Developing an Artistic Vision

In a recent thread Marc Williams lamented that we never have

discussions about developing our artistic vision. So let's talk about

it. How does one go about figuring out their own aesthetic? We talk a

lot about how to achieve a specific look in various situations, but we

don't spend much time talking about how we decided what look we like.

 

I'm lucky in that I live with a person whose own artistic vision is

far more developed than mine (although not in photography). And she's

pretty tough, so she doesn't let me get away with not asking hard

questions about my work.

 

So, how did you develop your vision? I hope Mary won't care if this

wanders a bit from Wedding Photography because I'd like to hear from

some of the other lurkers on this board that don't primarily shoot

weddings.

I think that it is something innate, hard to define, that manifests itself in your work... After

you've produced a body of work, people will begin tom try to define it... Oh, he's an

impressionist.... She's a cubist. He's a photojournalist, but he uses muted colors and his

use of light is dreamy... I don't think somebody can develop an artistic vision consciously.

It bubbles out of who you are and springs from the sum of your experience. That certain,

"Je ne sais quoi!"<div></div>

OK, I don't primarily shoot weddings. For the past twenty years my wedding work has mostly consisted of covering for a few wedding shooter friends of mine when they were sick or overbooked. The last couple of years my buddy Mike, a studio owner, has been bitching that I should go digital like he has, while he scanned my negs, but now he says he won't scan 'em anymore. That'll last until he gets over booked again or laid up with the flu...heh, heh. Before that I kind of burned out by shooting every wedding I could get my hands on for several years while my then wife attended medical school because we needed the money.

 

I've always had friends who were artists, my dad went to art school for two years after high school, and I attended the Swain School of Design in New Bedford, Massachusettes on Saturday mornings as a child. I've traded photography for art work with several now well known artists, and have numerous paintings and drawings on the walls of my home, mixed in with photographs by myself and others. Some of those paintings that I essentially traded for shooting a few rolls of color slides years ago would probably bring $10,000 or more at auction now.

 

I used to spend endless hours looking at books and articles with photographs by well known photographers, and I shot for a number of publications.

 

There's probably a college or university near you that offers a course in art apreciation, often in the evening. There you'll meet up with other like minded people. The tuition and books would qualify as a tax write-off, and some of those people you'll meet are potential customers. In the meantime go to your library and ask the librarian to suggest some books. Go to nearby art galleries and talk with the owners. Meet some of the artists. Again, look at this as a business opportunity. Artists need photographs of their art work. Gallery owners need coverage of show openings for distribution to newspapers and magazines. Neither is likely to pay big bucks, but again, you'll meet people! They get married and their kids get married. The sort of people who frequent gallery openings tend to be in the upper income brackets. And they tend to be professional people or business owners, again potential photography clients. Combine your art education with networking. Always have business cards with you and always carry a camera.

God love ya Matt.

 

I think there are a number of different ways one develops their own vision or style. One

way is by observing other work which touches you in some way. Historical reference of

those who went before us is often a path to that.

 

To this day I look in awe at the conceptually driven portrait work of Arnold Newman. I have

met the man, read everything I could get my hands on, have signed monographs of his,

and used borrowed money to purchased his incredible portrait of Stravinsky at a time

when I was a struggling artist who had to eat beans and franks to make ends meet.

 

My style often includes a sense of humor which I always try to hunt and capture at

weddings because of exposure to the work Eliot Erwitt, and Robert Doisneau.

 

Story telling sequencing was influenced by comic book art, drawing story boards for TV

commercials, and especially the earlier work of Duane Michals (Alice's Mirror has to be

seen).

 

Timing, as cliche' as it may seem, came from a love of HCBs work ... among others.

 

Color, from a love of painting ... with Paul Klee as an early favorite.

 

Light, just about all art and great photography. I especially liked studying how famous

artists had used reference photography in their work.

 

Eventually, that exposure amalgamates into your own take on things. It's sort of an

additive process. You are part them and part you, and the result is something different.

