…my way of photographing is my way of life. I photograph from my experience, my way of seeing things, and it is very difficult to tell you whether I photograph in one style or another. – Sebastiao Salgado
Examining the photos posted on Meandering Passage and in my Photo Gallery I don’t know that I have a style. Perhaps I’m developing one but it’s certainly not “there” yet. I can say that generally I like saturated colors and contrasty black and whites, but that’s even dependent upon the circumstances.
There are many photographers who I’d say have a very defined style but I seem to be a generalist at this point. I wonder is this good, or bad or what? I certainly care about the quality of my photos but I can’t say I honestly care about developing or maintaining any specific style of photographing. So is being a generalist and not focusing on developing a certain style of photography a detriment to developing as a photographer?
Thoughts…anyone?
A fine shot of the water plants with excellent processing. I’m thinking about the generalist idea. Off the top of my head I think it is not a limiting factor.
don, thanks. I appreciate you thoughts on the generalist idea…still thinking on it myself. :-)
No there is nothing wrong with it, you have to be you. I shoot anything I don’t want to limit myself, life is to short.
Don, I absolutely agree you have to be true to yourself and not force something that’s not there. I don’t know that having a speciality or style is necessarily a limitation.
Wow! This image pops. Shouts at me. It has power to move me and keep looking. That’s what our photography is about. Wow!
My answer to your question: I dunno know. I struggle with the same questions. When I ask those I feel confident in to tell me if there is a theme, a direction I’m working towards, I get nuttin’ for an answer. When I’ve asked myself the same question, I get the same answer: nuttin’. I will say that as we continue to shoot and work with our RAW negatives, we are practicing, experimenting, honing this craft we have embraced. Four years ago I shot a lot of landscapes now I shoot more of the city/street scenes. I would drive for miles to shoot a sunrise scene. I enjoyed those mornings because of the experience of being there but I think I was also wanting to copy others work.
I now seem to focus on those things I have walked past so often but never seen. I’m no longer looking for the same image some else has already taken. Your image above is an example where 70% of the people who walk by these reeds never see them, even though they are a major part of the landscape. I also believe no other photographer will have this same image. It’s yours, in your style. I guess I’ll ask the question: Do we need to define our style or just keep creating? Sorry for rambling!
Love this image, man!! Have you printed it?
Thanks so much on the image, Monte. It’s not rambling are all — you’ve captured some wonderful thoughts that I’ve also had. I believe at first we do often tend to imitate the work of others we admire and then with time and development it becomes more about shooting for ourselves, shooting what we see which others perhaps don’t.
No doubt my questioning comes from a state of change and flux. Today that photo above is my style but tomorrow it may be something else. I sometimes wonder if I’ll ever have a body of work that is bound together by common style or theme to be recognize as such. It’s not about public recognition or any type of praise, but more about reaching a point in my personal abilities to create that type of work and be personally proud of it. Hey, who’s rambling now? :-)
Yea, once we get started…….
I join in the chorus of “Hurrah’s” for this beautiful photo. As addicted as I am to color, I agree completely that this cried out for your choice of strong blacks and whites. The lines are so graceful and seductive, it would have been counter-productive to pull the eye away with color.
As for your question, far be it from me to question the validity of being a generalist, since I am all over the map. One week I am fixated on labor intensive art prints of horses—spending countless hours in Photoshp. The next week I am passionately devoted to landscapes, and the next it’s macro for me. The one constant is that I am obsessed with is seeing more of what life has to present to me and finding my own interpretation of beauty. Why beauty? I suppose because it make my heart swell, and makes me feel closer to what is best about being alive.
Anita, I’m always happy to hear your voice in the chorus. I agree black and white has the ability to convey some things that simply get lost in color images.
My question on being a generalist and personal style was sincere and so I’ve no answers of my own at this moment. I’m gratefully reading and learning from you who’ve shared your own opinions and experiences. This is something I mentally struggle with on occasion but until an answer comes to me I’ll keep making photos I can share with some friends. ;-)
I feel that in general, there are far too many specialists! After a while, it becomes boring.
Hi Steve, I understand in casual viewing of photos the appeal of a variety of different types of work. But let me ask you this.
If you were having open heart surgery would you want a generalist or a specialist? When you have “major” plumbing problems do you want the all around handy man down the street or would you prefer to have a plumber? So if you wanted the best landscape photos to hang on your wall, wouldn’t you tend to look at someone’s work who practiced or specialized in that type or style of photography?
Have a good weekend! :-)
Hi Earl,
Good question. Personally, I think it just depends on what you want to do with your photography. If it’s just a hobby, then absolutely nothing wrong with being a generalist. I do think that most successful fine-art and commercial photographers have developed a style and are _not_ generalists. Even working-man photographers usually specialize to some degree: weddings, high school sports, baby/family, etc. I think it would be difficult to become a well known photographer and not have some specialization. Can you think of any? Most the famous photographers I can think of are known primarily for one or two specializations (adams=b&w landscape, bresson=street, etc. etc.). That doesn’t mean they didn’t dabble in the other stuff, just that it wasn’t too successful.
Personally, photography is a hobby for me and I really the freedom of that. My photography has been very general in the past, but I’m trying to specialize more these days, not to be famous, but primarily because I want to start to collect my work into themes and folios that are not just my best random shots and then concentrate on the areas that I feel personally “successful” at. It’s taking me a while to sort that out. Someone once said “shoot what you love”. There’s a lot of truth to that, methinks.
“…I’m trying to specialize more these days, not to be famous, but primarily because I want to start to collect my work into themes and folios that are not just my best random shots and then concentrate on the areas that I feel personally “successful” at.”
I think you captured my own thoughts and feelings well here, Eric. I agree, most well know photographers are know for “something.” You seldom if ever here of one being call a great generalist. Have a good weekend!
Earl, it’s as though you, Monte, and others here have been channeling my own thoughts. Should I try to find my style? If I wanted to submit for a show, do I need a cohesive theme and style? Are generalists always going to be associated with hobbyists?
Once upon a time, a person with varied interests and skills was considered something of a Renaissance person. Are we entering an age when specialization is the key to success?
These are just some of the things rattling around my brain…
Oh, and one more quick note–really like the photo. The high contrast really works here.
Jim, it seems a lot of use are at the point where we’re questioning what direction our photography should take. I’m still working through my own thoughts on this so it’s nice to hear some of the thoughts of others on this subject. Thanks, on the photo!
I think you are confusing subjects with style. Shouldn’t matter what you have in front of your camera a style is a way you see it and then put it on film. Specializing in being able to shoot one thing well doesn’t make a style, just someone who is really good on one subject.
Ray, reading back over my post I no doubt crossed over the line between a common theme or a certain style but my original thoughts were more on style. However, I’m all over the place in either regard. :-)