rexbobcat
Been spending a lot of time on here!
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2011
- Messages
- 5,014
- Reaction score
- 1,967
- Location
- United States
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
I'm a fairly analytical person. Granted, my analytics are wrong about 80% of the time, but it's my nature to at least try. I'm like a Vulcan, only dumber.
So when I'm confronted by a problem that can't definitely be solved or at least lessened by using deductive reasoning or some colloquial form of the scientific method, I just...can't...compute...
Where I'm going with this is that I don't think I'll ever understand the public recognition of creativity. Does anyone else feel like this?
I'm not even talking about making lots of money. I couldn't care less about it. I'm just referring to this pervasive concept of general fame/adoration/acclaim that follows some photographers by the general public, fellow creatives, or companies.
Now, I'm not trying to discount their hardwork. There's no doubt most have busted their asses to get to where they are, but I can't help but feel this itch in my brain that maybe they have a predisposition for it - not for success, but for the right alignment of qualities to lead toward success.
My portfolio isn't as consistent. My eye isn't the same. Maybe my eye isn't as developed? But how would I know if it's not if I only have my own point of reference. I can't/won't post-process like they do. I'm awkward to a fault, but not in that quirky eccentric way. I have the wrong personality. My aesthetic tastes are different. And different is supposed to be good, right? But what if it's not. What if it's mediocre. My uniqueness is mediocre by the culmination of everything that has been put into my craft. It's not even an intentional mediocrity out of which I can climb. What if it's inherent? F*ck.
Different is good, unless it's a certain kind of different, a bland kind of different. A kind of different that isn't marketable, because it's inconsistent and ordinary.
It's enigmatic and it hurts my Vulcan brain, because there's no definitive answer to the equation.
It's like asking Einstein what it's like to be a genius. He only has a frame of reference as a genius, so it would be like trying to describe the color red.
I just wonder if some people have predispositions and a way about how they think and interact that will put them ahead of those who don't, regardless of the amount of work put in, like how Usain Bolt could train half as hard as his competitors and still be twice as fast.
I don't really know where I'm going with this.
And geez this is long.
I'm just going to go to bed.
So when I'm confronted by a problem that can't definitely be solved or at least lessened by using deductive reasoning or some colloquial form of the scientific method, I just...can't...compute...
Where I'm going with this is that I don't think I'll ever understand the public recognition of creativity. Does anyone else feel like this?
I'm not even talking about making lots of money. I couldn't care less about it. I'm just referring to this pervasive concept of general fame/adoration/acclaim that follows some photographers by the general public, fellow creatives, or companies.
Now, I'm not trying to discount their hardwork. There's no doubt most have busted their asses to get to where they are, but I can't help but feel this itch in my brain that maybe they have a predisposition for it - not for success, but for the right alignment of qualities to lead toward success.
My portfolio isn't as consistent. My eye isn't the same. Maybe my eye isn't as developed? But how would I know if it's not if I only have my own point of reference. I can't/won't post-process like they do. I'm awkward to a fault, but not in that quirky eccentric way. I have the wrong personality. My aesthetic tastes are different. And different is supposed to be good, right? But what if it's not. What if it's mediocre. My uniqueness is mediocre by the culmination of everything that has been put into my craft. It's not even an intentional mediocrity out of which I can climb. What if it's inherent? F*ck.
Different is good, unless it's a certain kind of different, a bland kind of different. A kind of different that isn't marketable, because it's inconsistent and ordinary.
It's enigmatic and it hurts my Vulcan brain, because there's no definitive answer to the equation.
It's like asking Einstein what it's like to be a genius. He only has a frame of reference as a genius, so it would be like trying to describe the color red.
I just wonder if some people have predispositions and a way about how they think and interact that will put them ahead of those who don't, regardless of the amount of work put in, like how Usain Bolt could train half as hard as his competitors and still be twice as fast.
I don't really know where I'm going with this.
And geez this is long.
I'm just going to go to bed.