June 2026 Theme Thread: Such a Beautiful Landscape

Hello,

Your reaction is really strange—I don’t see where you got the idea that I was making a big deal out of this...

I simply asked the thread starter to clarify whether urban landscapes were accepted so we wouldn’t go off-topic. That request doesn’t seem unreasonable at all. I’m a geography teacher and can assure you that a landscape isn’t *just* natural. An urban landscape is just as much a landscape and can even be "so beautiful."

Your classic definition doesn’t reflect any reality beyond your very subjective opinion. For proof, here’s the much more objective Larousse definition: 1. A spatial expanse, natural or transformed by humans, that has a certain visual or functional identity: Forest, urban, or industrial landscape. 2. The overall view from a given point: From my window, the landscape is rooftops and chimneys.

Philippebrg did post a photo as an example, but that initial image doesn’t necessarily represent the full diversity of the theme. He clarified things because it’s his theme, and that’s great. I don’t think he felt like I was making a big deal out of my question.

And honestly, your reaction is even more surprising given that you started a weird debate about the definition of stairs and ladders in the last theme—which was *way* less ambiguous...

Let’s just say you must’ve woken up on the wrong side of the bed this morning and will probably see my comment in a different light later.

Many people are fascinated, for example, by deserts or Antarctica. Or even high mountains. By shifting dunes or mystical rock formations, etc. etc. In the end, features that shape a landscape. But a lot of these landscapes are mostly amazing for tourists, so they can say they’ve been there. They aren’t exactly welcoming to live in, though. And some landscapes are stunning from above—but not necessarily when you’re right in the middle of them.

Oh, really? Well, that’s news to me!

Happy photographing!

You really have no idea what a "such beautiful landscape" is? Hard to believe. I think P.’s three photos speak for themselves and need no further explanation. And no need to make a big deal out of it...

What a surprising response! You have your own idea of "such a beautiful landscape," which, thankfully, isn’t everyone’s🙁 For example, I find that the paved road in "your" Swiss landscape ruins its "natural" side. I prefer Pagaljavab’s Indian urban landscape.

Unless you don’t quite grasp the meaning of that phrase, it seems like *you’re* the one making a big deal out of it.😏

Unless you don’t exactly know what this expression means, it seems like you’re the one here making a big deal out of it.

I almost added it to my message—thanks! I guess people who make a big deal out of things end up seeing drama everywhere 😄

"Making a big deal out of it"—now there’s a great future photo contest theme!

Clever, that staircase that seems to lead nowhere but actually takes you to the top step of the podium. 😉

In Lesotho, The Kingdom in the Sky. It's the only country where the entire territory sits above 1,400 meters.

Gorgeous, it would definitely fit in the contest.....

I’ve come to the conclusion that people who make a huge deal out of things end up seeing drama everywhere 😄 "Making a huge deal out of it"—now there’s a great future photo contest theme!

Speaking of which, I wanted to suggest to Pagal and Jean-Michel A Dish of Corsican Mussels:

- Corsican mussels from Diana Pond - Thin slices of Prisutu (Corsican cured ham) - Sauce made with Corsican sheep’s cheese and little bacon bits

With that, you forget EVERYTHING—even photo contests... 😉

Enjoy your meal!

(Restaurant Le Listincu, at Col du Listincone near Ajaccio—a place to discover)



...

If we go back to the contest description:

I suggest we share the beauty of the outside world through landscape photos. Whether they're desert, sea, countryside, or mountain scenes, with or without other elements (people, buildings, animals...), they should make us want to dive in.

It seemed clear that landscapes should mainly feature nature ???

Secondary elements are explicitly mentioned: animals, people, buildings—and they’re optional.

That said, I get that it’s trickier for some participants, like those focusing more on people or cities—those are tough for me.😉

(But food, now that I can do! !)

with or without the presence of other elements (characters, buildings

From there, it’s totally possible to imagine that Philippebrg opened the theme with landscapes that include... buildings, right? I also think that the collective imagination tends to mistakenly assume a landscape is fundamentally natural (see the Larousse definition I attached). That’s why I don’t agree with those who say the theme’s title made it so obvious.

Anyway, I was just asking. The photo of Udaipur I suggested still has a natural background despite the buildings in front. And considering the real definition of "landscape," I really don’t see anything outrageous about my request! That’s what the discussion thread is for. What a fuss over a perfectly legitimate question! 😅

Besides, I understand it’s harder for some participants—like me, since topics focused on people or cities are tough.

It wasn’t so much about difficulty as making sure I wasn’t off-topic! Given my photography skills, it doesn’t matter—everything’s hard for me anyway! 😂

(But food, now that’s my thing! LOL)

We’re on the same page.

