Are you satisfied with your photography ?

[David_Cavan]

<p>I go through periods of frustration with my outcomes, but so far have been able to convince myself that learning is a "forever" thing and have been able to take advantage of mistakes, and of successes to stick with it and go back out and try again. What I have found as I look at older photos is that I was not as good as I thought I was, but occasionally things came together in a way that I really like and would like to build on. I'm pretty sure that as long as I'm learning and getting some successful shots (not unlike golf here) I will stick with it and look forward to better days.</p>

<p>I really like with Steve T. wrote about the reason for photography - I may even borrrow your sticky-note note idea Steve.</p>

 

[sarah_fox]

<p>I'm "satisfied" with the shots I show others, or else I wouldn't show them; however, the vast majority of my shots are never seen. Of course satisfaction in no way implies any illusion of perfection. And yes, I always strive to expand and improve. There's not a photographer on the planet who doesn't have new things to learn or room to improve.</p>

<p>FAIW, Harry, I think we all admire the work of others. That's only human. I see shots all the time that make me think, "Gee, I wish I had taken that!" I also often see some really great concepts that I wish had occurred to me.</p>

[dan_south]

<p>I enjoy what I've shot so far (at least in the past few years) but I hope to accomplish a whole lot more. I'm certainly not dissatisfied, but I want to tackle new places, new subjects, and new techniques. And I'd like to revisit places that I saw long ago when my photographic ambitions far outweighed my skill set and when my gear was a bit more modest as well.</p>

<p>Zeroing in on a point that the OP made, I don't compare my photography to the work of others. I just shoot what I want and what I enjoy. Comparisons can help occasionally to identify technical issues that could be improved, but it's a good idea to make those comparisons sparingly. Focus on developing your own style instead of trying to emulate look of someone else's photos.</p>

<p>A year or so ago, I saw an interview with Bono of U2 where he recalled the early years of the band. Lots of other local music groups could play "better" than they could, but they had a certain quality that no one else had. That quality is part of what propelled them to great success. Rather than comparing your photos to the portfolios of others, look for what's special in your own work and develop that. Ask for the opinions of trusted friends if you have trouble noticing your unique qualities. Only you can be YOU, so you should work hard to be the best YOU that you can. I'm sorry if that sounds corny, but it's an important objective for all creative people to be as true to themselves as they can possibly be.</p>

[john_bellenis]

<p>I think that as long as I do the absolute best that I can on every shoot, and that I am proud of the results, I can be satisfied on one level with that. My first priority is towards my clients and their satisfaction - if they are thrilled with the results, then clearly that's enormously satisfying.</p>

<p>However, I am fully committed to continual learning and continual improvement, so I hope that my best work is in the future. I accept that there is always room for improvement and that there are new directions and techniques to be learnt - therefore I am determined to always strive to become better.</p>

[AlanKlein]

<p>I've discovered that I'm happiest with my photography when I give it away. When my cousin's mother died she showed my wife and me an album she had of pictures of her mom and dad during the 1940's. All B/W. So my wife "volunteers" me to scan them and make a slide show. My wife saw what I did with some of our own photos slide shows. So I did it and it was a labor of love. I'm not a PS expert but I did add contrast and cropped and the normal simple things. Then added a music track of 1940's big band music. The DVD we played on their HDTV. I even made extra copies of the prints so they could have a second print album for my cousin's sister. What a "high" when they showed their appreciation. No one said I should improve my skills.</p>

<p>Whenever I visit my sister in Florida, I see my landscape photo still hanging on her wall. After all these years she sill loves and appreciates the "gift". Another "high". She never said it wasn't good enough.</p>

<p>Nothing wrong with improving our skills. But there's always someone better, smarter, more talented, richer, more successful etc. so trying to beat them all is a trap. Frank is right in his comment above. Comparing leads to jealousy and depression. Be grateful for the gifts you already have.</p>

