Is it possible for a snapshot of a climb to be taken ‘looking the wrong way’ or to ‘provide(s) factually untrue information’? Surely a happy snap is just that, right? Not so, if this comment is to be taken seriously:
https://www.ukclimbing.com/photos/dbpage.php?id=29108
Unfortunately the pic in question is of rather low resolution, so it’s unlikely that any amount of intense analysis will be able to explain away all of its mystique. We all know how hard it can be to keep the horizon level when taking a photo whilst belaying, but I’m not even sure exactly which way it should have been rotated to be a more ‘accurate’ image of the climber in action. Lets hope that lens distortion isn’t doing anything crazy to the Pike of Whatever.
I’m actually most interested in the concept that climbing photography, or any photography for that matter might be gone about in the right or wrong way, or be regarded as providing factually true or untrue information. My own thoughts on this are that all forms of photography distort reality, from the framing of an image to the shape of the lens through which the light passes. However real an image may appear to be, the moment it portrays is fleeting, and only really relates to the person holding the camera. Of this particular climbing photo, I ask myself the question; Is this image a true likeness of what the photographer would have seen as he stood on the belay, rope in one hand, camera in the other, with his head cocked slightly to the side? Yes, of course! I only hope his vision was somewhat sharper than what we see here.
You won't be surprised to hear that 'it depends'.
Depends largely on the intention of the photographer. If it's simply a snapshot to show the scene as it appeared, then you could argue that it may be 'wrong' if it gives a misleading impression. But by the same token, choosing an unconventional perspective or orientation for effect is a key element of photography and can help convey things - both authentic and misleading - that a simple snapshot never could.
Main thoughts are Gordon got out of bed on the wrong side today!
> Main thoughts are Gordon got out of bed on the wrong side today!
This!
Its not as if it’s a topo or shot used to represent anything about the climb, it’s surely just a quick snap.
I can see his point with regards to the angle of the pitch. A quick rotation in post would sort it easily enough..
As for direction, that's the photographers decision. We wouldn't want every photo of that climb to be taken from the same perspective. Where's the originality in that!?
Most people would have tilted it the other way, if doing it deliberately.
> I can see his point with regards to the angle of the pitch. A quick rotation in post would sort it easily enough..
I've just done that:
It may be even steeper than that, judging by the angle the runners are hanging. I certainly remember the crux as being a bit of a bulge, then you scuttle right and end up in balance on a superb little miniature ledge about the size of a computer keyboard, in an absolutely stupendous position.
> As for direction, that's the photographers decision. We wouldn't want every photo of that climb to be taken from the same perspective. Where's the originality in that!?
Of course there are dozens of angles to shoot Kipling Groove from. Years ago, when I was taking a picture of it for my book 'Eyes to the Hills' I spent ages walking and scrambling around until I found the angle that I thought best conveyed its very exposed nature and its setting.
Many of the photos in the Symonds Yat guide are very misleading. They give the impression that the routes are longer than they actually are. You find yourself looking for a feature that is nowhere near where it actually is. In the photographer's defense, the photos are very good and do what they are intended to do in difficult circumstances because of the trees and the angles that limit what is achievable. Once you have got your head round the foreshortening that is.
Al
I’ve seen many photos of Kipling Groove over the years but I can’t remember ever seeing one that shows this part of the route.
Which I find slightly surprising as quite a few people seem to find this section quite hard.
> Most people would have tilted it the other way, if doing it deliberately.
Oh I totally agree. I don't think it would have been deliberate at all!
> I've just done that: > https://tinyurl.com/y5ynan2p
To be honest, that looks totally unnatural. Especially the far horizon which looks wildly tilted.
> To be honest, that looks totally unnatural. Especially the far horizon which looks wildly tilted.
I've been looking at some of my pics of the Langdales and the strata tilts down towards the north - the original photo looks to be about right. As for the angle of the gear on the harness I'd guess that it is actually in motion as the climber raises a leg - or does gravity behave oddly on Gimmer (I often seemed to weigh more than normal up there)?
But have you done Kipling Groove? It's a slight bulge at the crux, then sets back in balance. Take a look at the Kipling Groove (HVS 5a) shots again. There's a black and white profile shot that's probably slightly exaggerated towards the vertical. I believe the angle of my plate-camera shot is absolutely correct (the camera had a spirit level on it): you can see the line of the flat fields in the background.
Yes, looking at it again, I think I probably went too far. But I was making a point. Pictures can often mislead. Here's another example (this time of Original Route at High Tor).
https://cdn.ukc2.com/i/116688.jpg
Here's a very good/truthful picture of it:
https://cdn.ukc2.com/i/198948.jpg
I'm not saying there's anything 'wicked' about such pictures, simply that they can give a misleading impression about the reality of a climb.
