Thoughts on Original Work
If there is one recurring topic to my conversations with fellow photographers it is creativity and personal vision (probably as much an indication of the good quality of company I keep as anything else) — from finding one’s own voice to frustration about why everyone is photographing the exact same things the exact same way.
OK, to be fair: practically every one of us, at some point on our photographic journey, aspired to make images like those of [insert personal inspiration here], and every one of us, upon first visiting a well known area had to get our own image of [insert favorite landscape icon(s) here].
And yet, some transition out of this phase fairly quickly and move on to seek and create more personal expressions, while others seem to get bogged down in perpetual “trophy hunter” mode, continuously chasing after scenes and compositions made famous by others.
Admittedly, I find it hard to form a qualitative opinion here. There is nothing inherently wrong with wanting to see and photograph iconic locations. They are, after all, iconic for a reason. In fact, I would encourage everyone to get out there and experience them in person.
There is also nothing inherently wrong with seeking beauty for beauty’s sake, even if one doesn’t have much to “say” creatively, and there are certainly many other avenues to express creativity other than photography. Just because one happens to enjoy photographing nature, doesn’t mean they have to take their hobby or themselves too seriously. And, of course, there’s the whole “sincerest form of flattery” thing.
And yet, I have to confess it does bother me when someone asks for a recipe that will allow them to make an exact duplicate of one of my more personal works. I’m not talking about directions to Delicate Arch or Antelope Canyon, I’m talking about images that are personal creations, independent of any specific well-known locale, images conceived of my own creative efforts from elements that drew my attention and inspired me in a unique and personal way.
As a tour and workshop guide, I often take people to places where I have created such works but I will never instruct them on how to make a copy of my image (in fact I will often ask them to explicitly refrain from doing so and to substitute their own interpretation of the place,) and I will never provide such information on request.
Honestly – if you like MY image, buy MY print. If you want to make your own image, make it your own IMAGE, not your own COPY.
Not to be misinterpreted, I don’t feel this applies to land features where anyone who’s able to finds them will likely photograph them the same obvious way. I am specifically talking about unique personal interpretations.
What’s the general consensus among the photographers reading this? Do you feel the same way about your images? What value do you place on original/personal work vs. seeking well-known subjects?
Guy
Category: Thoughts and Musings
Hey Guy,
For me, it probably has to do with the depth of someone’s work more than a specific example. Is their portfolio a mass of icons and copies, or a bunch of images I’ve never heard of and one that looks familiar. And it depends a little (to me) on the subject matter.
I remember shooting grizzly bears one time at Brooks River, Katmai NP, and there were about 7 photographers, including myself, lining up with this one bear. When the bear lifted it’s head the cameras roared into action, sounding like a gattling gun (I guess, I’ve never actually heard a gattling gun). I saw the photos from one of my friends a few years later, and a number of them were almost identical to what I, and obviously a bunch of others) had .. I mean, looking at the slides, they could’ve been my photos. I don’t see that as a problem though I do try to get out and shoot where that’s not going to happen .. but once that situation arises, I don’t think its problematic that people make similar photos.
I’ve no idea if that makes any sense or not. I need some coffee and/or a nap.
Cheers
Carl
I definitely agree. My shot is my shot. This may be emphasized because most of my work and experience is in the Everglades, without many icons to flock to. I am glad for this actually, and enjoy the hunt. I may not see things as creatively as you, (you definitely have a distinct style), but I go off trail to find uniquely arranged scenes and I am proud that I can present a different scene than most others. This also leaves me without much to say when someone asks for a great spot to shoot in the Everglades. I say park somewhere and start walking. =)
Anyways, I think anyone who respects a shot will naturally ask about it and that is good, but if they respect it, they should respect some trade secrets as well.
Carl, I don’t think that’s the same situation. I’m sure none of the other photographers was there expressly to make a copy of another’s work (and how could they? all of you were there at the same time). Go get some coffee… and a plane ticket. You need some desert time to set you straight and put the color back in your cheeks
Paul, you do have a distinct style. I can generally pick your images easily, and not just by subject matter. Your love for the place and personal connection with it comes through in every one.
Guy
Hey Guy
That’s true, it’s different to copying another image, even idea, I suppose. I was just thinking in more general terms, of making images that aren’t so individual. I think copying another image is fine for practice – for example, I’ve sat down and learned guitar pieces and flute pieces note-for-note, best I can, and I do love playing those riffs and licks and phrases, even tunes, but I also realize the value is not in reproduction, it’s in what they teach me – and what I find they inevitably teach me is the language – then it’s up to me to say something worth listening to (which happens all to rarely).
