What exactly can allow things to be seen as picturesque, how can one see something as beautiful when to others it may seem ordinary? William Gilpin looks deeper into what picturesque really means. He explains that there are several examples of picturesque beauty in nature. There are multiple reasons why an object or setting can be picturesque. In this essay, I will discuss picturesque, Gilpin’s ideals that relate to my visual artifacts. This essay will link the beauty that is found in my picturesque photos and the relation to the 19th century to our current century.  I will also explain what Kodak tips I used in taking my vibrant photographs. There are many different ways that the Kodak tips assisted me in taking my photographs. I will explain how one of my photographs directly relates to the sublime definition by Burke.

Gilpin noted that variety and contrast are some examples that can make and object seem picturesque to the eye of the beholder.  Variety and contrast is shown in one of my pictures. The photo of the obstacle course( photo 1)  shows many different parts of it. The way that is a somewhat rugged structure, the light reflects off of the object. Shadows are shown in the picture and the shadows represent what time of day this photo was taken. The photo includes nature and a man made piece of architecture. This picture may have one feel the emotion called sublime.  The obstacle course can seem dangerous or may be scary because it is high up.  It reminds me of some dangerous things I have done myself like skydiving. These are similar because I was still afraid of jumping out of the plane even though I had an instructor and a parachute. If I was on the obstacle coarse that I photographed, I would have a harness on but the fear is still there. The feeling of terror if something went wrong. That is how sublime is incorporated into that picture.

I took all of the Kodak nature photography tips into account when I took my photos. There is a photo where I changed my perspective in a different way than kneeling down or changing my elevation. I decided to take a different perspective by taking a picture of the obstacle course, similar to the last one. Only this time I took it through a screen door. The faint, fine lines show the viewer a different angle and a different perspective. That perspective allows the viewer to see a piece of architecture while being in a piece of architecture that was created in the 20th century. The differences in the way architects would build from the 18th and 19th centuries to now are so different. When I took my photos I applied what Eddie Soloway suggested in his nature photography tips, to change perspective.

In another one of my photos, I wanted the theme to be nature with a special emphasis on fine lines. That is why I took a photo zoomed in and one zoomed out so there is more of a landscape view (photo 2) . The zoomed in photo (picture 3) shows the smoothness of the sign and how it is so clear while the background of brush is less clear because of the focus directed towards the sign. I also did the opposite. I zoomed in on picture 2 letting the viewer see all the small details of the brush. When you see photo 2, it is easy to notice the shadows on the sidewalk. I felt like this adds a different aspect to the photo, creating a more 3d look. It seems more true and authentic when shade is involved in any photo. As recommended in the Kodak tips, shadows add depth to the photo.  There is also symmetry between the sky and the brush as seen in photo 2. The lighting captured in this picture shows how nice of a sunny day it was. The sun helped bring out the colors in the photograph making it look more vibrant and picturesque.

I took this other photo in a field with some trees. Picture 4 has a creative background because the image focuses on the sky but all the green plants surrounding the field.  On my prezi, I included a zoomed in picture of the sky so you can directly compare the beauty of it to the other side of the picture, which is rugged and picturesque. This has many qualities a so-called picturesque photo has. Gilpin’s idea of the picturesque is more rugged and natural. He defines beauty as a smoother look and plain. Everyone sees everything differently. I have a picture of the sky. I would say it is more along the lines of beauty because of how plain the picture is. There is not much detail to it and that is what makes it beautiful.  I agree for the most part with Gilpin’s ideals on picturesque and beauty. I think beauty and picturesque can both be seen in a photograph. In the photo of the obstacle course, there is beauty behind the object and the sky is very blue and plain. The obstacle course is rugged and fits all the descriptions of picturesque. It compares closely to the image of a picturesque that we looked at on week two by Gilpin.

When I went out to take good pictures, I waited for the right time of day. I wanted the lighting to be good so everything turned out clear. I looked for good angles to take my shot from and creative backgrounds. I was aware of Gilpin’s idea of picturesque when I took my photos. My idea of picturesque includes lots of detail, and different aspects making it more complicated whatever it is.  I think plain pictures would be considered beautiful just as Gilpin, my idea of picturesque is very similar as well. My perspective of the landscape of which I captured through my photos is that it is really nice. “We acknowledge it to be picturesque: but we must at the same time recollect, that, in fact, the smoothness of the lake is more in reality, than in appearance.” I use the general term roughness; but properly speaking roughness relates only to the surfaces of bodies: when we speak of their delineation, we use the word ruggedness. Both ideas however equally enter into the picturesque; and both are observable in the smaller, as well as in the larger parts of nature—in the outline, and bark of a tree, as in the rude summit, and craggy sides of a mountain.” (Gilpin,8) Gilpin believes that observable details, or ruggedness relates to picturesque. In picture 6, which is zoomed in to on slide 12 on my prezi shows a building on the wsu campus. This building has fine lines and architecture and the bricks in the building give it a rough rugged look. I felt like this image captured the picturesque ideals Gilpin set fourth. The architecture compared to the 18th and 19th century is so different than today. Back then, the gothic look or elegant look was ideal back in that time. If I were to take a photo of Notre dome, you would be able to see the roughness of the architecture.

I took it a step farther; I searched for Gothic architecture in Pullman and was successful. I found this old church and I thought I could take the perfect picturesque photo. Picture 7 and 8 are of the gothic church. Picture 8 is more of a close up where you can see the roughness in the bricks of the church. Picture 7 was taken at a different time of day that when I took the other photos. I took picture 7 in the evening so the sky looked different than it would in mid-day. My last two pictures tie in closely to my group. The base of our group is religion and this church represents what some of the churches looked like in the 18 and 19th century. Churches that are made today look much more modern but don’t have the same rugged style as the gothic churches have.  Picture 7 has the simplicity of the sky in one corner of the photo with light, while the other half of the picture is darker. I think that the shade allowed the church to look very dark; also it is gothic architecture so it was ment to look like that anyways. It can be another example of sublime because the church looks like it could be haunted. “Whatever is fitted in any sort to excite the ideas of pain and danger, that is to say, whatever is in any sort terrible, or is conversant about terrible objects, or operates in a manner analogous to terror, is a source of the sublime; that is, it is productive of the strongest emotion which the mind is capable of feeling.” (Burke) Terror is an emotion one may feel when they look at this structure at night. Burke’s definition of sublime directly compares with my pictures of the church. Picture 7, showed symmetry because the picture seems divided by two different parts, the church and the sky. Eddie Soloway noted in the Kodak tips that is is good to make appealing composition, which is what I did in this photo.

Photos are in

http://prezi.com/fwgsqkoopujt/picturesque-photo-essay-presentation/  -prezi

Works Cited-

Gilpin, William. “Three Essays: On Picturesque Beauty; on Picturesque Travel; and on Sketching Landscape: To Which Is Added a Poem, on Landscape Painting. By William Gilpin, …” Three Essays: On Picturesque Beauty; on Picturesque Travel; and on Sketching Landscape: To Which Is Added a Poem, on Landscape Painting. By William Gilpin, … N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Sept. 2012. <http://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/ecco/004863369.0001.000/1:4?rgn=div1;view=fulltext&gt;.

Soloway, Eddie. http://www.kodak.com/. N.p., n.d. Web. <http://www.kodak.com/ek/US/en/Eddie_Soloway.htm&gt;.

Edmund Burke, On the Sublime: part 1, Section VII (1747)