I think this garden is so interesting…primarily because I can’t decide what I think about it. I really like the path, the design is really striking and the obvious detail is interesting.
But I think I would need to be in this garden to determine if I actually like the garden as a whole. I am looking at these pictures and thinking about a common experience I have with photography. I find most of the time when I am taking pictures in the garden, the photo rarely captures what I am really seeing or experiencing. It’s not because I am an entirely bad photographer, but actually just as often it is because the picture is too good (usually macro shots), even portraying things to be prettier than they seem in real life. I feel like goldilocks; garden photography is either too bad or too good, but rarely just right. I think the photographer of this garden might have the same problem.
I am not sure which way this one goes; is this garden more interesting than it seems in the shots? Or, are the individual features are all really nice, but I am loosing a sense of the thread that strings them together in the place? So I can’t tell. I think it is important when shooting a garden to think about how a garden is experienced so that you can lead people through with a set of pictures. There are a couple more images at Artecho, the designers website but it’s not quite enough for me.
What do you think? Do you like it? Do you photograph gardens? What are some of your tips for that just right image? My tip: try and capture context, which is hard, but I think it makes a huge difference. This garden is on a bluff over looking the ocean. Does that change your original thoughts about this garden? It does for me. It makes me wonder where that path is going to, or coming from. And the round sitting area – what do you see when you are there? Is it gray because of mist? Maybe it is moodier than it looks? Hmmm…