Now you are exploring "humans exploring in front of nature" !

Without the help of the words you write with the series you shared this image looks puzzling and makes one wonder "What's this image doing in a creative nature photography forum!!!"

It is about how the boulders of Hampi merge with religious beliefs of the people. It is about how a boulder morphs into God at the other side of I

I think this is how one should look at these images. Right?

Can you share a few more words about those people, their beliefs, and the 'nature' in this it ?

Adithya, I think "creativity" in "Nature Photography" need not be restricted to just visual arrangement of forms/shapes/colors/lights/shadows or lack there of. In such expressions I think I am more important than what I photograph. "I think it this way", "I feel it that way", "this is what it means to me" etc etc makes such images. Can there be creative expressions without "me" being there in them? Isn't the word "creative" itself drag "me" into the frame? I think it need not be. If I pursue this path further, I guess there can't be any assertion about Nature. I suspect there can only be questioning and wondering about Nature. Does that remind you Nasadiya Suktha? The fact that an image makes you think without bringing in the photographer into the frame (beyond routine 'natural history' images) is also creativity of the photographer, an unimportant one though.

Who really knows? Who will here proclaim it?
Whence was it produced? Whence is this creation?
Gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe.
Who then knows whence it has arisen?

Whether God's will created it, or whether He was mute;
Perhaps it formed itself, or perhaps it did not;
The Supreme Brahman of the world, all pervasive and all knowing
He indeed knows, if not, no one knows - Rigveda

Should we exclude these thoughts about 'Nature' in the so called 'Nature Photography' that we practice? Should we restrict the scope of 'Creative Nature Photography' to just forms/shapes/lights/colors/B&W/shadows/highlights and various visual arrangements alone? Or should we explore the word 'Nature' in a larger context? Please share your thoughts.

I tried to share more about the image in the links I shared above in the initial post.

…
Who then can know the origins of the world?
None knows when creation arose
Or whether he or he has not made it
…
Only he knows
Or perhaps he knows not

That last underlined words above appear as a very creative expression about the larger context of ‘Nature’. Listen to the same here in the beginning of this short video by Carl Sagan.

I think ‘creativity’ need not be tied to the original medium of expression. It may blossom elsewhere, may be as abstract thoughts, leaving the original medium of expression itself.