Is exposure to and study of good photography a bad thing?

[The_Traveler]

I would say that its not just TPF (although I find it interesting how many have used my post as an excuse to complain about the site....). My point was wider reaching and refereed to the internet, to TV, to magazines - to media and photography in general.

You're right.
I'm certain it isn't only TPF; in fact I know it isn't.
I've visited several other sites and they had approximately the same collection of defectives who have a keyboard and a camera that TPF does.
I've stayed here because I have carefully cultivated my list of those that I know are useless consumers of space and I hate to start over.

 

[Designer]

That is precisely WHY sites like 500px are flourishing: polished turds that hit all the current cliches get up-voted very quickly. For those seeking those up-votes, the cliche methods and approaches bring them in in volumes.

Well, I'll be!

That phenomenon occurs in building design as well where everybody seems to be doing the same exact thing at the same time.

I've often pointed it out to anyone who will listen that the current fad will be replaced eventually by the next fad.

 

[table1349]

A while ago I tried to join into a gaming group, they were a fun friendly group of players of a decent number and a whole spread of ages. However despite their friendly nature I didn't stick it out with the group and there was a reason for that - they were too good and a touch too focused on the competitive side.

It made me start to think if this isn't perhaps a problem with photography in todays world, especially online. Certainly being around peers who have superior skill can inspire; it can push a person to improve to reach that similar standard. Indeed I would not be one to disagree that exposure to superior works is a beneficial thing and that without it one can end up setting a lower standard than ones full potential.


However I wonder if many of us have gotten too much of this. That we are bombarded by such a volume of quality, of inspiration and of skill that we end up losing focus and that former motivation starts to dwindle away. I feel that many times we lack that contemporary grouping, those who are of a similar skill and experience set of our own. A grouping within which we can rise to the fore within our own niche, where we can see measured improvement in our own work against others and also see their measured changes as well.

Instead we are left still struggling to grasp the slippery rope and pull ourselves up to our peers level so that they might become our contemporaries. That we might "rub shoulders" with them and feel a part of that system; socially contributing and being acknowledged.


Now many might say to this that it doesn't matter, that you shoot for you and you alone. But I don't think that is always true, we do shoot for ourselves (unless we are paid or have other motives); but I think that being social creatures we also like to share and feel that we contribute to the group(s) we are within as well. That we have something to offer, something that makes us stand out, even if just a little.

Thus I put forward the view that we are too bombarded with quality; that we have too much inspiration and not enough building of contemporary networks. We don't have learning buddies; we don't have a class; we don't have a grouping - heck even in tutorials or classes the skill range can be very vast.

I guess to my way of thinking, I don't see it. As to the gaming group why did you truly quit? For your stated motive of them beeing too good and competitive or was your true motive because you just were not passionate and or competitive enough to get better and compete.

We, at least I, can't have total passion about everything I find interesting. Photography and wood working yes, but for all those other interests/hobbies, no. I understand and accpet that.

As a photograher or a woodworker I don't seek companinship while I am seriously doing either. When I am having fun yes, but not when I am seriously devoting time to either. I tend to agree to a point that no one can really shoot for themselves alone. I however have those whos opinions matter and they are who I listen to a dn shoot for.

For the whole rest of the world, I could care less. That is why my photo site is secured with only those I care about having acess.

Now I know that I don't speak for anyone but myself, but that is my outlook on the subject.

 

[imagemaker46]

I understand what you're saying Overread and I do believe that many people may feel the same way. I can only respond for myself and how I feel about photography and a few other things. Many of you know that I grew up in photography having a father who is regarded as the best photojournalist in Canada, an icon. I never felt any pressure to compete against him, even though on many assignments we worked together we had a friendly "who could out shoot who" He only beat me once, but it was a good beating, we were shooting sports. I think competition is good, looking at images that are better than we "think" we could shoot drives us to try harder. This applies to everything if life.

I'm a very competitive person, in everything but photography, which may sound strange as it's the only thing I've ever done. I've never felt that I had to be better than anyone else, I just shoot to my abilities and keep looking at being better with each shoot, or at least come away with something different. I see what other photographers shoot and for the most part know how they ended up with the image, could I produce a similar image, maybe, if I spent enough time trying, but I don't try. I appreciate the quality and time spent producing the image, I don't feel intimidated by it, or the photographer that produced it. We have to set our own standards and not worry about others.

