News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Pictures from Montana (not)
« on: March 31, 2006, 08:25:44 PM »
As it turns out, Larry Lambrecht was at Rock Creek last week, taking pictures of the site early in construction so we would have some before-and-after shots.

I looked through them in the office today, but I couldn't find any that I wanted to post.  I did, however, have an epiphany about why I couldn't find any pictures worth posting.  I am certain most people here couldn't make heads or tails of the pictures.

Even when the pictures are taken from the eventual tee with a flag on the eventual green, there is so much visual clutter in a broad landscape that it's rarely possible for the outsider to focus on the parts that matter.  The sense of scale on a raw piece of land is difficult to form -- most people think a flag in the distance is much farther away than it really is -- and there aren't any man-made visual clues about where to focus your eye for a landing area or a green.  

If you looked at these pictures from Montana, you'd be distracted by a rock outcropping or a tree or something, and you wouldn't see the hole.  It was the same for me when looking at Larry's pictures, even though when I'm there on the ground it's like the course is just laying there waiting to be grassed ... because I know where I'm going.

And besides, even if I did want to share the pictures, I don't know how to post them!   :D

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #1 on: March 31, 2006, 08:33:58 PM »
Man, I got a brand new BB gun, but my mom said I can't let anyone else play with it cuz they might put out their eye.  I'll bet you were the kind of kid that put snakes and frogs in all the kids lunch buckets just to watch them squeal! ::) ;D
« Last Edit: March 31, 2006, 08:36:16 PM by RJ_Daley »
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

DMoriarty

Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #2 on: March 31, 2006, 09:19:07 PM »
Tom, your problem is not a new one.  There are a couple of pretty good books out there (one called "Photographing Montana" and I cant currently find the other to give the title) about the difficulties of photographing the vastness of Montana and an early homesteader and photographer named Evelyn Cameron who had some success through rather unorthodox techniques.  I've tried to borrow from her in photographing golf courses, with only moderate success.  

An aside.  Your post ties into one of my pet theories:  The demise of compelling golf architecture corresponds to the rise of glossy golf magazines and coffee table books.   As Fazio discusses in his book, great golf courses don't necessarily photograph well.  [He, for one, sets out to build courses which photograph well.]  

I imagine that the same is even more true for great golf course sites, so perhaps you should be encouraged by the photograph's shortcomings.  

Aidan Bradley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #3 on: March 31, 2006, 11:07:19 PM »
Tom,

I believe Alice Dye is a big fan of your photographic eye, maybe you should do the photography yourself, or you could consider several of the other fine golf course photographers out there. Just a thought!

Ryan Farrow

Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #4 on: March 31, 2006, 11:13:18 PM »
You have been on this message board for how long and still don’t know how to post pictures? Maybe it’s just my youthfulness that thinks it is such a common task. Does anyone want me to make a step by step tutorial?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #5 on: March 31, 2006, 11:54:09 PM »
I looked through them in the office today, but I couldn't find any that I wanted to post.  I did, however, have an epiphany about why I couldn't find any pictures worth posting.  I am certain most people here couldn't make heads or tails of the pictures.


And so the point of this thread is...?

Bryan Tipton

Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #6 on: March 31, 2006, 11:58:00 PM »
Jes:

I had ask Tom if he had any pics of his project in MT last week in another thread.

Ryan:

I wouldn't mind knowing how to add pics to a reply.

Thanks
« Last Edit: March 31, 2006, 11:58:46 PM by Bryan Tipton »

Aidan Bradley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #7 on: April 01, 2006, 12:06:23 AM »
Tom,

I agree that it is not easy to put what we see in our minds eye or what actually exists and somehow transfer that vision to a one dimensional flat media.

Case in point, hole # 10 at Augusta. Having been there four times, I cannot find any way photographically (to date) to show the drop in elevation that both the specators and players experience when they stand on the tee box.

So maybe I can relate to some of your frustration.

Aidan.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #8 on: April 01, 2006, 08:18:08 AM »
For those who have asked, the point(s) of this thread were:

1.  I was responding to Bryan's question.

2.  Many people have asked over the past few years why we don't post more pictures taken during construction, either here or on our web site.  After looking at Larry's pictures it's clear that you wouldn't be able to pick out the features of the holes at all.  I think his pictures will be perfect in a before-and-after comparison -- he's taking them from where he will take pictures when we're finished and not trying to correct for the distractions which are there now, such as a little fir tree in the fairway which draws your eye to it.  But right now each picture would be worth 1,000 questions.

Ryan:  Thanks for the tutorial.

Aidan:  The tenth hole at Rock Creek presents the same scale problem as the tenth at Augusta, with slightly less drop from tee to green.  On the ground it's just awesome to look at; in a photo it's so much less compelling that it's silly to post the photo.

My apologies for "teasing" you which was not really my intention.  I encourage any of you to come out and see what we're building in person.  Montana is an amazing place and I am really excited that we seem to be building a golf course which does justice to the landscape.