Actually, I wanted to suggest to Pagal and Jean-Michel a "Un Plat de Moules à la Corse": - Corsican mussels from the Diana pond - Thin slices of Prisutu. - Sauce with Corsican sheep cheese and small bacon bits.

Oh my, it brings a tear to my eye 🥲

@Unamilanese

Photo 3: Auvergne (no idea where, I was lost on a tiny road LOL)

Looks like it’s the Château de Murol in Puy-de-Dôme.

There have always been "mix-ups" with the contests.

If you read all the threads, you’ll see there are often requests for clarification—requests that could turn into a real scrap between competitors...

Ah, finally some atmosphere here 😄 I really like the Corsican table—just missing a little glass of Clos Canarelli!

There have always been "blunders" in contests.

I’ve organized contests myself where I didn’t fully grasp the topic The more questions people asked, the deeper I dug myself in!

Philippe’s statement left little ambiguity, either in the written description or the example photos. We clearly understood that the main element had to be natural, and other elements (characters, buildings, animals...) would be secondary. But you could also imagine a landscape resembling a snowy mountain, a beach with a few people, an old street, a village, a road with sheep (Corsican landscape, here we go again 😛), a forest, a lake... In short, something that makes you want to dive right in.

Uhhh, on Corsican roads, it's more like pigs than sheep...😛

(I didn’t get your story about the old street or village at all ???)

An old street running through a village… or a village that’s part of a landscape… are those landscape photos or not?

The little village we see or sense—I get it.

But the street? I can’t really picture a street surrounded by a landscape.

Do you have an example photo?

Philippe’s statement left little room for ambiguity(...) We got it

Still not agreeing... Now it’s clear—Philippebrg did clarify his theme. But I’ll just refer one last time to the definition of "landscape," not the subjective feeling of "we," but the dictionary’s, and reiterate that my request wasn’t absurd at all. It simply called for a straightforward clarification from the initiator (which he did provide), not a pointless debate... Oddly, no one criticized those who turned it into an absurd debate about stairs and ladders...

The little village you see or sense—I get it.

But the street? I can’t really picture a street surrounded by a landscape.

Do you have an example photo?

Nope. I’m just imagining it (and I’m also being a bit stubborn ) Truth is, I don’t have much on hand—I’m terrible at landscape photos…

Good evening,

Your reaction is very strange,

and I find your reaction even stranger. I had no intention of offending you at all. But confronting me with insinuations and false allegations doesn’t help. I’m not blaming you for partly misunderstanding me—it happens, which is why we can discuss it...

I simply asked the thread starter to clarify whether urban landscapes were accepted to avoid going off-topic. That request doesn’t seem absurd to me at all.

Indeed, such a request isn’t absurd. But it wasn’t me who used the word “absurd.” I said—or rather, meant to say: given that what the contest organizer expects from us, as perfectly illustrated by the three photos, is clear and requires no further explanation, your request is therefore unnecessary. That’s all I said... And if I understand Phillipebrg correctly, he doesn’t really expect photos showing urban landscapes...

I’m a geography teacher and can assure you that a landscape isn’t necessarily just natural. An urban landscape is a landscape in its own right and can even be "so beautiful."

I’m a teacher myself, but that doesn’t mean much, if anything at all. I’m not contradicting you. It’s the ideal image, sometimes overly idealized. It doesn’t have to be that way. That’s true. Take forests, for example, which are often romanticized. But reality is quite different... Of course, an urban landscape can be beautiful too—you must have misunderstood me...

Your classic definition doesn’t correspond to any reality other than your very subjective opinion.

Goodness, that’s not my definition ("In the classic sense, one primarily understands wild nature outside urban areas")... And opinions are always subjective, of course...

And above all, your reaction is all the more surprising since you started a curious debate about the definition of stairs and ladders in the previous theme, which was undeniably far less ambiguous...

I started a strange debate in May’s contest?! Thanks for letting me know. But let’s be serious: I didn’t start anything. It was Sinforosa who asked Raga if the theme included ladders. Raga replied that, a priori, no... Later, I contacted Raga (msg. no. 9) to ask if my photo no. 2 was acceptable. Raga didn’t answer, so I asked VF to remove my photo. That’s all. Is that what you call “starting a debate”? Go back to that contest and reread it...

Conclusion: you believe Phillipebrg’s instructions aren’t clear or leave room for other interpretations, which is why you find your request justified; for my part, I think his instructions are clear and (barely) open to confusion, which is why your request is unnecessary... And if you want to continue the discussion, you’ll have to find someone else. I don’t need it...

No hard feelings.

Good night, hgb

to point out that my request really wasn’t absurd and just called for a simple clarification from the initiator

You were totally right, and your question made me second-guess myself. In fact, I followed up by asking Philippe if a photo of a palm grove with a village would be accepted.