Right now, I couldn't shoot outstanding wedding images, or landscapes, fashion, or creative product images, these aren't the fields I work in, if I dropped shooting sports and concentrated on any of these, I know in time, I could.

I don't enter contests, I don't care much for titles, photographer of the year, best portrait, best picture of a dog, just never have. I shoot for myself and my clients. I'm regarded as one of the best model car builders in North America, I have dominated contests for decades. My hobby isn't photography, it's model cars and I push myself in that area, it's what I love doing, it's how I relax, I try and build what others don't, not that they can't, they just think it's too difficult because they never tried. I've always played sports, and am just as competitive, always trying be better than the next guy.

There is a drive that everyone has, it's just a matter of how you want to control it. I always strive to be the best, I don't always succeed, but that just makes me want to be better, for myself. Many will never see the top rung, and it's not a matter of saying "I'm a loser" It's not even a matter of just accepting, everyone has a different skill set, be happy with the skills you have, but don't ever stop trying to be better.

 

[Fred Berg]

I feel that many times we lack that contemporary grouping, those who are of a similar skill and experience set of our own. A grouping within which we can rise to the fore within our own niche, where we can see measured improvement in our own work against others and also see their measured changes as well.

Oddly enough, this is precisely what TPF is for me: a kind of peer group, if you will.

 

[AlanKlein]

That is precisely WHY sites like 500px are flourishing: polished turds that hit all the current cliches get up-voted very quickly. For those seeking those up-votes, the cliche methods and approaches bring them in in volumes.

Well, I'll be!

That phenomenon occurs in building design as well where everybody seems to be doing the same exact thing at the same time.

I've often pointed it out to anyone who will listen that the current fad will be replaced eventually by the next fad.

I've noticed similar things at my photo club and when they have competition. The judges and even in non-juried critiques, the discussions go to the latest fad. "Oh, your shadows could be lightened up (in keeping with the new ability of sensors". Frankly, who cares in most cases. Most people look to the lighter parts of a picture. Dark shadows make pictures pop and add interest. "Oh, you clipped that spot." Another who cares in many cases. It has no effect on the final photo.

We all seem to get caught up in what's fashionable. That's one problem with critique groups especially on-line forums and photo clubs. You then to start shooting to meeting their passing criteria rather than putting your own imprint on your photography.

 

[sashbar]

The cold truth is there are billions of good images online and millions of good photographers in the world, but the number of true creative talents per square mile has always been very, very small and almost nothing has changed in this respect in decades.

I always remember how one great photographer with a big name said that in spite of all that digital revolution he did not see more truly great photographs compared to 10, 20 or 30 years ago. The number of talented people, trail blazers and creative giants has always remained the same.

I guess it is not entirely true, since cheaper and better digital cameras and software have indeed pushed some people with talent who otherwise would not pick up this hobby or profession. But this is a relatively small number, simply because apart from a true talent one needs a true passion and determination to excel. And having this passion, most will be there anyway, be it the new digital technology of an old film camera. So the number of "additional talent" promoted by the new "easy" digital world is relatively small.

So 99.999 % of what I see online are technically bad, decent or great photographs that have an entirely utilitarian function. If Yellow Socks beat Blue Pants 1:0, you want to see the goal. Or the celebration. Once you have seen it, the image may be discarded and forgotten however technically good it is. Some people are making shoes, others are shooting sport or portraits or nature.

I have never heard anyone complaining about too many shoes in the world. There are many billions of shoes in this world. Do you care? "I am making shoes, it is just a hobby, but you know what, there are so many shoes around, I do not know what to doooo"...

No? Why then do you care about billions of images? I would seriously care about it if any single image, or at least if one in a million would be another Steve McCurry or Alex Webb. Then I would have started worrying that something is wrong with me. But they are not. They are at best the guys who have learned the flash, the composition and the exposure triangle. Good for them. Some of them even earn good money.

So, back to the idea of a cozy community of mediocrity where you can "grow together" liking each other. Nice idea. Great way to kill your time, get some attention and scratch each other back. Or, for a change put a little toy knife through it. That is what most of us are doing here on TPF.

 

[bribrius]

I feel that many times we lack that contemporary grouping, those who are of a similar skill and experience set of our own. A grouping within which we can rise to the fore within our own niche, where we can see measured improvement in our own work against others and also see their measured changes as well.

