on and over the ground

I mostly forget an essential fact about the photography I do at the same places, going back over and over; once I arrive I usually wonder 'why am I even coming back, there's nothing here?'. It's a bit deflating. And every time from that complete nothingness I start.

The strip of land I went to last weekend, which may become possibly site d, has some appeal, but I'm not sure I've identified what that is or how to make something of it. I want to find a way in, which is harder than being able to get in, which is currently easy, through a torn down fence.

The use of mirrors in landscape photography is not uncommon, and almost always an appalling misjudgment.  Actually not 'almost always', just always. So it was strange to find myself pondering this evening how feasible it might be to take a mirror along with me next time (if there is a next time) to site d (or what may be site d, if I stick with it.)

The ground was the most interesting thing last weekend. It was devoid, and yet it was choking up with a hugely diverse range of plant life.  Every pace or two there was difference It looked like some kind of desert environment but there was a lot going on. Yet I couldn't bring myself to take more than one or two photos of any of it, since it was too obvious.

So I wondered tonight about placing the camera at ground level, letting it look through what was there, up close, and then what if I got around that restriction and placed the camera on its back, on the soil, with the timer set and place a mirror over it, facing back. So I did a quick indoor test to see what that would entail and I've got an idea of some of the issues now. On a practical level, getting a mirror there in one piece is one thing, and camera survivability after a few hours of placing it in the dirt, may be another.