W.H. Cosgrove

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #9 on: April 01, 2006, 09:13:22 AM »
Mr. Doak's, Tom's, comments about visual clutter, reference points and the human minds tendency to exagerate distance, make me think of the Fazio thread discussing framing.

The question I have is what part an architects skill play in utilizing the time tested techniques of framing, forshortening, and focal points(and others) play in the creation of the gameboard of a golf course.  

While some of us have criticized Mr. Fazio for being over dependent on framing for his creations, I wonder how much the architect actually relies on these tools and how important they are in the final product?  Are these essential to creating a great course? Is the process of separating the 'visual clutter' from the surrounding environment just as important or even more important than the strategy included in the course?  Does the routing of the design and the journey through the golf course depend on this part of the design?


Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #10 on: April 01, 2006, 09:51:01 AM »
Bill:

Part of the solution is just knowing what pieces to remove from the picture.  Obviously, I'm not going to leave any trees in the fairway, but exactly which trees I pick out of the roughs and which stay are going to have an effect on how people see and play the hole.  In fact, when I was in Montana three weeks ago, we cleared a bunch more trees on the right of the seventh hole so that people would be more comfortable in aiming to the right off that tee, and less drawn down into a hollow on the left of the fairway.  We want the greedy players to get sucked into the left side, but we don't want to point everyone down there.

I am not a fan of "framing" as in building mounds of any sort, but we are sometimes guilty of adding bunkers in certain spots to affect the look of the hole and the psychology of where to hit or where not to hit.  I prefer to think of it as "composition" and I do it the same way I did as a photographer ... by trying to move the golfer's focal point on the hole.  Bunkers can do this, mounds much less so.

But, to those who would use "composition" and "framing" interchangeably, damn right it's important and most everyone who has been a successful golf architect is pretty good at it.  I was really surprised by the extent to which Jack Nicklaus thought about such stuff at Sebonack ... I didn't think he would care at all, but while we weren't always moved by the same objectives, he did consider the composition and made many suggestions about holes for that reason and not for playability.

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #11 on: April 01, 2006, 10:08:08 AM »
I am looking out my window right now....and yes, the Montana landscape is vast!  I can see a flag way off in the distance....its....its...a huge American flag flying over the local Perkins resturant. ;D


Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #12 on: April 01, 2006, 10:56:53 AM »
How far away does it look?

Wrong!  (With due credit to The McLaughlin Report.)

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #13 on: April 01, 2006, 11:03:13 AM »
Tom,

Its only a matter of time before Deer Lodge has a Perkins with a flag the size of a basketball court fly over it.

The Rock Creek course...will it set back in on the side of the mountain in the woods, or does it play out and down the open foothills?

DMoriarty

Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #14 on: April 01, 2006, 11:26:30 AM »
A few shots of Stone Eagle to tide over those who just need photos . . .












« Last Edit: April 01, 2006, 11:26:59 AM by DMoriarty »

Voytek Wilczak

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #15 on: April 01, 2006, 11:32:09 AM »


Even when the pictures are taken from the eventual tee with a flag on the eventual green, there is so much visual clutter in a broad landscape that it's rarely possible for the outsider to focus on the parts that matter.  

Reminds me of a great sculptor, who, when asked how difficult it is to create a masterpiece, said: "It's easy! Just take a raw piece of stone and remove the parts which are not necessary..."
 

Steve_ Shaffer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #16 on: April 01, 2006, 11:52:13 AM »
Tom

When is Rock Creek scheduled to open? Is there a website yet as I couldn't find one? Who are the developers?

Steve
"Some of us worship in churches, some in synagogues, some on golf courses ... "  Adlai Stevenson
Hyman Roth to Michael Corleone: "We're bigger than US Steel."
Ben Hogan “The most important shot in golf is the next one”

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #17 on: April 01, 2006, 11:58:09 AM »
If you use google earth and search for Deer Lodge, Montana, you will zero in on a small town right on I-90

Head southwest a couple of miles and the open foothills give way to pine and fir covered mountains...and you will find Rock Creek lake...I assume the course is being built in the vacinity of the lake and the road leading into the lake???

Don_Mahaffey

Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #18 on: April 01, 2006, 12:10:06 PM »
"...most people think a flag in the distance is much farther away than it really is..."

When Mike first started staking the course in TX, I had a very tough time judging the distances and everything looked a lot farther away than the actual distance. I would think photos would only exaggerate this feeling. Now that I've been on site a while and we've defined the corridors a bit and hit a few shots I have a much better feel for distance. What will be interesting is to see first time players play the course with no help at all from distance markers. I'm hoping we don't even have hole distances on the card. Anyone play a course for the first time recently with no distance info?

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #19 on: April 01, 2006, 12:18:18 PM »
Craig:

I don't have a picture of our routing plan or I could post it now.  :)  The golf course occupies rugged land between the mountain and the last hill before the highway, but we are still set well back from the mountains.  There are Douglas fir trees around a few of the holes and visible from most, but there are only a couple of holes where you would have any chance of winding up behind a tree; even so, they add a lot to the change of scenery as you progress around the course.

