Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: John Kavanaugh on November 06, 2022, 09:25:28 AM
-
The taking, posting and sharing of photographs has obviously deteriorated most public experiences. How much do photo opportunities add to the cost of building and maintaining golf courses? My research shows 20%. Close to the cost of a caddie before gratuity.
-
Photography and social media has definitely increased the desire from architects / clients / public for “wow” holes to be built, prioritising views and features over simple strategy or even a flow in the routing.
-
Agreed, but it’s not such a new phenomenon. Forty years ago Pete Dye lamented to me that clients wanted “18 postcards”. [That was also a subtle dig at Pine Valley, which used to sell a set of postcards of every hole.]
But Americans have tried to make courses prettier than their British counterparts since Hugh Wilson.
-
Can’t comment on the cost to build but there’s certainly a “must go there” factor when photos of holes and courses are posted both herein on the likes of social media etc and a “my course should be conditioned to that standard” (cost) factor too.
Atb
-
I like this thread John.
Courses I visit that have been photographed extensively routinely look different. Perfect late day lighting combined with over saturation are the Botox and airbrushing of golf course photography. At the moment I’m really enjoying the unaltered photos on twitter from some architects and supers at new courses. Shows them in a different light… ;)
-
Can’t comment on the cost to build but there’s certainly a “must go there” factor when photos of holes and courses are posted both herein on the likes of social media etc and a “my course should be conditioned to that standard” (cost) factor too.
Atb
That "must go there" factor is demand being driven from effective marketing created by photography and platforms to share it on. If the fixed cost of architecture as claimed from "research" then I'd imagine it's well worth those additional costs if the course can be more profitable in the long run.
And it isn't really fair to say that photography is driving up the costs if that is really the case. I'd love to hear an architect's perspective, but wouldn't any additional design costs and decisions related to making a course more photogenic be a decision the owner makes based on their tastes?
I'm sure that a talented photographer, such as our own Evan Schiller featured here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsA507uqm9U) would be able to make the most of a course that is not built with instagram posts in mind.
-
20 years ago we complained because Augusta would come on to our TV’s once a year exhibiting “perfect” conditioning. Now it is an everyday occurrence on our phones. What’s the point of paying for hand raked bunkers if not to hide sandpro trails from curious eyes?
-
20 years ago we complained because Augusta would come on to our TV’s once a year exhibiting “perfect” conditioning. Now it is an everyday occurrence on our phones. What’s the point of paying for hand raked bunkers if not to hide sandpro trails from curious eyes?
I don't see ANGC conditions everywhere or exclusively, but for thought experiment even if I did... does advancement in agronomy over the last 20 years not get any credit either? My research says it counts for at least 60% of the excellently conditioned courses in my instagram feed. ;)
-
I was an early hater of turf research. Then I moved to Florida and found the greens to be better than Midwestern bent. Sure it cost me more, but it’s worth it.
I would put the cost incurred by embracing the turf-industrial complex to be slightly less than that of photography. Drone footage being the tie breaker.
-
I would put the cost incurred by embracing the turf-industrial complex to be slightly less than that of photography. Drone footage being the tie breaker.
You should go to the Golf Course Superintendents' Association trade show, just for a day. I think it would cause you to revise your estimate. ;)
-
I went to the GCSAA a few years back. Met Brad Klein, Joe Hancock and the great Dan Lucas all for the first and only time. Hate the crime, love the super.
For the first time in my life I don’t know the names of the well dressed young men who manage the turf where I play. I’ve never been happier.
Is the celebrity super a thing of the past?
-
https://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,71456.0.html (https://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,71456.0.html)
You can’t look at these art for arts sake pictures in the above thread about the 21 best and not see something drastically wrong. Even LC is playing ketchup with the filter whores.
-
As a golf course photographer not mentioned by Alex Miller, I cannot speak to what my impact has on costs in the golf industry.
There was a time when LCL was the go-to photographer in the western hemisphere. Jon Cavalier got his start here, then branched out to LinksGems on Instagram. His work was then gobbled up by print magazines. Jon's early work was enhanced tremendously, and I recall the author of this thread calling him out for it. Jon, like all of us, improved.
