stephen.w Posted August 27, 2012 Share #21 Posted August 27, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Just start looking at other photographers in a similar genre, read what is written about them, and soon the context will form in your head about your own place in the genre and how to describe it. As you say it is 'rural life' as a jumping off point look at the work of this great Leica user (although don't limit yourself to Leica users) James Ravilious You could also maybe try David Hurn's photographs of Wales and Welsh life, even if they aren't exclusively 'rural'. Land Of My Father Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 27, 2012 Posted August 27, 2012 Hi stephen.w, Take a look here Trying to define genre and style. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Keith (M) Posted August 27, 2012 Share #22 Posted August 27, 2012 I am currently constraining myself to one Leica M2, one 35mm f/2.8 Summaron and one film, Tri-X. A brave move. Lots of interesting replies to your question regarding style and it is one I have been wrestling with on and off for a couple of years. This stems from being advised (after gaining the LRPS distinction) that for the step-up to ARPS there needed to be more of 'me' in my photographs and that I needed to develop a personal style. I will admit to being something of a 'butterfly' photographer (i.e. I flit from subject to subject...) but that is down to me photographing whatever it is that catches my eye. Sometimes I go out with a particular subject in mind but if I see something completely unrelated, I'll still photograph it. As part of my attempt to develop a personal style I decided I needed to be much more informed about a broader range of photography aspects, from history through to modern usage. Up until that point my photographic reading material had been of the 'how to' and the purely technical aspects. My starting point was Susan Sontag's 'On Photography' and Graham Clarke's 'The Photograph' closely followed by books such as 'Ways of Seeing' by John Berger, 'The Nature of Photographs' by Stephen Shore and John Swarkowski's 'The Photographer's Eye'. Other tomes can be seen (you may have to squint) in the iPhone shot below. Has all this reading made me a better photographer? I certainly like to think so but even if it has not, I have (after an initial struggle) enjoyed reading and absorbing the contents. Do my photographs now have more of 'me' in them - I have absolutely no idea! PS - Ravilious will probably be my next addition. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/186517-trying-to-define-genre-and-style/?do=findComment&comment=2096822'>More sharing options...
Keith (M) Posted August 30, 2012 Share #23 Posted August 30, 2012 My reading list and bookshelf picture appears to have killed the thread. A pity, I was quite enjoying reading other peoples thoughts on the issues. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiMPLiFY Posted August 30, 2012 Author Share #24 Posted August 30, 2012 No, not at all. I actually have made notes of the books on your shelf and have a reading list now. Thank You! I have been giving this quite a lot of thought this week and actually did try to take 36 images in 30 minutes of my kitchen to see if I could define my style. I was only able to take 20 and the place is really almost too familiar so I got a little stuck as nothing seemed interesting. Then I started thinking about what CalArts99 stated about personality. I found it was interesting to google introverted and extroverted photographers and there are quite a few blog posts about that. I think there may be something to the different type of photos that come from different personalities. I am no doubt an introvert so that helped me narrow down what I don't want to do. Have you ever looked at a photo that made your nervous or gave you anxiety? Then you can look at a different photo and it can make you feel relaxed and at peace? I find the process of defining a style may perhaps lead to more self awareness as well. I don't know anything for certain but this has been my thinking process so far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiMPLiFY Posted August 30, 2012 Author Share #25 Posted August 30, 2012 ps. If you've every watched Robert Capa: In Love and War there is one part where a lady says that Capa was like a bull in a china shop and his images had strong horizontal lines Bresson could be picked out by the geometry "Chim" was the philosopher with complex compositions or something like that. These are not direct quotes but apparently the 3 photographers who founded Magnum each had their own style which was apparent to this woman. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted August 30, 2012 Share #26 Posted August 30, 2012 Kathleen: Your path is your own and quite possibly sensible. My comments come from experience that goes way back. Perhaps obsolete. I have to let it go. Personal - I never tried to put to words what compelled me to certain subject and composition largely because I was led by a visceral sense, something an athlete might sense in his pursuit. Beyond words. Late in life I put together some of my favorite photos and a person wiser than I said, "It is all about windows! Frames within frames. And a lot of misery." ( example The caption was important. ) I was devastated. Later a scholar and photo critic took one of my photos to a large seminar, put it up on a big screen and said, "An inscrutable photograph." I quit photography a month later, eventually stumbled into academe where I stayed for thirty years. I can't put the bullet back in the gun. That life is over. Good luck, Kathleen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiMPLiFY Posted August 30, 2012 Author Share #27 Posted August 30, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) That's really sad because I love that picture! It does evoke strong emotions in me and immediately the song that popped into my head was "My name is Luca, I live on the 7th floor ..." it's about child abuse I think. Does anyone remember that song? That is my very subjective interpretation. I am not an art critic by any stretch of the imagination. The picture is great if it can immediately evoke such a strong emotion. I have no interest in pursuing this professionally because I cannot bear the politics and don't have the art of schmoozing down at all. I just want to use this tool as a form of self expression. Out of curiosity I just took some personality test online for free and it says I am an INFJ. Meyers and Briggs I think. I kind of agree with it as much as I dislike placing myself or any other being into a category. I think having this knowledge will help me find my style and prevent me from placing myself into a situation that would damage my sensitive soul. I am very sad that the art world treated you and this wonderfully emotive image so rudely and so dismissive. I honestly just love it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiMPLiFY Posted August 30, 2012 Author Share #28 Posted August 30, 2012 I call this one "secret passage" but I'm not sure anyone other than me would get that and i'm quite sure it would never be considered "high art". i think it fits with what perhaps may be my "style" though. it would be interesting for everyone in this thread to post one photo and we can sort of assist each other in defining our style. anyone in? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiMPLiFY Posted August 30, 2012 Author Share #29 Posted August 30, 2012 ( example The caption was important. ) What is the caption? I missed it and it's too late to edit. I'm not very used to forums and I apologize if I misunderstood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiMPLiFY Posted August 30, 2012 Author Share #30 Posted August 30, 2012 Okay, I'm really slow and really new so this idea took a while to sink in. In the future I will sleep on things before I post. I think I get it! satori! (maybe) What pico is saying is that he did not think captions were a good idea because the image speaks for itself. Maybe if I look at it then I interpret it one way but then you could have millions of others projecting their own ideas, personalities and conclusions on it. It's meaning is different for each individual viewer until you slap a caption on it. Once you give it a name it is no longer about the image? Images are "beyond words". Did I get it? this is hard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiMPLiFY Posted August 30, 2012 Author Share #31 Posted August 30, 2012 ps. If you've every watched Robert Capa: In Love and War there is one part where a lady says that Capa was like a bull in a china shop and his images had strong horizontal (correction) VERTICAL compositions Bresson could be picked out by the geometry "Chim" was the philosopher with complex compositions or something like that. These are not direct quotes but apparently the 3 photographers who founded Magnum each had their own style which was apparent to this woman. oops! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiMPLiFY Posted August 31, 2012 Author Share #32 Posted August 31, 2012 now i am just so embarrassed and confused. please accept my apologies for not pausing to think things out. these are all new concepts to me and it's really hard to raise your hand in a forum. i'm so sorry for my ignorance but please understand i am determined to learn one way or another. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheekyguille Posted August 31, 2012 Share #33 Posted August 31, 2012 I often question that for myself. Having been thru experimentation with genres, experienced different styles, but only beginning to understand what I am doing. Still the ambition is one that goes past equipment and signature. At some point the bigger question is what does one want to say, what is the unique perspective or concept? Is a big hairy question, and a good one to focus on. I've also found myself absorbed in the black hole of technical and equipment discussions. In the end these topics may help with technique but they don't answer the big question. So, yes spend time thinking about it, believe in yourself and your path, study photography and photographers and their language, Figure the place you want to be in. Most never figure this out, I know I haven't, but I sure don't want to take pretty photos the rest of my life Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted August 31, 2012 Share #34 Posted August 31, 2012 What pico is saying is that he did not think captions were a good idea because the image speaks for itself. Maybe if I look at it then I interpret it one way but then you could have millions of others projecting their own ideas, personalities and conclusions on it. It's meaning is different for each individual viewer until you slap a caption on it. Once you give it a name it is no longer about the image? Images are "beyond words". Did I get it? this is hard. You took the photograph, you decide what it is about. If you want to caption it and claim it for your own do it, if you want to leave it for other people to decided what it is about, well that works sometimes but not always. The point is that not having a caption can lead to misinterpretation while even a vague description for a caption, like the place, can set the image into a context. But at some point either an individual photograph, or the body of work it belongs with, needs a title. Images are not 'beyond words', this implies that art exists in isolation from the rest of the world. It doesn't. A fine way to understand the