 

Almost never have I sought inspiration from the work of other wedding photographers.<div></div>

Kind of a spin off on Matt's question, do you ever wish your style were different than what it is? I tend to look at other people's work and wonder why I don't have that kind of eye, or why my style is so different, while I like their style better. It does help me to srtive for a goal, and I get other ideas. I tend to focus so much on technical issues, that I miss a sense of style. Technicality is important, but we need to focus on a vison. Great topic Matt.

Matt,

 

I can speak of how other people get to their vision, but in my case I can tell you that my vision has developed over time based on what I feel confortable doing.

 

For instance when I meet with the couple for the first time the emphasis is on working together towards a common goal of good photography, meaning that if they want to be their photographer they will have to pose for me and give me time to do my thing, because my artistic style requires that.

 

Hope that makes sense.

 

Hugh

This is an interesting question but I've been thinking about it and I'm not sure I can answer. I don't think my vision has fully developed yet- it's still all experimental and changes from day to day. I like things simple and elegant and raw looking- sometimes that comes through in my photos and sometimes not. I always like motion- like blur- photos that evoke feelings- I'm always drawn to blue in photos or paintings. I'm also very interested in cinema and the colors- crops- angles. I went to see "Lords of Dogtown" Sunday and now I'm really obsessed with finding a film and process that will give me that color- 70's color I guess you could call it but it also had a hint of a cross prossed look in the shadows.

 

Somebody emailed yesterday to ask if I'd like to teach "my style"...are you kidding me- I don't even know what that is!

Anyway- hopefully one day I'll be more sure.

My vision & mission can be found on the front page of my web site.

 

I'm constantly searching, trying to depict the happy moments of an important day in the life of beautiful & happy people. I'm constantly checking my vision & mission statements. I can go to a mall, looking around every nook and cranny, poking into various places with my senses, listening to sounds of voices & music & noise. How people walk & talk and I look at what and how they wear clothes, look at the displays in stores, taking the pulse of living, breathing people. I can go to a magazine area of a Barnes and Noble and just watch. Airports and parks are another good place.

 

What's popular? Sleveless, carnations or roses or lilys; purple, red, black tux, maroon dresses, hair style, makeup. Vendors who participate in the wedding industry are fun to visit with. I find the industry is a moving target and I like that.

 

I take the wedding business seriously. I have many reasons are they are in no particular order.

 

It is an honor and a great responsibility to have a couple place their trust and confidence in hiring me to tell their wedding story with my heart, mind and soul connected with their families, relatives and friends as one through my camera. It is my only source of W2 income. I love doing weddings. Every one of them is a new experience.

 

Do I look, feel and listen to other photographers? You bet I do. I need to learn a lot yet and I consider it a valuable experience, where a successful wedding photographer will take the time and energy and share with someone like me how they became what they are. And some of the best of the best, at least by some standards, take the time to do this.

 

Is wedding photography art? To my clients it is and that's most important to me.

 

My wife is my partner and after the conclusion of each wedding we will be driving home trying to figure out how we can do better with the next one.

 

It's what I do and some people like what I do while others don't. That's life.

I agree with drawing inspiration from sources other than wedding photographers. While there's value in it, especially for the (sigh) traditional formal poses which Mom desires, I like to highlight the more artistic images to the younger B&G. Bambi Cantrell is my hero in this category.

<p>

I look at the glamour style magazines when waiting for a hair cut. I watch the special features on a DVD movie. I'm often thinking album covers when anticipating and composing. A little less "artistic" if there's a variable scale to being "artistic," than those mentioned here thus far.

<p>

OMG Marc, I LOVE the work of Erwitt and see his inspiration in your work. I referenced one of your images in this thread about humor in photography:<br>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CRvL">http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CRvL</a><br>

I'm a little disappointed with the lack of participation this topic garnered.

<p>

The idea Kari presents is daunting! I don't so much wish I had a different style, but I wish I could better define styles, and then grab the image accordingly. I'm glad you brought this up here Matt! The above "similar" discussion in the people photography forum went nowhere! It's a little more energized here.

