Are you a creative photographer? If so, there are pitfalls that we can avoid. Some are created by ourselves, while others are deliberately set up by others.
One of the great obstacles we face in photography is that we are creating interpretations of the ordinary. While there’s a lot of counter-argument to the adage that cameras never lie, it’s true to some extent. Unlike other artists, who can create anything they create, photography is, with a few exceptions, mostly the art of observation and not interpretation. Therefore, to make our images appealing, we must present the ordinary world in an unusual way.
That distinction is made more difficult by the rich nature of photography. An unimaginable 1.4 trillion photo was taken last year. Admittedly, the majority of those photographs are not made as a work of art – although whether pulp photography is art is still a subject of debate – but the sheer number of people who do are holding their camera and trying to create something that is still amazing to watch. Therefore, it is difficult to achieve uniqueness.
Most of the photos we see are the work of another photographer. For example, there are many clones of Ansel Adams, and one thing they all have in common is that their work is not as good as Adams’. Of course, there’s nothing wrong with mimicking your favorite photographer’s style; it’s a great way to learn. However, we can get stuck by that. A creative photographer would be inspired by their heroes, and then break free from that style, taking their creativity at least one step further.
Of course, this applies not only to photography but to every other creative art form, from painting to writing. For example, when we at Fstoppers write an article, unknowing other writers on the net will take them and rewrite the information as their own. Sometimes, it’s obvious that they took the article because they only partially revised each paragraph. Of course, the copy is never quite up to the standard of the original. It also happens in the picture. I wonder how many fake Bob Ross paintings hang on the living room wall, all of which are slightly worse than the real thing.
Likewise, with each new musical genre born, countless artists imitate without quite being Mozart, Bob Dylan, The Beatles or David Bowie. I chose musical geniuses for a specific reason. They all take other musical styles first and then make them better. How did they do that? Not by directly copying what was there before, but by mixing two or more styles to create something new and exciting. That’s how creativity works. With very few exceptions, it was an evolution resulting from a combination of existing factors. Understanding that can help us break free from the traps that are holding us back.
All art grows out of what came before. In photography, however, it seems acceptable for many photographers to get stuck in the pursuit of their favorite photographer and not grow from there, not challenge the standards. As a result, a lot of photos are boringly similar and are never as good as the ones they copy.
Creativity is not easy. It’s certainly not a natural process for many, but it’s a skill that can be learned and, with dedication and practice, improved.
If we try to break free from the conventions of photography, we may encounter resistance. The photos that break the limit are unlikely to win the most likes on Instagram. But in reality, bowing to popular opinion doesn’t necessarily make you a better photographer.
So how can we approach photography differently? We can start by learning from other arts that defy convention and encourage experimentation.
Painting is a science and should be pursued as an investigation of the laws of nature. So why is landscape painting not considered a branch of natural philosophy? [physics]What pictures are out of the experiment?
Just as the great landscape painter of the 19th Century, John Constable, talked about painting, the early photographers also saw science as a major part of the art of photography. The photos are test subjects. That’s what many people have lost and should bring back to photography. So, besides taking the pictures that we always take, based on the work of the photographers who have come before, we should push boundaries and explore our capabilities and our cameras.
Experimentation is important for developing photography beyond the constraints of the conventional. All great photographers have experimented, whether it’s Henri Cartier-Bresson with his constant pursuit of gold and decisive moment, Ansel Adams with his investigations into tonality, or David Bailey pushes the boundaries of fashion photography.
So, what does testing mean? It takes aspects of photography in directions you haven’t tried before. For example, consider street photography like wildlife; incorporate your fashion shots into landscape photos; if you’re an architectural photographer, bring an element of vibrancy to your photos; try a camera from a different system than the one you use: if you shoot full-frame, try a Micro Four Thirds camera or vice versa; instead of using top quality glasses, choose an adapter and a low-quality vintage lens.
It doesn’t just stop with the camera. Doing some research to discover some different creative editing and processing techniques and then combining them in new and creative ways can also take your creative photography to the next level. .
Accept that experiments are less likely to land you online prizes in the form of discarded likes. Most people only appreciate what is familiar to them. The usual simplicity of pulp photography requires little effort or brains to process. What’s more, you may even face direct criticism from those who have limited ability to see beyond mundane things. For example, I built a website and shot for a vacation rental and the client wanted to emphasize that the property is pet-friendly. Therefore, I included a picture of a dog in several photos and posted one of them online. I then faced criticism from another photographer for including a dog in a real estate photo.
Challenging the conventions of photography requires bravery. But those who denigrate creative work are talking more about themselves and their limited ability to understand it than your skills. Furthermore, we should avoid falling into the trap of negativity and always encourage others in their work, even if their results are not what we want.
Do you experiment with photography? Do you cross the line? It would be great to hear your thoughts on the challenges you face with creativity and originality, and maybe see some of your photos in the comments.