Joe Bausch has done great work for years, and has resisted the siren cry of enhancement. A young, landscape photographer would do well to study his work.
I have been hired by a few clubs and courses over the years, and I have my own method for thorough shooting of a course. I don't drone, so all my work is land-based.
I do my best to not botox a golf hole, unless I am doing it for art's sake (and I state explicitly that I have Warholed it.) If a photo is awesome, but the coloring is improperly poor (the vagaries of lens/body interaction) I will gently massage it.
I am open to any critiques of my work on the @buffalogolfer instagram feed. As photographers, we are grateful for any insight. We certainly don't wish to contribute to the obliteration of golf.
-
I learned something living within unrelenting natural beauty for the last month. The only golf holes who don’t disappoint visually compared to their images are those whose surroundings inspire.
-
I can't believe the 20%
-
Proper/creative photography/media of a hole or holes could possibly INCREASE the revenue at a golf course. I am still amazed at so many courses, both public and private, that do not showcase "the golf" but rather weddings and stuff like that on their websites and their social media, assuming they even have it.
-
As a golf course photographer not mentioned by Alex Miller, I cannot speak to what my impact has on costs in the golf industry.
There was a time when LCL was the go-to photographer in the western hemisphere. Jon Cavalier got his start here, then branched out to LinksGems on Instagram. His work was then gobbled up by print magazines. Jon's early work was enhanced tremendously, and I recall the author of this thread calling him out for it. Jon, like all of us, improved.
Joe Bausch has done great work for years, and has resisted the siren cry of enhancement. A young, landscape photographer would do well to study his work.
I have been hired by a few clubs and courses over the years, and I have my own method for thorough shooting of a course. I don't drone, so all my work is land-based.
I do my best to not botox a golf hole, unless I am doing it for art's sake (and I state explicitly that I have Warholed it.) If a photo is awesome, but the coloring is improperly poor (the vagaries of lens/body interaction) I will gently massage it.
I am open to any critiques of my work on the @buffalogolfer instagram feed. As photographers, we are grateful for any insight. We certainly don't wish to contribute to the obliteration of golf.
Just wanted to say the video about Evan happened to pop up on my youtube right before I saw this thread. A tremendous amount of talent is here so I don't want to make it seem like there was a reason for the specific shoutout. Also I think I can speak for many when I say I'm grateful for the content creation!
-
I can't believe the 20%
Start out imagining that cameras never existed and you get to 20% very quickly on maintenance alone.
-
Proper/creative photography/media of a hole or holes could possibly INCREASE the revenue at a golf course. I am still amazed at so many courses, both public and private, that do not showcase "the golf" but rather weddings and stuff like that on their websites and their social media, assuming they even have it.
To your point, I'm always amazed at how many private club websites I visit where such little photographic attenion is given to the golf course, which should be promoted as the crown jewel.
-
It's funny to think that while Augusta National might be one of the most photographed courses in history, many of the elements that the modern golfing public looks for in a stunning photograph will simply not be present in a picture of Augusta. There are no ragged edge bunkers, no varying textures or contrasts across the ground cover, no million dollar views. its simple shaped greens, tees, and bunkers across a uniform field of green with a backdrop of pines and the occasional flowering bush. Yet so little of that matters when someone views a picture of the tight drive up the 18th, or the 12th green perched above the creek.
Good photography can help boost the look of a course as much as good course design can help boost the look of the photography. While the aesthetic value, and thus photographic value, of a piece of property can impact the placement and design of a course, it would seem doubtful that any architect would place visual interest of a hole over strategy value and playability.
-
I just returned from Bandon, where the scenic values were off the charts. I don't know whether or not photography has driven up costs, but beauty certainly makes a difference in the enjoyability of a round.
-
I just returned from Bandon, where the scenic values were off the charts. I don't know whether or not photography has driven up costs, but beauty certainly makes a difference in the enjoyability of a round.