<p>

This portrait here, I was thinking album cover. I had seen the Arnold Newman image before. But at the moment this image was shot, I was not attempting to emulate the Newman image of Stravinsky. Frankly, it's not even close.<div></div>

Agreed this is a great topic. About a year ago I started getting down into the serious side of photography. I absolutely love getting that moment in time that will last a lifetime. I think I have most of the technical skill needed and by practice this will hopefully develop into second nature.

 

What really gets me is how to develop the ?eye? for a good picture. How to compose a beautiful picture and make a bride look stunning. Since taking this hobby a step further I tend to look for more detail in things around me. I?m more aware to look at the sun set, walking into the room I will always try to find a place that will make a good picture.

 

I still don?t have a specific role model to work from and in this regard I feel a bit left out. I do have to admit that I enjoy looking at other people's pictures and learning from them.

 

Should I be bothered by the fact that I don?t aspire to a specific role model? Maybe someone out there is or was in the same boat at some stage.

 

Maybe there is no right answer to this question and to each his own interpretation of what and how to make a picture. But sometimes it?s great to have reference be that an artist or a photographer.

Quick thought:

 

there are two kinds of creativity and vision I see in photography -- and the lines will blur.

 

in no order there is:

 

reactive creative vision; this is like being a poker player: what can I do with the cards that

have been dealt. Pure reportage type photojournalism for example.

 

imaginative world creative vision; where yo ucreate and contro leverything that is

happenign in front of the camewra --best example here is a Stanley Kubrick or Alfred

Hitchcock movie.

 

A third approach is hybrid: create the framework for something to happen in a drection

you want it to go in . This is best examplified by watching a Robert Altman movie where

much of the dialog is improvised by the actors but inside and relavant to the structure

Altman has created.

 

And after all of this there is the editing process.

Interesting thread. It's something I spend a lot of time thinking about. I love art. All kinds. From paintings to cinema to books and magazines, they can all offer inspiration. I don't just look at it, but examine exactly what it is I like about it. I think it's important to spend as much time as possible studying the art that has already been created and thereby having some of its influence rub off. I've been told I have a recognizable style, but I disagree. I have had many influences and I feel my "style" is constantly changing. I hope I never settle because that could be a sign of boredom or lack of interest which can kill the artistic vision.

I remember reading an interview with a great painter. The question was asked, "Which painting do you consider to be your best?" His answer was, "My next one."

I'm pleased that so many folks have responded to this. Thanks to all for taking the time to do so.

 

One of the things that keeps coming up is training your eye by looking at the work of others. I do this too, but it's sometimes troubling to see what passes as good amongst my peers. I'm in my late 20's, and it seems like nearly all the photographers that I meet of my own age are very into a sort of shabby chic, plastic lens, polaroid style of photography. I've played around with this some, but it doesn't speak to me. I don't know what life experience they are building from that drives them to create something that often seems to me to be me little more than ugliness and lazy technique. In short, I don't get it. But this is what seems to be getting recognition.

 

I don't do art for the sake of recognition, but I'd eventually like to be able to do this for a living. On a deeper level, I worry that if I don't understand what my peers are trying to say with their work, does anyone understand what I'm trying to say with mine?

I don't know about the art but I get a lot from the higher end portrait photographers, the way they can use the medium to say whatever they want, to make anyone anything, their control of lighting, that's what I aspire to. When I was the manager of a photo lab my boss told me about his first store in LA. Julia Roberts was a client of his. He said "she was really not good looking, Speilberg is the genius he is because he makes her look good, he knows his lighting!" Control your light, Control the pose and you have beauty.

I'd like to narrow the question at least insofar as the answer I give.

 

To me the question I struggle with is how to not only develop ones "artistic vision" (to

which I lay no great claim) but also how to balance and integrate that "vision" with making

a living. I agree with marc w in that only by reaching past the "craftsman" mentality

toward a greater artistic goal will we grow but how? I guess that's matts question in a way.