importance of words, captions, titles is to look at it from the other way around, what gives a totally abstract photograph a life. Well, calling it '#1 of 100' implies at least it shouldn't be dismissed as an accident. Calling it something more enigmatically poetic, perhaps after some music you have heard like 'The Lark Ascending', works by calling up the viewers memories and existing thoughts, to which your image will be added. It will at least claim a place in their minds even if they don't 'get it'. A fine example of the way titles or captions can profoundly influence photographs is found in Alfred Stieglitz's series called 'Equivalents', and I think you could argue it is the title as much as the subject matter that dragged photography into the modern age. Equivalents - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith (M) Posted August 31, 2012 Share #35 Posted August 31, 2012 I call this one "secret passage" but I'm not sure anyone other than me would get that and i'm quite sure it would never be considered "high art". i think it fits with what perhaps may be my "style" though. it would be interesting for everyone in this thread to post one photo and we can sort of assist each other in defining our style. anyone in? Good idea, Kathleen. In the Digital Imaging Group sub-forum of the RPS, we have a thread 'Images for Discussion' where participants upload one image per week and then comment on all other participant's images. Numbers vary between a dozen and twenty so some weeks it can be a bit time-consuming, but the process is quite rewarding. Maybe something similar could work here (perhaps in a sub-set of the Photo Forum?). Must dash - have a hospital appt but will try to comment on your image later. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
businessasusual Posted August 31, 2012 Share #36 Posted August 31, 2012 My reading list and bookshelf picture appears to have killed the thread. A pity, I was quite enjoying reading other peoples thoughts on the issues. Ha ha, Keith - I was so tempted to mention that I felt someone had broken into my house and snapped this photo. And then I thought to start a thread calling it "Show Us Ya Bookcase." :D Mine is 3 shelves long. I thought better of it - trying to avoid hijacking your post - but yep, I loved it!! I am on your page! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted August 31, 2012 Share #37 Posted August 31, 2012 Okay, I'm really slow and really new so this idea took a while to sink in. In the future I will sleep on things before I post. I think I get it! satori! (maybe) What pico is saying is that he did not think captions were a good idea because the image speaks for itself. [...] Images are "beyond words". Did I get it? this is hard. I've been away since last post, thus late to respond. I was a news photographer and photojournalist (largely magazine work) when I quit. Captions were important because photos accompanied articles. Sometimes a caption was repeated from the text. The photo in question was accompanied by text which was, in effect, "Chicago during the Days of Rage, with flags flying from the right and burning on the left, we were reluctant to let our children outside." The composition of the image is almost exactly that of the stars and stripes of the US flag. The estranged little boy was very real. I have more pictures. By the way, he died of AIDS at the age of twenty-six. It has been a sad life. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larcomb Posted August 31, 2012 Share #38 Posted August 31, 2012 I am currently constraining myself to one Leica M2, one 35mm f/2.8 Summaron and one film, Tri-X. Is there such a style called "classic"? I think my genre would be considered rural life? I don't know how to use 2 words to describe a style when I've been working for less than one month. Maybe it's too soon to define this for me but I'd prefer to be very consistent and dedicated to simple treatment and presentation. Continuity feels like it should have weight. Do any of you who shoot film have one basic style and genre? If yes could you define it in 2 words? I'm having trouble even articulating my question. If anyone knows what I mean please let me know. Thanks. I just want everything to be cohesive or ... to look like they belong to the same photographer ... What you are talking abot is your habital using of certain films, lenses, apertures, etc. If you like shallow depth of field or deep depth of field. I like a certtain look and my photos are easily identifiable from others. its not that hard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted August 31, 2012 Share #39 Posted August 31, 2012 [...] Images are not 'beyond words', this implies that art exists in isolation from the rest of the world. It doesn't.[...] Those were my words, so permit me this opportunity to explain what I meant. I was trying to address how I worked, not the outcome - the photographs. I held no words in mind as I photographed. I was not driven or guided by an articulated style. That is what I meant. The association with athletic skill refers to body, or kinetic intelligence, applied to moving to a subject and composition. I know it is a real thing, having once been skilled in athletics, military battle behavior, and perhaps in photography - all without words in my mind. Words associated with my published work were provided by writers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted August 31, 2012 Share #40 Posted August 31, 2012 What you are talking abot is your habital using of certain films, lenses, apertures, etc. If you like shallow depth of field or deep depth of field. I like a certtain look and my photos are easily identifiable from others. its not that hard. May we see some? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.