Should I specialise?

[ukpa]

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>I recently returned to photography after an absence of over 20 years and in the last six months, I've been sorting out the technical side of taking pictures and getting the gear together. I've been pointing the camera at anything which is in my field of vision, with no discrimination.</p>

<p>I've got to the point where I'm happy with my technique and kit, so it's time to start getting creative. Do you think that specialisiation in a particular field would be preferrable to continuing to have a go at anything and everything?</p>

<p>The reason I ask is that it's getting harder to think of things to go out and shoot. If I specialise, I may get better focus on a particular subject.</p>

<p>Has anyone else reached this crossroads, and what did you do?</p>

[bernie moore]

Bill, I would think that as you "shoot the lights out" you will gravitate to what you like or what comes out well all in good time. Don't think you have to force it, it will come.

[umesh_bhayaraju]

<p>Bill, your gallery looks good. what I can say is, We shoot what we like whether knowingly or unknowingly. Our perspective is limited by our natural inclination towards certain subjects. So, by default you will have a preference whihc is very restrictive, if you want to improve your photograpyh, you need to have a lateral perspective which is needed to improve your photographic skills. its an art. Unless, you want to have photography as profession focussed on particular area of interest, you need to shoot erythign whichever comes your way.</p>

[leicaglow]

<p>Hi Bill, All I can say is my friends and colleagues are actually going away from their specialities in these tough economic times in order to diversify their income. I've been lucky enough not to have to do that, and I'm actually heading into some areas that I've wanted to pursue but been locked into because it was my bread and butter for so long.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>In the heyday of "evolutionary laws" in anthropology, there was one called the "Law of Evolutionary Potential."<br /> The idea was that the more specialized you are, the more at risk you are. It's the generalist animals that survive the mass extinction. While this sort of thing can be overdone, and <em>cultural</em> traits can be discarded and/or learned, unlike genetic ones--there is a kind of lesson here. The more options you have, the better you are equiped to deal with emergencies. This is what is behind what Michael just said. Probably not a good time to become the photographer equivalent of a koala bear.</p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>My guess is that if you are using the camera kit as a toolbox to pay the rent, then you need to shoot what your clients want to pay for. If you are using the camera for yourself, then specializing some for a few weeks in one way or another can sharpen or broaden your skills. When you get into specializing, you may need to purchase some new tools; like, for macro, get a bellows kit, etc.; but, beyond being reasonable about the costs, I guess you can do whatever you want.</p>

<p>I have enjoyed seeing better documentation on the basics of lighting; once I fired up the internet to look for photo stuff (it just never occurred to me before, I don't know why) I ran into suggestions for http://www.strobist.com and "Light: Science and Magic" a book by Fuqua. Both were excellent works, which fostered some quick learning through easy exercises. They seem to have worked well for others, also. Maybe that would be a good direction to go in. Proceed with confidence. It's your camera. J.</p>

<p>P.S. Chicks dig koala bears. And women like to buy decorations, like photographs. </p>

[evphotography]

<p>I did reach those crossroads about 18 months after I took up photography again after about 20 year absence. What I did Bill was look at what I really enjoyed the most in my photography and that was landscape photography. So after that I stuck with that, studied the work of professionals that I aspired to, read books, took workshops from professionals and then just went out and tried to use those lessons in my own work. I found that my photography did start to improve a lot faster when I focused on one area versus going out and shooting anything and everything. I would look at what type you get most enjoyment out of of, then focus in that area. You will probably get better at it, by doing so.</p>

[michael_dimarzio]

<p>JDM, huh?</p>

<p>That reminds me yesterday I was in B of A, a lady called us up to the counter and said "Hi, I'm not a teller, but can I help you?". I swear they think I'm whacked because I walk in with a Leica on my neck, and my gf with an FM3a. So I asked her, I swear, "But you stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night?".</p>

<p>If I were a real photographer I would have prefocused the MP, 28/2.8 and snapperd her choking.</p>

<p>Not knowing on which level to respond. Good post</p>

[ukpa]

<p>Thanks, everyone, for taking the time to give me some answers.</p>

<p>I see two equally valid points of view, but both coincide in the short term, so I'm going to keep going with the across the board approach for a while until one subject somes to the fore, either from an interest point of view or some as yet undiscovered natural ability is producing better images from that particular subject. At that point, I can look at the economic advantages or disadvantages of specialisation and whether it is a sustainable approach to paying the rent.</p>

<p>Bill</p>

[profhlynnjones]

<p>If you are really capable in certain areas, moreso than most other photographers, then by all means specialize if there is adequate potential to support you.</p>

<p>Lynn </p>