Given everywhere you have played it's obvious that photographs don't do Bandon justice or you would have gone years ago.
-
I can't believe the 20%
it's kind of like the 15 yard gain in driver distance from the latest technology...
I'm not buying it, the cost of architecture increasing.
Mike Strantz was an artist first and then a gca... I don't think his courses cost more because of photography.
Now the costs that the retail golfer will bear, is another thing...
-
Proper/creative photography/media of a hole or holes could possibly INCREASE the revenue at a golf course. I am still amazed at so many courses, both public and private, that do not showcase "the golf" but rather weddings and stuff like that on their websites and their social media, assuming they even have it.
To your point, I'm always amazed at how many private club websites I visit where such little photographic attenion is given to the golf course, which should be promoted as the crown jewel.
But are those private clubs actually trying to promote the golf course? Or is the web site just a service for the members? I know some people are "always selling" but a really good club doesn't need to put out personal ads.
-
The whole idea of creating a beautiful golf course is certainly demonstrated by Kingsbarns. As I understand it the property was flat and thousands and thousands of cubic yards of dirt were brought in to build the course which the public believes to be a links course and spectacularly beautiful and worth it to pay the highest, or second highest, greens fees of any course in the UK. I am sure that many of us would not consider paying much to play that course when there are so many other true links courses which were built over the course of hundreds of years which one can play for far less. But ask most American golfers their must play courses in the UK and it is right at the top of their list no matter what the cost. Why - because it is beautiful and there are so many photographs of how beautiful it is. So how much of its greens fee of 345 pounds is attributable to photography I cannot say but I would guess that it would be at least 20%.
-
I played Kingsbarns out of respect to Bob Huntley. I don’t recall it being pretty and just google imaged the course. Nothing but drone shots. 275lbs is a realistic price without the social media dregs.
-
But are those private clubs actually trying to promote the golf course? Or is the web site just a service for the members? I know some people are "always selling" but a really good club doesn't need to put out personal ads.
That's a great question. While I'd say nearly all feature a hero image of the course among other banner images that scroll across the top of their homepage, when you go to the actual "Golf" section of the website it's amazing what few images there are of the course on some, while others will have flyover videos and or images of every hole. Thus, it begs the question what some are trying to sell if the golf course isn't being featured as the centerpiece of the club experience?
-
But are those private clubs actually trying to promote the golf course? Or is the web site just a service for the members? I know some people are "always selling" but a really good club doesn't need to put out personal ads.
That's a great question. While I'd say nearly all feature a hero image of the course among other banner images that scroll across the top of their homepage, when you go to the actual "Golf" section of the website it's amazing what few images there are of the course on some, while others will have flyover videos and or images of every hole. Thus, it begs the question what some are trying to sell if the golf course isn't being featured as the centerpiece of the club experience?
Mike-I think there are a fair amount of clubs that are trying to market a lifestyle over the golf course itself.
-
Mike-I think there are a fair amount of clubs that are trying to market a lifestyle over the golf course itself.
Agree and I see this becoming a trend with many destination golf resorts as well.
-
https://www.prairiedunes.com/ (https://www.prairiedunes.com/)
Is this what you guys want? Feels plastic.
-
https://www.prairiedunes.com/ (https://www.prairiedunes.com/)
Is this what you guys want? Feels plastic.
Agreed. Why do you need to oversell a golf course like Prairie Dunes?
-
https://www.prairiedunes.com/ (https://www.prairiedunes.com/)
Is this what you guys want? Feels plastic.
To me, the copy calling it "A little bit of Scotland..." is the bigger head-scratcher than the photography, which no one would ever confuse with Scotland. Why not lean into your unique location in the American heartland, rather than invoke someplace thousands of miles away?
-
Here is a complete list of Top 100 courses I have played that are not aesthetically stunning in some way:
-
-
-
-
https://www.moma.org/collection/works/78455 (https://www.moma.org/collection/works/78455)
I can’t believe that the above depicts coastal Maine. Looks like a young girl studying a green site in Kansas. This makes me want to get out and discover life through nature.
