Digital BW, The Print

Your question suggests that there is some kind of right way take landscape photographs.  In my view (and the view of many others) photography is an art form and, as such, there are no inviolable rules.  Many people today are using Holga's and other pinhole cameras to capture images where nothing is in focus.  Many of these images are highly prized for their artistic and creative content.  A successful image is one in which you, the artist, are able to convey a sense of mood or feeling that finds a connection with the viewer.
   
  On the other hand, many camera clubs insist on spreading the impression that there are only a limited number of things that are permissible in "good" photography.  Yet, if you'll look at some of  todays most honored work, you'll find that the artist who created it followed his or own muse and did it their own way.  The work of Maggie Taylor, for instance, is held in collections all over the world and her work is done with a scanner!  Her husband, Jerry Uelsmann, is even more widely collected and breaks even more rules.  
   
  My point is, if you feel that your artistic vision is better expressed with the trees in the background out of focus, who is to say that that is wrong?  The only questions that a knowledgeable art critic will ask are: Does it work? and does it have an emotional impact?  Long before you show your work to anyone else though, you should ask yourself: Does this work for me?  That, in the final analysis, is the true measure of whether your picture is "successful".




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]