I have picked up on some tips that may relate to your situation. I subscribe to a trimonthly photography magazine, LensWork, and the editorials are always highly informative. A few issues back the editor, Brooks Jensen, commented on our constantly growing pile (or bytes) of single-image works. What to do with them? Do single-image works satisfy our creative self (paraphrasing a bit)? What Jensen suggested, was to think in terms of projects, or image series. A story might be easier told by combining several images into an image series. I was intrigued by his preposition, and I myself want to try it. With such a plan, ideas are key. My ideas come to me when I see something interesting when walking outside, and I try to write them down when possible. I am not that good following my ideas. Thinking in terms of projects, and not just about about how you feel your single-image works lack context, a story, or meaning, might help you get some renewed confidence in your images.
Speaking of LensWork - I cannot praise this magazine enough (although they try not to call themselves that). LensWork is about the creative process, and about photographs. Technicalities are mentioned in a sentence or two, if at all, and the reader is left with the images and an artistic statement or introduction to the series. I think only black and white are printed (I have not seen any color prints), and the print quality is terrific. They have also won awards for their printing. But all this aside, my point is that looking at what other people deem good enough for publication, really helps. Most of it, anyone of us would be able to do - we just need to get the idea for the project. I remember in one issue when a man came across some icicles in a frozen stream. He captured everything with his iPhone, edited the best shots, and was later published in LensWork. And they were good images - especially as a series. I highly recommend LensWork, because its content is always rewarding to read. Usually there are between four to six photographers' portfolios presented (image series) and either an article or an interview. Also, once you get past its self-advertizing, there is no advertizing throughout the magazine - just photography.
I seem to recall that another member suggested studying the "Greats" - after all, their images must be meaningful; why else did they stand the test of time? Some weeks ago I bought some books by Ansel Adams. I am currently working my way through "The Making of 40 Photographs", and I must say it is highly rewarding. Not only are many of his photographs really good, but there are interesting reflections and thoughts throughout his explanations. The interesting thing is that his images are not necessarily better than most people's. Heck, I do not even like his famous one with a moon over a New Mexico village. This fact should encourage most, because everyone can create extraordinary images. The crazy thing is that, most likely I dare say, there are thousands of extraordinary images sitting on computers, never to be discovered.
You may find some small grain of help in my ramblings; I apologize, that all I have to offer.
edit: My experience is the following: When people try to "force" the thing we call "meaning" into their photography, it is rarely convincing. I dare say that Ansel Adams did not think about the meaning of his negatives when he developed them. I think he was confident enough to believe he didn't make crap, and saw when his compositions were great and when his negatives were printable that he would be happy with the final image. I, maybe wrongly, believe that whenever a photographer has to somehow "explain" the meaning of his photographs, it is a sign of amateurism.
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/31/31038-84f0b9d14b7ced20e61bc19a9d4dfcc2.jpg?1734159138)