-
Not just Scotland, but Australia as well!!
Who the hello did they overpay for that branding?
We're not in Kansas anymore, Toto.
https://www.prairiedunes.com/ (https://www.prairiedunes.com/)
Is this what you guys want? Feels plastic.
To me, the copy calling it "A little bit of Scotland..." is the bigger head-scratcher than the photography, which no one would ever confuse with Scotland. Why not lean into your unique location in the American heartland, rather than invoke someplace thousands of miles away?
-
Not just Scotland, but Australia as well!!
Who the hello did they overpay for that branding?
We're not in Kansas anymore, Toto.
https://www.prairiedunes.com/ (https://www.prairiedunes.com/)
Is this what you guys want? Feels plastic.
To me, the copy calling it "A little bit of Scotland..." is the bigger head-scratcher than the photography, which no one would ever confuse with Scotland. Why not lean into your unique location in the American heartland, rather than invoke someplace thousands of miles away?
Don't forget New Zealand. Damn drones make the great look ordinary, and the ordinary great. Everything being equal is what we all want or need.
-
John,
I think the tradition of quasi false adverting has caught up with golf. Cause the golfer will sure as shit almost never see the course from a drone view when playing it.
But its nothing new. I recall reading an article several years ago that many food commercials actually show inedible versions of the product to make them look more appealing. Or like those Axe body spray commercials where after using it you suddenly become irresistible to every female within a 5 mile radius.
-
Damn drones make the great look ordinary, and the ordinary great. Everything being equal is what we all want or need.
Among many quotables on this thread, this one hits.
-
John,
I think the tradition of quasi false adverting has caught up with golf. Cause the golfer will sure as shit almost never see the course from a drone view when playing it.
But its nothing new. I recall reading an article several years ago that many food commercials actually show inedible versions of the product to make them look more appealing. Or like those Axe body spray commercials where after using it you suddenly become irresistible to every female within a 5 mile radius.
We can't control Madison Ave but we have been given the option of controlling ourselves. One picture, from the ground, per round.
-
John,
I think the tradition of quasi false adverting has caught up with golf. Cause the golfer will sure as shit almost never see the course from a drone view when playing it.
But its nothing new. I recall reading an article several years ago that many food commercials actually show inedible versions of the product to make them look more appealing. Or like those Axe body spray commercials where after using it you suddenly become irresistible to every female within a 5 mile radius.
We can't control Madison Ave but we have been given the option of controlling ourselves. One picture, from the ground, per round.
Barney,
I like that last bit...more and more I find myself keeping the phone in the bag when I play.
P.S. If I want to get a more realistic view of a place, I look up the pictures as they show in Google Maps. And you'll find something intriguing stuff. Like this one at Harding Park, a true master class in cart path routing...
https://www.google.com/maps/place/TPC+Harding+Park/@37.7251376,-122.4906841,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m8!1e2!3m6!1sAF1QipN6sc_S1NiNkt82PAQlSDUdm_U7zHcKhyyVPX6O!2e10!3e12!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipN6sc_S1NiNkt82PAQlSDUdm_U7zHcKhyyVPX6O%3Dw203-h114-k-no!7i5376!8i3024!4m15!1m7!3m6!1s0x80859a6d00690021:0x4a501367f076adff!2sSan+Francisco,+CA!3b1!8m2!3d37.7749295!4d-122.4194155!3m6!1s0x808f7d09c0e36e93:0x7ca372998950b434!8m2!3d37.7248228!4d-122.4932023!14m1!1BCgIgAQ
-
Proper/creative photography/media of a hole or holes could possibly INCREASE the revenue at a golf course. I am still amazed at so many courses, both public and private, that do not showcase "the golf" but rather weddings and stuff like that on their websites and their social media, assuming they even have it.
To your point, I'm always amazed at how many private club websites I visit where such little photographic attenion is given to the golf course, which should be promoted as the crown jewel.
