Finding my voice, emulation, etc.

[kdthomas]

I think I'm starting to grow into my own gradually, but I have some heroes(Mapplethorpe, Avedon, among others), and sometimes I find myself emulating them a little bit ... Some of my portraits and still life have been inspired by them, and I'm a little worried may even be too derivative (like my stuff could ever be mistaken for theirs, LOL)

Is this a normal part of progressing as an artist? Sometimes I wonder if I should even be studying the greats, because I keep getting ideas from them. I want to make my own work, I don't want to make knockoffs.

Has anyone else gone through this?

 

[photoguy99]

Yes.

Make some knockoffs. Good writers borrow. Great writers steal. If you haven't got influences then you are adrift in history and your work quite likely makes no sense.

Everyone's work, really, is some mixture of copying from and rebelling against, with a light flavoring of original ideas.

 

[rexbobcat]

It depends on what you're borrowing from them. There is a difference between having influences, obvious or not, and downright copying a photo.

Now, if a photo's concept is broad, vague, or simple, then it's really not that big a deal. There's only so many ways you can have someone cross their arms in an environmental portrait.

But then there are photos like these: Fashion Photography Plagiarism | Ampersand

Don't do that ^ if you can help it. Granted, there is a chance that you'll create a complex photograph (or one with a very specific/obscure concept) that's VERY similar to another photographer's, but that can't really be helped if you're unaware of the other artist's work.

 

[rexbobcat]

Also; there's also a difference between blatantly emulating another photographer's work/style, and paying homage to them.

One example would be the recent photos of Kim Kardashian's 2-ton caboose. The photographer who took the photo actually recreated one of his older photos from the 70's (the original is better but that's beside the point).

It's somewhat vague. I say to look at art forms other than photography for inspiration. Yeah, if you need technical help go to your photographic heroes and mentors, but if you really want to grow as a photographer, I think paying more attention to music, painting, sculpture, film, and other mediums is much more helpful.

 

[rexbobcat]

And the answer to your question is, yes, it's normal. Just don't get sucked into chasing after "the greats." Their greatness must be put into historical context to really understand it (not to say that their images weren't also brilliant.)

 

[KenC]

Some photographers say that you should go out and try to reproduce a famous photograph, the idea being that it is nearly impossible to perfectly reproduce every condition (angle, lens, light, etc.) in taking the photo, much less in how it is processed, whether in darkroom or software. Anything you do in emulating another photographer is yours because you'll never do it exactly the same. The only time I can see being concerned about this is if you want to sell prints and people perceive them as being too close to something done previously. Even this may be pretty unlikely for the reasons stated above.

 

[Gary A.]

Yes. In fact try to duplicate their work. As you adjust the lighting and the camera to replicate what you like ... put yourself in their shoes ... see what they saw ... then go outside their box and make it your own. There is nothing new under the Sun, but for the neophyte ... all is new.

I new a reporter that when she read a great story, one that she wished she had written ... would simply keyboard the entire story into her computer. She said the exercise helped her improve her writing.

Gary

 

[MichaelHenson]

Yes, this is normal and even (I think) expected in creative expression. I've experienced this in music and am experiencing it in photography. I'll never forget my jazz instructor in high school made the comment that when he was learning to play Eric Clapton was in his explosive part of his career and my instructor emulated him as much as possible in his playing. He got to the point that people actually started saying that he sounded like Clapton. His response? "Is that a bad thing?"

Basically, emulate all you can but emulate without copying. The very fact that you are asking this question and have a desire to express YOURSELF through your art pretty much guarantees that you won't "plagiarize." What will happen is that you will progress and adopt the aspects of your hero's art that you like while incorporating other elements from other artists and from your own creativity...The result will be something entirely "KDThomas."

 

[kdthomas]

... As you adjust the lighting and the camera to replicate what you like ... put yourself in their shoes ... see what they saw ... then go outside their box and make it your own ...

Yeah this gave me a new appreciation for Mapplethorpe ... I did some calla lilies, and he had this way of making them look huge, towering, like monuments lit by spotlights ... it was incredible. I wound up w images I was very proud of, but wow, thinking about doing that w film ... w nothing but MAYBE polaroids to go by. Sheesh!