"Natural" is relative.

I describe my images as "natural landscapes." As such, one might expect that my goal is to capture places of natural beauty that are pure and unaffected by humans, to hold them up as an example of what we need to protect and why we ought to protect it. To a point, that is true. I do try to get off the beaten path, away from traffic, development and other people, and commune with nature on its own terms, as best I can. I then try to capture these experiences, photographically, to share them with others. However, regrettably, there is now no place on Earth that can claim to be pure and completely unaffected by humans, conditions which most people seem to associate with the state of being "natural." Therefore, what I usually try to do is capture the kinds of experiences I have in places where the effects of humans are not readily apparent. On the other hand, as with this image, I will occasionally photograph places where the presence of humans is obvious. Nevertheless, the dominant subject in my "natural landscape" images will always be nature.

My intent is not so much to show pure, perfect, unadulterated nature as it is to illuminate the relationship between humans and nature. I do this not by showing people in "natural" settings -- which would be far too literal, and would tend to "date" the images -- but by creating images about natural subjects and places, composed in such a way as to imply the presence of a human who is aware of and sensitive to his surroundings. When I compose an image, by choosing a certain lens, locating the camera in a specific spot and aiming it in a particular direction, I create relationships among the visual elements I choose to include in the image. And those relationships are highly subjective. Those relationships exist more in my eye and my brain than they do in nature. This is not nature, per se; it is nature as seen by a human.

I should also say that I intend this particular image to be more than a picture of a tree; it is a picture about a tree. I am telling a story about the tree, as I see it. And that story is, in part, about the relationship between the tree and humans. The meaning I give to the tree is determined to a large extent by its context, and I try to include in the image just enough of the context to convey that meaning. The act of telling a story in a photograph involves a lot visual editing, which is highly subjective. But I believe this is appropriate. By virtue of the fact that no place is completely isolated from human influence, it is appropriate and informative to consider nature in relation to humans. We and the rest of nature evolved within the same system, or global ecology, from the same materials and forces, so we should acknowledge that humans are an integral part of nature -- humans and nature are one and the same. Yet, because humans have come to have such pervasive and disruptive effects on nature, and because nature is essential for our physical and spiritual well-being, I believe it is important to consider the relationship between humans and nature.

In making all of my "natural landscape" images, I am trying to better understand what that relationship is and, more importantly, what that relationship should be. By the same token, it would please me greatly if, to the degree that you respond emotionally and intellectually to my images, you were to channel the resulting energy into better understanding what your relationship with nature should be, and act accordingly.