The fishing lodge and golf pro shop are located on the creek near the bottom of a big valley, before the creek goes through a narrow pass and on down to Clark Fork by the highway.  The first fifteen holes are in a clockwise loop above the pro shop [nos. 2 thru 6 are uphill to the seventh tee at the highest point of the course]; the last three make a smaller loop below the shop.  The creek is in play on the par-3 8th, the par-5 10th (if you really push the second shot), the par-3 17th, and all three shots on the par-5 18th.

The routing is not quite the standard mix of holes and I'm sure people will question why on such a large piece of property, but here's the scorecard and I am confident all the holes will hold up their part of the equation:

1 - Medium par-4, small tributary creek cutting in front of the green.
2 - Long par 4
3 - Medium-long par 5 through a meadow toward the mountains
4 - Long par 4 uphill to long skinny green in a bowl
5 - Short, wide par 4 with optional carry over a nest of fairway bunkers
6 - Medium-long par 4 over two dips
7 - Long 4 downhill to shelf of landing area, then over the corner of a rocky hill to green in saddle
8 - Picturesque par-3 crossing stream which runs along right of fairway and green (the stream is in a 20-foot-deep gorge at this point)
9 - Medium-short par 4 to large green in bowl against rocky hillside

10 - Long, downhill par 5 with green set back up on a shelf next to creek
11 - Long par 4 with split-level landing area and crowned green
12 - Short par 3, drop shot, to small green with bunkers all across front in a swale
13 - Very long par 3 across deep valley, a standout hole
14 - Long par 4, way downhill off tee, second shot thru gap in hills to unusual green site
15 - Driveable par 4 (330 yards from back, downhill, narrow gap in front of green between bunkers)
16 - Long par 4 with dry creek to carry off tee, tilting second shot to green in front of rocky knob
17 - Par 3 over the creek at the bottom of the valley
18 - Par 5 back uphill, must carry creek on tee shot and then climb toward green with creek hard on left side, mountains in distance.

This yields the somewhat unusual scorecard:

445 444 434 = 36    543 344 435 = 35 = par 71.

I think the course is about 7,300 yards from the back tees, but it is between 4600 and 4900 feet altitude.

From the time the routing has been set I've been convinced that holes 7, 10 and 13 would be among our best work.  The first seven holes are shaped and the third and fifth are now personal favorites as well.


Ryan Farrow

Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #20 on: April 01, 2006, 02:09:25 PM »
I will just not comment on the distribution of pars in this thread. ;D
But then again nobody has played the course yet.

What made you choose back to back par 3's. Is this becoming something you are more comfortable with now after your recent success at Pacific Dunes (can I even say it was successful?).

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #21 on: April 01, 2006, 03:26:24 PM »
Ryan:

In the case of Rock Creek, the final routing has about twelve holes from an earlier plan that was in place, before the client said that he wanted to use the land in the bowl below the pro shop for golf.  As a result of that decision, we had to stretch the first 15 holes to make room for the last three [because we weren't going to give up the great holes up at the top of the plan], and in the end we were looking for a spot to cut one hole out of the routing.  Cutting one hole is much harder than cutting two, particularly on rugged land where stretching out a hole is an unlikely option.

The par-3 13th was always in the routing, but the only good short-cut we could find was to put the par-3 12th in front of it, in place of a par-4 that had played out beyond and a short par-4 that played back to what is now the 12th green, from the opposite direction.

I really didn't want to use back-to-back par-3's again because it will draw comparisons to Pacific Dunes, and it's tough enough for all of my current courses to be compared to that one.  But the par-3 12th was a good enough hole and it is a lot different than the 13th, and it really was the best solution to tightening up the routing to use those holes below the pro shop.

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #22 on: April 01, 2006, 04:34:14 PM »
Tom  I know what you mean about construction photos not showing too much of the final product -- I guess that's what you meant!    During an early construction tour of the remodeling of Pensacola CC, I took a whole bunch of photos of the rough shaping going on mostly in sand as all the fairways were being flipped.  I tried posting them and nothing looked anything like a golf hole except for the big PVC poles at tees, turning points / landing areas, and greens.  So I will do this later!

Scott_Burroughs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #23 on: April 02, 2006, 02:54:50 PM »
Tom D,

How long is the golf season up there (or Craig)?  Will the club have set months of being open/closed (a la Sand Hills) or will there be on/off days in the shoulder seasons where it could either snow or be 65 from one day to the next?  I'm just curious/interested in seeing how the 'exclusive private retreats' use the shoulder seasons.


Ryan,

You just got yourself a new hoops coach who took his team to 5 straight NCAA tournaments.  And the fans of the team he left have been TRYING to get rid of him for years.....a win/win situation for all, it seems.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re:Pictures from Montana (not)
« Reply #24 on: April 02, 2006, 04:08:19 PM »
Scott:

I think Rock Creek will have long shoulder seasons.  The elevation is not too high, and I've already seen everything from golfable days in mid-March and some snow in May.

Since the club's founding partners intend to use the property for other pursuits as well, I imagine they will keep the golf course open for play as late in the season as possible.