Extra note, for fellow photographers. Of course, an unavoidable problem with a wide-angle lens is that it 'splays out' the vertical angles progressively towards the left and right side of the frame if you tilt the camera up or downwards from the horizontal.
> I’ve seen many photos of Kipling Groove over the years but I can’t remember ever seeing one that shows this part of the route.
> Which I find slightly surprising as quite a few people seem to find this section quite hard.
Well, it is the crux, and on Kipling those two or three moves are substantially harder than anything else on the route.
have a 5*.
It's fine, it's a climbing snap in the moment without too much "crop and rotate". Makes it look pretty tough too.
If you want to see how that can be badly done, look at "Matt Climber" on instagram. I'd link him but he blocked me for calling him out as the horizon of the sea was at about 15 degrees off.
There was once a bi-monthly climbing magazine, Mountain, I think. In one of its last issues it printed several pictures rotated through 90 degrees to make them look impressive at first glance.
Then rather ridiculous on closer inspection . . .
T.
> Main thoughts are Gordon got out of bed on the wrong side today!
He seems to do that most days.
Re the photo, he's certainly overthinking it, its a snapshot not a candidate for inclusion in a coffee table book.
So is that where the infamous peg is/was?
It's a couple metres left of the climber, behind that wee arete.
Well, that's where one was when I led that pitch, but that was a while ago.
T
I honestly don't remember it being that steep Gordon. The crux is the move up and out of the groove, and the steep wall above rather bold. I had no small nuts with me.
As for the photo I actually agree with what you said Gordon and why you voted as such.
Yes, exactly there. I think the remains of it were still there when I did it 1988. But what a brilliant, entertaining and enjoyable crux it is for a route of its standard, and in such an outrageously good position.
OK - this is my memory of it. You go up the groove, slightly overhanging, but you're bridging and it's really surprisingly easy ... despite some dubious flakes. Where it runs out you step right to a good resting place directly below the crux. Which is a slight bulge with lots of small holds, none of which at first seem good enough ... so it's a bit of a boulder problem. You make a few tentative moves up and down, trying to crack the puzzle, and then, wow, you're suddenly committed, and then it all falls into place and you quickly get to the horizontal (well sloping up to the right) line of weakness you've been heading for. You scamper along that and end up on that superb little resting ledge: one of the great classic spots on British rock. What makes that crux so good, imho, is that it has about two or three 'decoy' holds that throw you off the scent initially. I know I've said it before on here, but I remember the crux being so entertainingly 'clever' that I found myself laughing out loud when I reached the resting ledge.
> Yes, exactly there. I think the remains of it were still there when I did it 1988. But what a brilliant, entertaining and enjoyable crux it is for a route of its standard, and in such an outrageously good position.
Thanks.
> But have you done Kipling Groove? It's a slight bulge at the crux, then sets back in balance. Take a look at the Kipling Groove (HVS 5a) shots again. There's a black and white profile shot that's probably slightly exaggerated towards the vertical. I believe the angle of my plate-camera shot is absolutely correct (the camera had a spirit level on it): you can see the line of the flat fields in the background.
Yes, I have done KG a long time ago (just the once?). It's the tilting of your photo that I think is over-done. Take a look at these photos of Pike of Stickle by different photographers and you'll see what I mean about the angle of the strata
https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/6046079
https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/241375
https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/2211525
In your rotated version you have tilted the pike too far forward so that the strata appear to be dipping towards the valley rather than away from it.
That's really helpful, thanks. Yes, I've obviously gone far too far with the tilting. I suppose the runners could just about be explained by body movement, but it still leaves a bit of a puzzle re. the crux bulge. Isn't it very similar in standard to The Thorn at Beeston Tor - perhaps not so steep, but perhaps even a little bit harder? (I did both routes many years ago, so my memory may be playing tricks.) I think we have to accept that wide angle lenses can do some strange things sometimes.
You have a very good memory Gordon. It obviously made more of an impression on you. I must do it again.
The problem is that it's a climbing snap from someone whose primary focus is protecting their mate from falling to their death. It's not going to be artistically perfect - but that's the attraction. It's in the moment, real and unstudied. It's not been taken in circumstances conducive to walking and scrambling around for hours.
It's been taken by a climber with a camera, not a photographer with a belay device.
Of course it could give a misleading impression of the climb - but then so does my mate's beta of 'ah I breezed the crux, it's soft for the grade' when I find myself at the crux having an absolutely nightmare because his hands are bigger than mine!
The second BMC Members Open Forum webinar took place on 20 March. Recently-appointed BMC CEO Paul Ratcliffe, President Andy Syme and Chair Roger Murray shared updates on staff changes, new and ongoing initiatives, insurance policy changes and the current...