Here in California during the Spring all the photographers go crazy looking for wildflowers. While wildflowers are great I can’t help but think a flowerless field is equally if not more attractive. A field such as this is quite a busy subject to photograph, yet due to our exposure to grass on an everyday basis we seem to lump it all together into one object.
Back in college chemistry there was the concept of the “Avagadro number”, a value of 6.022×10^23 or 602,200,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms in 12 grams of carbon. “A mole is defined as this number of “entities” (usually, atoms or molecules) of any material.” (courtesy of Wikipedia) In one of my lectures a philosophical if not rhetorical question was asked by my professor, “How many moles of sand are on the beach?” The concept of this value was mind boggling to me. Looking at this picture less wildflowers I’m left to ponder how many moles of blades of grass are in this field? on this hillside? in this state park? in California? To think how much life this represents and how much life resides in these fields is awe inspiring to me.
[tags]California, field, grass, sky, sun, spring, springtime, stock photo, landscape, photography[/tags]
Jim… once again we seem to barking up the same metaphorical tree. Although this one is BW, you might see a similar concept at work – especially the inclusion of the sun in the photo:
http://www.gdanmitchell.com/wpg2-3?g2_itemId=1241
Take care,
Dan
(Nice redesign, by the way – you are encouraging me to buckle down and do the same at mysite.)
@Dan great photo. The long shadow of the tree is particularly nice. This area in the spring is particularly beautiful.
Certainly a very dramatic image Jim. Proof that landscape photography is more than sunsets and out-of-this-world scenery.
Pingback: mole