think that is too true, and a shame. I suffer from the same thing.

In my experience, living near Washington, DC, where there are many wonderful opportunities for photography, I don't do much there.

But in the 70s and 80s, I really enjoyed Korea. From city to country it was very picturesque. I enjoyed the USA Great West on an arduous trip some years ago. Plains, mountains, desert, cliff dwellings, Grand Canyon, what great shots to be taken.
 
thegman said:
Why can't it be easy sometimes? Sometimes a game of golf, snooker, tennis can be won with an easy shot, sometimes a hard one.

Are pictures of old cars bad photos just because they are popular? How many times does a subject have to be photographed before it becomes uninteresting?

I like the idea of putting in a lot of effort and getting the reward at the end, but sometimes it's just not required.
Click to expand...
Very true. Strategy 3 (of 8) from Gurus and why to avoid them, http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps ignore gurus.html

3 The purpose of photography is to enjoy yourself and make good pictures. It is not to purify the soul through suffering. Too many believe that if something is more difficult or expensive or obscure, it must necessarily be better, which is patent nonsense. A lot of photography is easy as well as enjoyable, and you can make superb pictures without ever venturing into the obscure.

Cheers,

R
 
Phantomas said:
I generally hold exactly the same sentiment. Photography enhances my travels enormously and makes me go further and deeper to discover things. That's why I often prefer to do such travels on my own, not to burden my company with my sudden fascination with what might look like an uninteresting place from a touristic perspective.
I actually initially was planning to travel to Ethiopia, to photograph of course. But, realisation that I now have a little son who even at 5 months looks like ready to hit the road (and he did!) I made last minute change to Cuba. No stroller (too cumbersome for island-wide trips) I had him strapped to me, making logistics slightly more difficult. Of course I took pictures! (In some cases he was a good assistant commanding good predisposition of bystanders) just not exactly in the manner and intensity I'm accustomed to so I didn't exactly considered it a "serious photography" trip. That will come once he's old enough to be my lens-carrying assistant :D
I do, however, agree that there are situations where letting go of camera helps with different interaction on new terrains. I did have one such case, keeping the camera in the bag for a wonderful opportunity. But I bet it would develop differently if I did pull it out. That's a whole different story though.
Click to expand...
I understand your point, but equally I'd say (as you point out) that you don't HAVE to get your camera out. Quite often I don't. But unless I have it with me, I CAN'T take it out -- and I don't like that.

Cheers,

R.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom