jonnygraham
163-365 Keeping up with trends
12.06.2010
There are a lot of cliches on flickr.
Basically anything with epic bokeh and a person in it is amazing but you ask the same people why they like it and they have no idea. Not that this is bad, at least it conveys enough. However you get to a point where someone is ONLY doing high bokeh, multiplicity backlit girl with cat with fancy film-esque processing and no 100% black values (of the RGB sort) so it looks like the photo is 20 years old. Sure this is great but tbh anyone can do one thing great. Sure I sat down at our piano a while back made up a little song by stringing together notes that sounded cool, it has no lyrics yet but even my sister (who does play the piano) commented that it was pretty good. However ask me to play anything else or give me some sheet music and Im stumped. It may be harsh but I found myself comfortable in the 'dark' image mindset and off camera flash skillset but my natural light skills were seriously lacking IMO. Hence why Im pushing this 'brighter' way of seeing photographs. That way if I get cool ideas I will be less held back by my kit or skills because I have a wider experience in more techniques/gear/environments. There is a whole consensus that you are either really good at 'studio' lighting or you are really good at available/natural light. Im trying to investigate if you can improve on both.
This sort of mind-speaking may not make me very popular on flickr but there is some truth in it. People like finding one lightring technique, one post processing method or one type of camera (yea you with the expired film and the AE-1, old style is great but if you're depending on it to take good pictures you're missing the point altogether). Said people will then assume that becuase this *insert one or all of above things* works for them they claim it as their 'style' but really its only because that's all they know. Anyone can come along and 'steal' their technique.. I see loads of cool ideas and could easily hijack them (like today; youaretheocean, she put some coloured cellophane infront of the lense really cloes up to get the effect of a colour gradient that looked like a red light leak) but while I could do that myself it wouldn't be my decision, my vision, my creativity.
To be honest I am still unsure as to what defines a 'style' in photography. I know it's there as I see it in people's work as a consistant pattern in an element of the picture but with so many duplicates out there it all seems the same. Only a small few people bring something original to the table and those people gain my greatest respect.
There's this girl on flickr that I've been (stalking) following for a few months. Her work is quite the opposite to mine. Difficult to interperate and not gutted out and layed on a table for all to see the thought process behind it like I do with this writing (urgh, I really have to stop doing that). Some of it seems deeply personal but not enough to make you sure it is. Anyway, her work went through a stage were an effect was used almost exclusively, at least in all of her uploads. There are a few others of equal popularity using the same effect on flickr and I was beginning to wonder when (and I mean this in a nice way) she was going to move on. It wasnt really helping the pictures in some cases but gained a huge flow of attention from followers as it made some pretty crazy images. It was 'style' I guess but tbh you/I/Billy Joe just starting into photography could buy the same thing and put it on their camera and it would make the same effect..
But then she did something different. A technique that has been tried thousands maybe millions of times over the years but her approach to it was unique, It impressed me big time because it had more substance. Again the equipment required isnt expensive but her creative 'vision' (I have no better word to make that easier to understand) in relation to it was unique, stylish even. You may be able to buy all the actions and curves adjustments and gear that your faviourite photographer has but you cannot buy/steal/borrow their creative vision (I'll maybe make more sense of that word tomorrow.)
Maybe style is not so much a destination but more of a journey. One not just of kit, gear and process but whole shifts in thinking/seeing pictures. The artist that survives is the artist that can diversify, widen their horizons and think within new spaces. Just look at Mattise.
-----------------
I didn't intent to write this but somehow it's been stewing over in my head for a few weeks and I've only got the words to articulate it now.
The fact that this picture is quite literally tongue and cheek is purely coincidence.
The fact I'm blowing away the strobe gel (see above about the cellophane) is not.
I don't ever want to become so comfortable in something physical (camera gear, post process techniques or genre/subject matter) that I mistake it for the other thing that is my personal style/vision/creativity, which I still havent entirely found yet. Of course it is great to try new gear and techniques etc but those arent what make good pictures. Creativity transcends all gear, all software, all locations or subject matter. In a way finding your personal style involves finding yourself. As a result my pictures automatically convey how Im feeling most of the time. At the moment I have to decide wether to sit down where I am and (lie) say I have found who I am as a person and photographer or continue to explore, experiment, do cool stuff that Im not confident with. Those who have tried or are trying to find themselves will know how frustrating/confusing this is. Those that have not will have no idea what Im talking about but I would encourage everyone to try.
BIG out of focus (pre focusing and self timer is a beast to get right :/ )
163-365 Keeping up with trends
12.06.2010
There are a lot of cliches on flickr.
Basically anything with epic bokeh and a person in it is amazing but you ask the same people why they like it and they have no idea. Not that this is bad, at least it conveys enough. However you get to a point where someone is ONLY doing high bokeh, multiplicity backlit girl with cat with fancy film-esque processing and no 100% black values (of the RGB sort) so it looks like the photo is 20 years old. Sure this is great but tbh anyone can do one thing great. Sure I sat down at our piano a while back made up a little song by stringing together notes that sounded cool, it has no lyrics yet but even my sister (who does play the piano) commented that it was pretty good. However ask me to play anything else or give me some sheet music and Im stumped. It may be harsh but I found myself comfortable in the 'dark' image mindset and off camera flash skillset but my natural light skills were seriously lacking IMO. Hence why Im pushing this 'brighter' way of seeing photographs. That way if I get cool ideas I will be less held back by my kit or skills because I have a wider experience in more techniques/gear/environments. There is a whole consensus that you are either really good at 'studio' lighting or you are really good at available/natural light. Im trying to investigate if you can improve on both.
This sort of mind-speaking may not make me very popular on flickr but there is some truth in it. People like finding one lightring technique, one post processing method or one type of camera (yea you with the expired film and the AE-1, old style is great but if you're depending on it to take good pictures you're missing the point altogether). Said people will then assume that becuase this *insert one or all of above things* works for them they claim it as their 'style' but really its only because that's all they know. Anyone can come along and 'steal' their technique.. I see loads of cool ideas and could easily hijack them (like today; youaretheocean, she put some coloured cellophane infront of the lense really cloes up to get the effect of a colour gradient that looked like a red light leak) but while I could do that myself it wouldn't be my decision, my vision, my creativity.
To be honest I am still unsure as to what defines a 'style' in photography. I know it's there as I see it in people's work as a consistant pattern in an element of the picture but with so many duplicates out there it all seems the same. Only a small few people bring something original to the table and those people gain my greatest respect.
There's this girl on flickr that I've been (stalking) following for a few months. Her work is quite the opposite to mine. Difficult to interperate and not gutted out and layed on a table for all to see the thought process behind it like I do with this writing (urgh, I really have to stop doing that). Some of it seems deeply personal but not enough to make you sure it is. Anyway, her work went through a stage were an effect was used almost exclusively, at least in all of her uploads. There are a few others of equal popularity using the same effect on flickr and I was beginning to wonder when (and I mean this in a nice way) she was going to move on. It wasnt really helping the pictures in some cases but gained a huge flow of attention from followers as it made some pretty crazy images. It was 'style' I guess but tbh you/I/Billy Joe just starting into photography could buy the same thing and put it on their camera and it would make the same effect..
But then she did something different. A technique that has been tried thousands maybe millions of times over the years but her approach to it was unique, It impressed me big time because it had more substance. Again the equipment required isnt expensive but her creative 'vision' (I have no better word to make that easier to understand) in relation to it was unique, stylish even. You may be able to buy all the actions and curves adjustments and gear that your faviourite photographer has but you cannot buy/steal/borrow their creative vision (I'll maybe make more sense of that word tomorrow.)
Maybe style is not so much a destination but more of a journey. One not just of kit, gear and process but whole shifts in thinking/seeing pictures. The artist that survives is the artist that can diversify, widen their horizons and think within new spaces. Just look at Mattise.
-----------------
I didn't intent to write this but somehow it's been stewing over in my head for a few weeks and I've only got the words to articulate it now.
The fact that this picture is quite literally tongue and cheek is purely coincidence.
The fact I'm blowing away the strobe gel (see above about the cellophane) is not.
I don't ever want to become so comfortable in something physical (camera gear, post process techniques or genre/subject matter) that I mistake it for the other thing that is my personal style/vision/creativity, which I still havent entirely found yet. Of course it is great to try new gear and techniques etc but those arent what make good pictures. Creativity transcends all gear, all software, all locations or subject matter. In a way finding your personal style involves finding yourself. As a result my pictures automatically convey how Im feeling most of the time. At the moment I have to decide wether to sit down where I am and (lie) say I have found who I am as a person and photographer or continue to explore, experiment, do cool stuff that Im not confident with. Those who have tried or are trying to find themselves will know how frustrating/confusing this is. Those that have not will have no idea what Im talking about but I would encourage everyone to try.
BIG out of focus (pre focusing and self timer is a beast to get right :/ )