Alan,
Yes, without wishing to diminish their skills, BH and TH are both working in the tradition of the idealised landscape. Perhaps we see the landscape as a place of innocence and joy, and so it may be.
Sherlock Holmes took a different view. He was travelling through Clapham Junction and remarked on the tallest buildings at the time, the new Board Schools – beacons (or perhaps lighthouses) of hope. We can still share that townscape today. In the town, he said, there was always someone to overhear the screams of an abused child, whereas in an isolated cottage... I paraphrase of course. And sadly, we now know that it isn't true.
You might find that Mr Isaacs offers a different kind of approach, even if it's only a different kind of idealisation.
It's a coincidence that all these use colour; it's not a personal preference.
Ian,
If I may, I'll quote an anecdote from a different field. When Dave Brubeck was studying (counterpoint?) under
Darius Milhaud, he relates that his teacher asked why he had used a certain chord. "Because it sounds good!" was Dave's answer. He was told that that was not enough, that there had to be reasoning and logic behind his choices.
I cannot disagree with any of your suggestions, it's almost a duplicate of a list I might compile, but I'd be delighted to know why.
Let me make a start. I can partly date my liking for TJC from emptying a bottle of brandy with him while we exchanged suggestions for improving the world. Sadly, none of our proposals have survived the morning after.
As far as I can tell, he is not photographing attractive scenes at all, even though some beautiful images may emerge, but reacting to the sensation of being there. He did see things in my work that I'd not noticed.
I realise that this is a fairly shallow analysis, but this post is trying to turn into a novel