 

I like to study others work like everyone else. I also find reading NON photography books

to be of great importance to the work. The photographs that I respond to (and aspire to)

seem to fire the same parts of my brain that a brilliant descriptive passage does. there are

certain passages from certain books that are like photographs and of course there are

some photographs that are like an entire book in what they contain. Well over the

traditional 1000 words that it's worth.

 

and I like to study my own photographs. It's very hard not to be judgmental at all times

with ones own work but I think it's important to try. For some years I made my living as a

jazz pianist and I learned a neat practice then from a wonderful teacher (who of course in

addition to being an amazing musician was also a great photographer). He had me work

into my practice schedule an hour a day of purely unstructured, unrestricted and "free"

time to play in the pure sense of the word. To enjoy and to stretch and to have fun with

no judgment and no fear of ever having to share it. But the key was to record it so that I

may study it and learn from myself. It's a closed loop but one that can provide a great

opportunity for growth. Letting go and having the free time is not the hardest part, but

rather to be able to go back after the fact and try to have an open ear to the work. It was

part of the practice that at least 1 week should pass between the recording and the

analysis.

 

so I do the same thing with photography. I set time aside for me to play with my cameras

free of the contexts that usually dominate. To just grab a camera and a lens and walk out

the door but different from "always having my camera with me" or taking the camera to a

specific time or place. It's key that there is nothing else in that time and space that you

set aside. Nobody with you. No destination. No "ideas". almost like a meditation.

 

It was a film only practice until last year but now I do it with digital too. I have

a 512 meg cf card I use just for this as I like to leave the images alone on the card for a

week or two before I review them. I put tape on the LCD (just got a neat hoodman LCD

cover to replace the tape)

 

It's a fun exercise and a very useful one for me.

 

I also get a lot of great "ideas" from it. Somehow I feel like I can't take credit for what I see

on the street or when shooting in a "documentary" fashion, but I can certainly "steal" from

it, even if it is my own work.

 

One of my very favorite photographers was Louis Faurer. If you don't know his work I

really suggest you check him out. He was an amazing street shooter but also worked in

fashion and advertising and if you look at his whole body of work you can see many of his

street shots recreated (by himself) for the paying gig. To me that's a wonderful and

exciting way to "close the loop" so to speak. To bring the two worlds together. I don't

think it's practical to try to apply a purely "in the moment" or free approach to commercial

work, be it portraits and weddings or other. There is structure and context (not the least

of which being that there is a paying client and their needs and aesthetic concerns must

be taken into account) but I suppose for me the integration of my "free and unstructured"

eye into a more purposeful and directed context IS what I think of as the development of

"artistic vision".

 

thanks matt.

Everywhere I go, I'm observing something...I observe how the light is falling, I observe people, necklines, hairstyles, body styles, clothing, smiles, moods, I observe how the light is falling on the people I'm observing :), I observe the sky, the water, gardens, buildings, trees. Then, I think about the different ways I would photograph them...how could I make this person beautiful or how can I make this different or interesting? I love taking a great portrait...a portrait to be proud to share, but I live for moments captured and real reaction. I find so much beauty & romance in pictures that have been achieved without the person ever knowing I was there. I see my visions in black/white and color, but I tend to "feel" in black and white.<div></div>

For most of my adult life I've been creating a look and or vision for my clients in

advertising. I've studied the portfolios of thousands and thousands of great photographers

over the years. I have always had a love for art and photography and spend a lot of my free

time in galleries and book stores. I am an obsessed, experimenting, curious maniac that

has little room in his brain for anything else other than visual expression through

photography and art. My vision is always evolving and being influenced by what I discover,

what I see everyday just walking around. I drive myself insane by seeing (envisioning) a

photograph in almost everything I encounter. <p>

Developing my vision isn't something I do on purpose, it's unavoidable, it's like breathing.

<br>

How can a photographer not develop an artistic vision? It's nothing more than thinking

about where you want to take your photography and how to get there.