[size=78%]But are those private clubs actually trying to promote the golf course? Or is the web site just a service for the members? I know some people are "always selling" but a really good club doesn't need to put out personal ads.[/size]
Well established, very private courses more than likely do not have a need to advertise. Their websites are mainly for the members, not the general public.
However, many semi-private or pubic golf courses do have a need for self promotion, and they (a majority of them) drop the ball on this.
-
Here is a complete list of Top 100 courses I have played that are not aesthetically stunning in some way:
-
-
-
What is aesthetically stunning about Southern Hills?
-
For 100+ years golf courses have used whatever media forms are available to them at the time to promote themselves. We have seen hundreds of old articles here from newspapers & magazines announcing the formation & development of a new golf course/club. Invariably the articles describe the new course as better or the best of its kind.
Sometimes the articles had photos. Sometimes they did not. Before the internet/digital age, golf courses/clubs had glossy brochures with full page photos to announce/promote their presence. Some took out adverts with photos in golf magazines. Some even resorted to "infommercials"on TV to drum up business.
Now that we are well into the 21st century, it should be no surprise (and certainly no cause for concern) that golf course operators & developers take advantage of all the media options available to them to promote their courses.
To claim that photography has driven up the cost of architecture 20% is nonsense, as is the so-called "research" behind that claim.
-
John,
I have only played Southern Hills one time and it was before the restoration/renovation work. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder but for a parkland golf course, it looks pretty stunning to me especially in the late afternoon with the shadows and backdrops.
-
That’s fair. It’s been fun going through those 100 photos used in the Golf article. Took me three tries to get through the list.
-
Here is a complete list of Top 100 courses I have played that are not aesthetically stunning in some way:
-
-
-
What is aesthetically stunning about Southern Hills?
I love PH2 and Somerset Hills but except for a couple of holes, neither is visually “stunning.” Nor are Bandon Trails or Pasatiempo (not a top 100 for JK). Outside the US, Swinley Forest, St. George’s Hill, and Woking (top 100 in my book) are not either.
-
Ira,
With all due respect, Somerset Hills is stunning especially on a clear summer day. I play there a lot (including the member guest) and it is amazingly beautiful. I wish I could post photos. I would also disagree about all the rest you mentioned all of which I have played. There are photos from every one of them that I would be thrilled to have hanging in my study!
-
Here is a complete list of Top 100 courses I have played that are not aesthetically stunning in some way:
-
-
-
What is aesthetically stunning about Southern Hills?
I love PH2 and Somerset Hills but except for a couple of holes, neither is visually “stunning.” Nor are Bandon Trails or Pasatiempo (not a top 100 for JK). Outside the US, Swinley Forest, St. George’s Hill, and Woking (top 100 in my book) are not either.
Hello limb, welcome aboard. Love that you took some chances there.
-
Here is a complete list of Top 100 courses I have played that are not aesthetically stunning in some way:
-
-
-
What is aesthetically stunning about Southern Hills?
I love PH2 and Somerset Hills but except for a couple of holes, neither is visually “stunning.” Nor are Bandon Trails or Pasatiempo (not a top 100 for JK). Outside the US, Swinley Forest, St. George’s Hill, and Woking (top 100 in my book) are not either.
Hello limb, welcome aboard. Love that you took some chances there.
Thanks, but Mark and I have disagreed many times before. I concede that he is a far better golfer and has played more courses more times, but I can find great photos from every course I ever played (including the Cook County Park District courses on which I grew up) especially in the Spring or Fall. Several great photos does not make a course “visually stunning”. However, more importantly, I do not believe that a course has to be so in order to be a great course which is the clear implication of his OP.
-
Ira,
This it why rankings are sooo subjective. You for example look at Somerset Hills and see it visually very differently then I do yet we both love the design. Neither of us are right or wrong. I get goose bumps thinking about some of the cross course vistas and then you have a hole like #2 that just blows my mind! It is one of the most visually stunning holes in all of golf.
We have talked about this many times before; the list is very short of great but ugly golf holes let alone great but ugly entire golf courses. [/size][size=78%] [/size]
-
Mark,
In all fairness, I think it goes without saying if you catch the light just right in the dawn/dusk hours, you can find those magical glimpses on most courses.
