Would this even be considered a Landscape?

[mdpix]

Trying to get a handle on Lanscape photography. I still find making landscape photography "interesting" quite challenging.

[Elmo]

"I believe the proper term for this is Macro Landscape", not to be confused with Macro Photography. However the term landscape has many definitions by many folks. So say a land scape should show no evidence of man. In this case the flowers are the result of man's efforts so it is not a landscape at all.

My definition of a landscape it contains an area not considered a close-up and contains a limited number of man introduced structures. So by my deninition it is a landscape.

I feel you will get many other definitions, most of which will be personal opinions.

[mdpix]

Thanks for clarifying the definition (hmmm, sounds like one of those that is open to interpretation). I never heard of "Macro" landscape. . . Learn something new everyday

[moi]

http://www.digicamhelp.com/learn/nature/landscape.php
http://www.fotografiewimvanvelzen.nl/webarticle05.htm

2 viewpoints to consider........might help?

[mdpix]

Thanks Moi. Those are some good reference sites. Based on what I read, I think I can then safely say this qualifies as a landscape 1) I have a horizon and 2) it evokes an emotional response (at least to me )

I just love this learning process!

[moi]

Yes-great site here isn't it!!

[marwamorgan]

I think it can be considred as a landscape. It's not macro, coz the distance is too far for a macro, plus this is somehow a wide angled photo. That's a cool shot anyways with vibrant colours