Lucas, I like your parallel of a great descriptive passage in a book. I have a bit of an obsession with searching for the perfect opening paragraph to a book (so far it is Isabelle Allende's The House of the Spirits: 'Barrabas came to us by sea'). I get that same thrill when seeing a photograph that has that same indefinable - yumm, & hope one day to find that in my own work.

I really liked what Ellis said. Also agree with being inspired by art other than wedding photography. Keeping yourself tuned in to beauty around you. <p>Wedding photography... Often - Very often you have to shoot with what is dealt. The venue..the couple...and most importantly...the lighting. It's fast and furious and often somewhat crazy! <p>The number one thing is (especially with outdoor photos) finding the light...studying light..understanding light. Then directing the couple/groups etc. to the right spot.<p> My particular inspiration has come from the couples themselves. I've learned that the more I can inspire the couple into being present...and emotive..The better the images. My couples are my "muse". Wedding photography is (my opinion) 50% lighting and 50% emotion. <p>I say this because having recently been married.. My favorite pictures of my wedding (this also goes for my clients) are the ones that make me feel something... Again, just my humble opinion... I've seen stunning "artistic" wedding photos..and where they may be amazing "art" photos that leave me cold because they lack emotion.

"I've seen stunning "artistic" wedding photos..and where they may be amazing "art" photos that leave me cold because they lack emotion."

 

That's one of the things that concerns me; is it really artistic if it doesn't say something. Or is just technique, sound and fury signifying nothing? I'm interested in telling stories; I couldn't care less is if the photos aren't "fine art".

I agree that emotion is vital. There is room for a few though that are just about beauty - everyone - esp the bride has made quite an effort to look gorgeous, and probably won't get a chance to (in such a mythic way anyway) again. So they will want a few 'gorgeous' & 'mythic (meaning classic - doesn't she look like she's straight out of a magazine or old movie)' shots - which sometimes take great creativity. So long as most of them have the emotion - the real beauty.

I agree with Mary's POV. IMO, capturing emotion is a mix of instinctive observation (see

the light, watch the human dynamics at play), anticipation (so you're ready and there), and

above all timing, timing, timing... the other aspects are mute points if your timing is off.

 

I'm not sure I understand the reference to a purely artistic shot that leaves you cold. If it

doesn't say something intellectually or emotionally it isn't art anyway... it's just decoration.

However, a beautifully lit, flattering portrait of a Bride might not communicate anything

intellectually or be particularly evocative or revealing emotionally to people who don't

know her, and thus be seen as a purely a decorative image to the outside world ... but the

beauty in itself may transcend all and be loved by the subject herself. Most wedding

photography is highly personal and not particularly for general public review. Just a

thought on the nature of what we do.

 

Here's a shot that's all about timing. Not hard to anticipate or to position yourself in a case

like this, but the difference is the exact nano second you decide to press the shutter.<div></div>

Marc, is this from the infamous Leica only wedding? Seems like a shot you would shoot with a DSLR nowadays.

 

Great shot by the way (but you already knew that probably).

Sorry for multiple picture posts Mary, just want to provide an addendum to my last post.

 

Here's one that could be construed as chilly art. But this Bride will love it for its asthetic

properties alone (the clients are artistic souls). On a purely informational plane it records

the veil she chose to wear in an unusual way. But that could be done any number of ways

(which I did).

 

But there is something more about this shot that isn't intellectual or particularly emotional.

I just like it, as do a number of people who have seen it. It's like explaining a joke. Either

you get it or you don't.<div></div>

I agree - this is a great shot, and the bride will want beauty and aesthetically pleasing shots as well as the emotional ones. The emotional ones are my favourite, but for the bride - remembering all the effort she made to look like that can be emotional too, as it can be for the groom who is usually blown away by the appearance of his bride, and see's it also reflecting her inner beauty. Also - for some women who have never thought of themselves as beautiful, seeing that they are can also be emotional. As long as there is a bit of both it all contributes.