P.S. I thought Pasatiempo was a magical journey in my one and only play years ago, especially on the back 9...in the middle of the day, so its certainly very subjective.
-
Here is a complete list of Top 100 courses I have played that are not aesthetically stunning in some way:
-
-
-
What is aesthetically stunning about Southern Hills?
I love PH2 and Somerset Hills but except for a couple of holes, neither is visually “stunning.” Nor are Bandon Trails or Pasatiempo (not a top 100 for JK). Outside the US, Swinley Forest, St. George’s Hill, and Woking (top 100 in my book) are not either.
It depends on the person and how one sees the course. P2 is a beautiful course, so is Swinley. Woking and SGH have their moments. All are attractive enough.
BTW.. I don't buy JakaB's rant. It's the latest in his 10 year war against photos. Marketing of all sorts has gone hand in glove with the explosion of golf over 100 years ago.
Ciao
-
Sean,
Thanks. It has been at least 10 years. I’ve had fun and won some battles.
-
I think his last photo rager was about JC and his embellishment of images.
-
I think his last photo rager was about JC and his embellishment of images.
That stupid picture of the flag through the tunnel is on the clubs web page. Lost that one.
-
Here is the future of all of this. Now we will never know if this photo ever happened.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDd3a6o9U4o
I plan to take a photo of my backyard and turn it into the Road Hole.
-
Agreed, but it’s not such a new phenomenon. Forty years ago Pete Dye lamented to me that clients wanted “18 postcards”. [That was also a subtle dig at Pine Valley, which used to sell a set of postcards of every hole.]
But Americans have tried to make courses prettier than their British counterparts since Hugh Wilson.
Tom,
You right it is not a new phenomenon. When Robert Trent Jones built the Cashen at Ballybunion he had Kevin Frost do paintings of all 18 holes.
Would love to know what happened to them.
-
Thank God that we all can’t paint. I’d hate to go to a concert and see a sea of easels in front of me.
-
Thank God that we all can’t paint. I’d hate to go to a concert and see a sea of easels in front of me.
John,
Kevin Frost was an art teacher in the County Kerry school system and was also about a 2 handicap when Mr. Jones built the Cashen.
Kevin did the paintings for Mr. Jones and also hit balls for him during the design phase of the project. The funny thing was Mr.Jones couldn’t walk the property, so the club put him on a horse to be led around the property. I think my friend Kevin had some help on that!
-
Kevin did the paintings for Mr. Jones and also hit balls for him during the design phase of the project. The funny thing was Mr.Jones couldn’t walk the property, so the club put him on a horse to be led around the property. I think my friend Kevin had some help on that!
Wow! How are there no pictures of Mr. Jones on horseback out there in the dunes? That would be an all-timer.
-
Kevin did the paintings for Mr. Jones and also hit balls for him during the design phase of the project. The funny thing was Mr.Jones couldn’t walk the property, so the club put him on a horse to be led around the property. I think my friend Kevin had some help on that!
Wow! How are there no pictures of Mr. Jones on horseback out there in the dunes? That would be an all-timer.
Tim you should ask Kevin to do a painting!
-
Kevin did the paintings for Mr. Jones and also hit balls for him during the design phase of the project. The funny thing was Mr.Jones couldn’t walk the property, so the club put him on a horse to be led around the property. I think my friend Kevin had some help on that!
Wow! How are there no pictures of Mr. Jones on horseback out there in the dunes? That would be an all-timer.
Tim you should ask Kevin to do a painting!
Tony,
Long ago Kevin did a painting for me of #17 on the Cashen. Love it.
Kevin has agreed to do a painting of Old Barnwell for me that I will give to Nick Schreiber as a gift to the club, but that is probably 12-24 months away.
Tom,
I’ve heard the story of Mr. Jones on the horse a few times, but never heard about any picture taken, maybe because apparently he fell asleep on the horse a few times, so I was told.