<p>So give it away. You can create things for others with the skills you have now. You're a better photographer then you think. Then we all think.</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>Many posters apparently think that satisfaction means there is nothing left to learn, but that's absurd. If you're not satisfied with your photography, try something else. Being satisfied means you are accomplishing something. For those who take satisfaction to mean sitting on your butt doing nothing, maybe that is a better thing to do.<br>

<br />I'm very satisfied with my photography. I'm disappointed with the slow progress of a major series I have been shooting for ten years, but I plan to show it in March and expect it will "do well." I don't really care though, once it's up. I'm doing a couple shows a year, that's satisfying. I'm taking photos I care about, that's satisfying. I'm hanging out with talented performers and freakazoids. If I didn't have that kind of satisfaction, I would probably spend a few years trying to write a novel.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>Satisfaction is the fulfillment of a desire.</p>

<p>It's like sex. You feel spent and soon you're aroused all over again.</p>

[ted_raper1]

<p>I am one of those people who carry a camera with me pretty much everywhere I go (either a Sony NEX5N or an Olympus EPL1 w/20mm lens), and I shoot a lot. I also have had formal training in the studio arts, and I do exhibits in local galleries fairly often; have gotten awards in international competitions. So by small standards, I could consider myself satisfied with my photography - but, guess what? When I look through my work preparing for an exhibit, I reject about 98% of it. So in the bigger picture, I guess my answer would be that I am only really satisfied with a very small percentage of my stuff. And that is what keeps me trying harder - soaking up advice here on PNet, asking questions of other photogs I admire...I'll never stop trying to get better.</p>

<p>But, like golf, it's the really good shots that keep me coming back, even if they are only 2% of the total. So yeah, I'm satisfied.</p>

[Julie H]

<p>I [try to] stay hungry. It motivates me to see in the dark.</p>

<p>(The mice are vewy, vewy quiet.)</p>

[AJHingel]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm "satisfied" with the shots I show others, or else I wouldn't show them;</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sarah, funny you write that, because I think that very often I upload photos that I'm questioning whether they are acceptable to me or not. Most of them end up in deep dark folders afterwards.</p>

[johne37179]

<p>As with most things in life, once they lose their challenge they move into the boring category. Years ago I had the privilege of traveling with the Blue Angles off and on over several seasons as a freelance photographer working on a book and film on the team. Those guys are pretty good at what they do and they practice a lot. They would constantly say they never flew a perfect airshow. After every flight, whether at a show site or in practice they would hold a critical debrief. They were never satisfied with their result and always striving to be better at their profession. Satisfaction tends to breed complacency. I have been actively taking photographs over fifty years - a decade of that as my profession. I can say that I have never been satisfied with the result in the sense that I didn't learn from it and stopped looking for ways to improve or find new challenges.<br>

I show my work to others not because I'm pleased with them or satisfied with them, but get the views of others about other ways to approach the subject and improve my craft. For the same reason I don't attach any ego to my work. Many might feel down if their work isn't praise, or liked -- forbid that it is disliked. The more critical someone is of my work the more closely I listen to them and pay attention. I'm not after praise, but improvement. If I wanted to be liked, I'd get a new puppy.</p>

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p>Satisfaction tends to breed complacency. </p>

</blockquote>

<p><br />That's nonsense for many people. Satisfaction means I can move on to other things. I was just reading Avedon at Work in the American West again - Avedon was very satisfied with the work he did. He moved on to new projects after that. He never got complacent.</p>

<p>Satisfaction may make <em>you</em> complacent, but that doesn't make it universal.</p>

[AJHingel]

<blockquote>

<p>Satisfaction may make <em>you</em> complacent, but that doesn't make it universal.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Jeff, so it is not nonsense for some (many?) people, at least.</p>

[jgalyon]

<blockquote>

<p>Satisfaction may make <em>you</em> complacent, but that doesn't make it universal.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I didn't get the sense that John E was attempting to make a "universal" statement. Or were you, John E.?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>That's nonsense for many people.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I agree. But...then one person's "nonsense" makes perfect sense for many people.</p>

[MichaelChang]

<p>Some days I feel like I'm on top of the world. Other days I just want to trash my portfolio and start over. </p>

[Brad_]

>>> Satisfaction means I can move on to other things.