Oddly enough, this is precisely what TPF is for me: a kind of peer group, if you will.

cool. we are peers? So , when do we have a beer?

 

[Buckster]

Some people are making shoes, others are shooting sport or portraits or nature.

I have never heard anyone complaining about too many shoes in the world. There are many billions of shoes in this world. Do you care? "I am making shoes, it is just a hobby, but you know what, there are so many shoes around, I do not know what to doooo"...

No? Why then do you care about billions of images?

Well said.

 

[Forkie]

If you're shooting just as a hobby and for your own enjoyment, there is no need to stand out from anyone else. A good photo will always be a good photo and you will always enjoy what you do. If you are still intimidated by other people's standards of work on say, 500px, then it's simply a case of practice. You will get there if you want to.

If, however, you intend to earn all your money from photography, you must make yourself noticeable. Whether that's through sheer technical ability or artistic ability (they don't always come in tandem) is up to you, but mixing with photographers who you feel are "better" than you is a good thing. At least I think so. That way you are on top of what the experienced photographers are doing and can at least start thinking about how you can differentiate yourself from them and then get one step ahead of them.

If you allow yourself to be intimidated by them, you'll never be there to even see what you need to achieve in order to be noticed.

 

[bribrius]

a. copy others, try to make money, join the commercial club. Learn. You don't turn out what others like, fad or not, you wont sell much. Make it a point to get published and start doing weddings or some freakn thing. Sell landscape photos. Join the 500 crowd.

b. Do your own thing, concentrate on developing your own style. Work hard at it. You will probably die broke but might be recognized some how long after you are dead.

c. Just take photos as a hobby, and ignore it all.

 

[bribrius]

If you're shooting just as a hobby and for your own enjoyment, there is no need to stand out from anyone else. A good photo will always be a good photo and you will always enjoy what you do. If you are still intimidated by other people's standards of work on say, 500px, then it's simply a case of practice. You will get there if you want to.

If, however, you intend to earn all your money from photography, you must make yourself noticeable. Whether that's through sheer technical ability or artistic ability (they don't always come in tandem) is up to you, but mixing with photographers who you feel are "better" than you is a good thing. At least I think so. That way you are on top of what the experienced photographers are doing and can at least start thinking about how you can differentiate yourself from them and then get one step ahead of them.

If you allow yourself to be intimidated by them, you'll never be there to even see what you need to achieve in order to be noticed.

agree to a large extent. But being noticed don't matter unless they are cutting you a check. How many noticed people on these sites are actually making much money off this work? You might be better off shooting baby portraits to the higher end neighborhoods if you want money.

 

[DanOstergren]

When I see photos that impress and inspire me, it motivates me to do better in my own work.

As for saying we don't have learning buddies, I think this is untrue (however I could be misunderstanding what you mean by this). I took on an intern both to pass on my knowledge and to learn as well. Not having "learning buddies" or going to classes or watching tutorials is all based on the individuals who choose not to do so.

 

[rexbobcat]

I don't understand the point of a creative endeavor if not to get some recognition for it, whether that be in the form of having your photos displayed by family members or getting comments on forums like this.

I've said it before, but the human ego can't exist in a vacuum. I can't imagine someone spending thousands of dollars in equipment and learning and not expect/want some return on their investment. In creative hobbies/professions, it's almost taboo to admit that you want someone to notice and appreciate your work.

I think it's sometimes more difficult to be a part of a photographic peer group especially in larger markets, because the attitude is less about building community and more along the lines of "Yeah, it would be great to get together, but I want something in return ($$$)."

In LA, for example, there is literally no way to network without already having money.

 

[bribrius]

I don't understand the point of a creative endeavor if not to get some recognition for it, whether that be in the form of having your photos displayed by family members or getting comments on forums like this.

I've said it before, but the human ego can't exist in a vacuum. I can't imagine someone spending thousands of dollars in equipment and learning and not expect/want some return on their investment. In creative hobbies/professions, it's almost taboo to admit that you want someone to notice and appreciate your work.

I think it's sometimes more difficult to be a part of a photographic peer group especially in larger markets, because the attitude is less about building community and more along the lines of "Sure, I'll help...for $200."

In LA, for example, there is literally no way to network without already having money.

my ego exists in a vacuum. Like i made my picnic table, i sat at it. I was content. Really not a entire lot to it.