 |
|
|
|
SIGHT: What kind of time goes into producing images? When you find a promising scene, how long do you spend watching the light? Have you ever made note of a particular scene, then come back at a different time or time of year? 
JOHN MACPHERSON: To be honest, the type of light that makes a 'lightscape' is fleeting and unpredictable, and the 'time' involved is frantically spent setting up a tripod and figuring out the exposure then pressing the button. The majority of the images that I have captured are very much products of being in the right place at the right time. And that means spending time outdoors, travelling about watching. I think it does help to know your location so that you can reduce the luck involved in being where you need to be. No use being on the east side of a mountain when the sun sets to the west of it, basic fundamental points like that. There is also an intuitive thing going on as well with light, I 'know' that winter brings shorter days and lower sun and that such conditions in a particular place might bring certain opportuntites, so that can and does influence the way I think and act. I have returned to scenes at a later time or date, and certainly it can be a good exercise just to observe the changes and see if it matches your expectations. And sometimes it does, although often it can disappoint. But that is the nature of the landscape photography game - lots of anticipation, lots of frustration, and then when you least expect it, nature throws huge rewards at you. If you are unprepared - you miss it! |
 |
S: Why do you shoot landscapes? Is it simply to try to capture beauty, or do you have environmental concerns? J.M.: Both really. I firmly believe that the two elements are connected. I try to show beauty (although I also photograph scenes of environmental degradation/concern), but many of my images are of fairly 'ordinary' places - they are not always images of national parks or other honeypot locations, just places that people might otherwise pass by, but when captured in fine lighting conditions can make people stop and look more closely. I am an environmentalist, but not a misty-eyed romantic one though. I think that in order for people (and I mean by that the great majority of ordinary pepole) to value landscape they require to perceive some worth in it. That 'worth' could be some personal aesthetic concern or it could more likely be as a source of income, as a spin-off of visits by people wishing to use the landscape recreationally (tourists). I have strong feelings about sustainable tourism in my country. We have a fantastically rich environment, but one that is under-utilised. My personal opinion is that the tourism industry in Scotland, despite being sophisticated and extensive, falls short in many areas when it comes to sensible use of the environment, and the quality of experience that is being offered. Customer focus is generally poor and unimaginative (with some notable exceptions). My family have been involved in tourism in various ways since the late 1800's (and I am too in various ways through my photography) and I take a personal pride in giving visitors a warm welcome and a quality experience. Sadly not enough other operators think similarly. Photography can play a role in informing people. Many of my photos are of 'ordinary' places but photographed in extraordinary light. I'd like to think that such photos might help make people reappraise the 'ordinary' scenes that surround them, and thus value them more. Many people make long journeys to 'honeypot' locations (and that is a reasonable thing to do) but too many of them pass by equally important and beautiful sites on the way without noticing. And I suppose there is the personal artistic thing going on too - I enjoy the challenge of capturing fine light, and the satisfaction that such endeavours can bring. The tired old cliche of being the frustrated painter applies I guess - I can't paint so I photograph. |
 |
S: You say that you are a self-educated photographer. Are there any photographers who influenced you in your work? How did you technically and visually get to the level of sophistication you now possess? J.M.: Yes I learned by trial and error, making mistakes and trying to figure out why, getting success and hoping it would happen again. The realisation that light itself was such a huge factor in the resultant 'success' of an image was a revelation for me. I have admired the work of many photographers, such as Jim Brandenburg, whose work is very evocative. I am particularly fond of Robert Glenn Ketchum's work - he has an uncanny ability to make wonderful images out of seemingly ordinary subject matter in a way that few other photographers are able to, and that is a great gift. British photgrapher Paul Wakefield is someone that had a great influence on me when I was younger - his photographs of Scotland, and of particular locations that I know well, made me really aware of the possibilities that surround me. His observation and use of light is excellent. To be shown places that I was familiar with and consider to be 'ordinary' but revealed in stunning lighting conditions was a real learning experience for me. But to honest there are many photographers whose work has influenced me, and not necessarily landscape practitioners, such as dance photographer Lois Greenfield, or photojournalists Alex Webb and David Alan Harvey, whose use of light, and particularly composition, is exemplary.
|