 

Yep. Or feeling confident that where I am is where I want to be, doing what I do. The complacency

comment is odd. Even though there may be room for improvement on individual

photographs I make, that has little to do with being satisfied in the larger realm with respect to my photography. Thus my direct

"Yes, very much so." up above to the original question.

 

 

>>> I was just reading Avedon at Work in the American West again - Avedon was very satisfied with

the work he did.

 

Yeah, that can also be seen in his Darkness and Light (American Masters) documentary. As an aside, I have a lot of photoboooks, and that one is hands-down one I look at the most; both for

insight and inspiration. Even though it's not a photobook in the conventional sense.

[johne37179]

I think that being satisfied is like finishing a good meal. I think to make better photographs you are aided by being at least

a little hungry. I think that curiousity drives creativity. "What would it look like if I did this?". I think curiosity comes from a

lack of the feeling of completeness...a sense that there is always something more. At the point of satisfaction that urge is

"satisfied."

 

I do think that satisfaction and complacency can coexist. It is hard to be complacent and unsatisnfied and care about your

work at the same time. From my viewpoint, and it is mine and not one I'm advocating...just presenting...my best work

seems to happen when I'm the least satisfied and the most driven to solve a creative problem...or solve a problem in a

more creative way.

[Norma Desmond]

<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3a7cHPy04s8">DUH!</a></p>

[jgalyon]

What' the "duh" for, Fred? I don't understand...nothing more...just curious.

[Norma Desmond]

<p>The reason for the "DUH" . . .</p>

<p>When Mick says he can't get no satisfaction and Avedon says he's satisfied, I doubt they are very far apart. There are various levels, including meta-levels, of satisfaction and dissatisfaction which can operate simultaneously for each of us.</p>

<p>I think some artists do have a fairly constant and pronounced gnawing which might lead them to say they are consistently unsatisfied. I think other artists don't experience that. It's OK to feel differently about this. And that the other guy feels differently, or expresses it differently, doesn't make it nonsense. IMO.</p>

<p>For me, desire (longing) and satisfaction seem to be in counterpoint with each other, sometimes in harmony, sometimes in discord or tension. They contain each other, swallow each other up and spit each other out. It's not an either/or dichotomy. They seem to co-exist. I don't mind if that sounds foolish to some people. </p>

<p>When you sing about it, as Mick does, listeners are more likely to understand the metaphorical aspects of it, the poetry of it. No one would look to pin Mick Jagger down as if he were taking part in a debate.</p>

[jgalyon]

Sorry, Fred. Didn't notice until now that the "duh" was a link. My bad. Now...to check it out. Thanks...

[aplumpton]

<p>I think that the reason for the sometimes feeling of dissatisfaction, even that blended with the euphoria or some lesser level of satisfaction that accompanys our success, is in the nature of the unleashable beast that is called creativity. As a scientist and engineer, I know that successes are often short-lived. We (I) always strive (rather, have to strive) to do better, to create something more useful, more significant or truer than what came before it. So it is for many poets, writers, scientists, artists, photographers. It is part of the beauty, tension and purpose of human existence.</p>

[jgalyon]

Well stated, Fred and Arthur. I appreciate what both of you had to say on the topic.

[johne37179]

Arthur, your comment reminded me of Feynman's description "of the joy of finding things out." I think that the may be

some confusion between being pleased with a result and being satisfied with it.

[Norma Desmond]

<p>Maybe it's not about satisfaction or dissatisfaction, complacency, or being pleased or displeased.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>"An artist never really finishes his work, he merely abandons it."</em> <strong>--Paul Valéry</strong></p>

</blockquote>