I’ve been in quite the quandary the past few months because I fear there is a division among some people who consider themselves to be outdoor photographers. On one side there is the old guard of outdoor photographers who desire to keep the shooting pure. It’s not outdoor photography unless it’s a photograph of only nature.
Sure, I can be on board with that!
However, you also have the young guns coming up and changing the meaning of “outdoor photography” to include “adventure photography” as well, meaning there is some sort of adventure going on in the composition that may include people, sports, or gear. The rise of social media has given adventure photography a huge platform to flourish because it easily connects these adventure shooters with a large audience instantly. The photographs often inspire as well as make people jealous they aren’t living your life however lavish it may be.
I can be on board with that too!
So, why is there a divide? To get down to what I truly believe about the argument, I looked up the definition of outdoor photography and this is what it read....
https://www.outdoorphotographyguide.com/article/adventure-photography/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=A6197&vsoid=A6197