That said, for example, one of Eric Clapton’s solos when he was in the band Cream, to a song called Strange Brew, is note for note a solo by Albert King (crosscut saw) – so imitation can indeed stand as flattery – again, it goes back, for me, to the depth of his work .. Clapton’s work stands alone just fine, and doesn’t rest on any single piece, so his copying that particular solo is nothing more than respect.
Overall, don’t worry about it bro.
A slice of the desert would be nice. But I think the temperature inversion would kill me.
Cheers
Carl
Hello Guy,
. I find I learn a lot by asking someone about their shot, especially if I am with them at the location; however I tried to find my own attraction/story to tell what I want to tell. And that is hard for sure.
Nice new blog, I am glad I found it, and great article. Sometimes one has to try and see how saw and photographed just to get some ideas and to try and understand not only the attraction but the technique. I also think if that is *all* one does, well heck just buy the postcard/print
Anyway, hope you are offering workshops this fall in Torrey, would love to get over.
Paul
Hi Guy!
I have had this same conversation with two eminent British photographers (and noted workshop leaders), one of whom is known for his work in the ‘intimate-landscape’ genre, and they expressed pretty much the same opinion.
I think it’s a form of plagiarism and displays a chronic lack of ambition. Most of us are into photography because it is a form of self-expression but if your only form of expression is in copying the work of others then what does that say about you as a photographer?
In any case, it’s a far more satisfying challenge to put your own stamp on a location and use the prevailing conditions to your advantage (whatever they might be) in order to create something really unique and personal. To do otherwise is, at best, not being true to yourself.
Julian.
You raise a very interesting etiquette and ethics conversation point Gal. Although imitation is the sincerest form of flattery the degree and type of imitation can make a big difference.
In short I see eye to eye with you on this point.
For one I always try to bring my own creative perspective to a subject I photograph whether it is an iconic location photographed a million times or one that is being photographed for the first time.
Second when with with other photographers I try to be attentive to their activities so as to not crowd their space or style. The last thing I want is to put my tripod legs in the holes of another photographer and I certainly don’t want others doing the same to me.
Third when in the shadow of a a great photographer from yesteryear at an iconic location I’ll aim to capture a unique interpretation of the scene, but often after capturing that iconic shot as I’ve seen it before. Why do this? For me it is a way of paying my respects and using it as a stepping stone to applying my own interpretation. In these instances only my vision ever sees the light of day.
Fourth like you I will never give out the exact recipe. I don’t mind putting people on the right track as doing so will always require the person to discover their own path and vision.
I have to also add that my viewpoint on this transcends to artists in other mediums reproducing my photographs.
I am curious though when in a workshop setting how do you address your opinion on this matter to the inquirer? Also settings and perspective to capture a photograph are one thing, but how do you feel about others reproducing a particular style (think post-processing)?
Guy,
I have run into the problem a couple of times. One was with a friend, and fellow nature photographer. I photographed a group of beautiful little spring ferns growing up through a bead of fallen rhododendron blooms. The dense bed of fallen blooms was of my doing. I made this photo. When I left my friend stated to the group that he was go to shoot the in this area. He did but he shot that same “exact” shot! I know this because he put it on his photo stock site. After noticing this I nicely asked him to think about what he had done and remove the photo. I had published it in my Blue Ridge Parkway book. By the way, it was brought to my attention from a buyer of my book when I received an email asking why I had a photo of this photographer in my book and wanted to know why I didn’t credit him.
There is another photo that I took up on the Roan many years ago, with the blooming rhododendrons and the three large rocks protruding into the scene from the LLC. This is now the most photographed location on Roan.
It’s a fine line we walk! I try to make my workshop students understand how important it is to make their own photos and find their own style. But it’s really hard to see how a professional photographer can copy a photo and try to sell it on their own site as their own design and style. Especially when he’s a friend
Jerry Greer
http://jerrydgreer.wordpress.com/
I think it’s a form of plagiarism and displays a chronic lack of ambition. >>>
I’m not sure if I will classify this as one (While I may agree with your former statement ). And if that is the case, almost no photographer I know is doing any ‘original’ work (or let’s say majority of their portfolio consists of images which look ‘familiar’). If you see landscape photographers around the world, hardly 5% of them can be said to have done something original.