These Ethereal Landscape Photos Were Faked in a Cloud Tank

Illustration for article titled These Ethereal Landscape Photos Were Faked in a Cloud Tank

Looking at his work it seems like Kim Keever always has his camera in the right place at the right time for capturing stunning landscape photos. But unlike that debacle over the shot of the wolf jumping over the fence, Keever readily admits his shots are fake, created in a very controlled studio environment.

Advertisement

He first starts by constructing the landscapes himself, in miniature, inside a large 200 gallon tank. It's then filled to the brim with water, lit using colored lights, and then augmented with painted backdrops and foreground props. To create the fog, mist and cloud effects, he simply pours pigments into the tank and quickly snaps a photo with his large format camera before they're able to completely mix with the water. Though completely artificial, Keever seems to put just as much thought into composition and lighting as a photographer waiting for the perfect moment at dawn, and his results have a certain fine art landscape oil painting aesthetic to them. An exhibition of his work just opened at the David B. Smith Gallery in Denver, Colorado, and runs until November 19th. I wonder if he also does wedding photography this way? [David B. Smith Gallery via Coudal]

Illustration for article titled These Ethereal Landscape Photos Were Faked in a Cloud Tank
Illustration for article titled These Ethereal Landscape Photos Were Faked in a Cloud Tank
Illustration for article titled These Ethereal Landscape Photos Were Faked in a Cloud Tank
Illustration for article titled These Ethereal Landscape Photos Were Faked in a Cloud Tank
Advertisement
Illustration for article titled These Ethereal Landscape Photos Were Faked in a Cloud Tank
Illustration for article titled These Ethereal Landscape Photos Were Faked in a Cloud Tank
Advertisement
Illustration for article titled These Ethereal Landscape Photos Were Faked in a Cloud Tank

DISCUSSION

This reminds me of the work in Avatar. They pay good money to create environments using such techniques in Hollywood.

'Real' pictures are overrated anyway. I believe in components of the solipsistic homunculus argument anyway which makes 'real' a non-realizable idealization. No two humans share the same interpretations because the sensory measurement processes use non-homogenized sampling that depends on non-stationary, chemically influenceable, interpretation schemas that themselves depend on ecology and the current quasi-static state of evolution which can only be known/understood locally. Of course, this doesn't mean that the golden mean metric doesn't apply.

tl;dr - my eyes interpret my world according to my brain and my chemicals. So I will forever see different from you. And the discussion forum is meant just to help me understand why you see the way you do.

Mihi argumenta ultima.

I SO rule on Saturday drunk session closures.