Do You Have a Photographic Style?

[Tom in Arizona]

Hi All...

Some photographers have achieved a recognizable style with their photography. Most of us would readily recognize an Ansel Adams landscape or a Yousuf Karsh portrait. There are many other photographers of different genres who have developed distinctive styles.

The question is, do you consider your own photographs to be easily “recognizable" by others? Two photographers on this site who are almost instantly recognizable to me are Daniel Scott for his portraits and fotoi for his unique perspectives on his travels (to say nothing of his Wood Duck photographs ).

Tom

 

[OhLook]

@airfrogusmc once posted that my photos have a characteristic style. I suppose he meant that just some of them do, probably a selection of urban scenes. For instance, I don't believe my photos of garden vegetables share any kind of discernible personal essence with my street scenes.

I was told by someone (not on this forum) who used to know Stephen Shore in NYC that my photos resemble his in some way. I think that kind of resemblance comes from having similar opinions about what things out there in the visual world, or their relationships, are interesting enough to record.

 

[ShutterbugsstationStan]

I have been told many times that I have a unique and beautiful style of floral photography. ????

 

[Tom in Arizona]

Hi Stan...

I would agree with others about your approach to floral photography. I think one's style shows more clearly with the subjects they choose to photograph. Your love of flowers over the years tends to show itself in your photographs. Anyone can take a picture of a rose, but only a few, like you, can turn that into a portrait.

Tom

 

[Tom in Arizona]

@airfrogusmc once posted that my photos have a characteristic style. I suppose he meant that just some of them do, probably a selection of urban scenes. For instance, I don't believe my photos of garden vegetables share any kind of discernible personal essence with my street scenes.

I was told by someone (not on this forum) who used to know Stephen Shore in NYC that my photos resemble his in some way. I think that kind of resemblance comes from having similar opinions about what things out there in the visual world, or their relationships, are interesting enough to record.

So true, "...having similar opinions..." tends to focus our interest (and style) on how we photograph the world around us. I think many landscape photographers may have started out by trying to hone their skills by emulating Ansel Adams before going on to establish their own unique style.

 

[ShutterbugsstationStan]

Hi Stan...

I would agree with others about your approach to floral photography. I think one's style shows more clearly with the subjects they choose to photograph. Your love of flowers over the years tends to show itself in your photographs. Anyone can take a picture of a rose, but only a few, like you, can turn that into a portrait.

Tom

Thank you very much for your kind and uplifting words.

 

[ShipleyNW]

Tight, Crisp, Easy to read

That's the style I shoot for. I worked at small newspapers for 10 years in my youth, An average day would see me shooting 3 or 4 different assignments, 5, 6, 7 days a week. I needed a style that would work across genres, would catch a viewer's eye, and let them work through my presentation with a minimum of distractions. Less is more. Two or three visual elements at most. I figure I'm given a fixed amount of time with a viewer's attention, and I don't want them to spend any of that time looking at things that don't add to the image. I want everything in an image to have a job in the composition.

I can apply this style to everything from sports to landscapes.

 

[OhLook]

Tight, Crisp, Easy to read That's the style I shoot for.
I worked at small newspapers . . .

Those three items are good goals in writing at newspapers and elsewhere, too. The job is communication in both cases, right?

 

[Tom in Arizona]

Tight, Crisp, Easy to read

That's the style I shoot for. I worked at small newspapers for 10 years in my youth, An average day would see me shooting 3 or 4 different assignments, 5, 6, 7 days a week. I needed a style that would work across genres, would catch a viewer's eye, and let them work through my presentation with a minimum of distractions. Less is more. Two or three visual elements at most. I figure I'm given a fixed amount of time with a viewer's attention, and I don't want them to spend any of that time looking at things that don't add to the image. I want everything in an image to have a job in the composition.

I can apply this style to everything from sports to landscapes.

View attachment 161231 View attachment 161232

Hi Ken...

Your approach to "style" in photography, and OhLook's comment, can be very effective across many disciplines. There is much talk about a photograph "telling a story" and newspapers do it every day - some do it well, some do it not so well. The basic "5 W's and an H" are the fundamental building blocks of good journalism. Applying them to photography is also a great way for developing a photographic style.

Tom

 

[airfrogusmc]

I think as in say Edward Westons work a style or as Ralph Gibson referred to it as a visual signature transends subject matter and reveals something of not only what is being photographed but a bit of the creator to.
Westons peppers looks like his shells which look like his nudes which looks like his cloud photographs which look like his peppers. Here is an interesting quote by Weston kinda getting to this.
".......so called “composition” becomes a personal thing, to be developed along with technique, as a personal way of seeing."-Edward Weston

I think when you are starting to arrive at having a visual signature is when people start recognizing your work as yours without seeing your name attached to the image. But they see your visual signature in the images. And as Weston was getting at that would be the way one composes, processes and present their work. It's all part of a personal way of seeing.

As far as stories in single photographs here's what Winogrand had to say about that,
From about 1:24 through about 2:45

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Tom in Arizona]

I think as in say Edward Westons work a style or as Ralph Gibson referred to it as a visual signature transends subject matter and reveals something of not only what is being photographed but a bit of the creator to.
Westons peppers looks like his shells which look like his nudes which looks like his cloud photographs which look like his peppers. Here is an interesting quote by Weston kinda getting to this.
".......so called “composition” becomes a personal thing, to be developed along with technique, as a personal way of seeing."-Edward Weston

I think when you are starting to arrive at having a visual signature is when people start recognizing your work as yours without seeing your name attached to the image. But they see your visual signature in the images. And as Weston was getting at that would be the way one composes, processes and present their work. It's all part of a personal way of seeing.

As far as stories in single photographs here's what Winogrand had to say about that,
From about 1:24 through about 2:45

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Hi Allen...

Thanks for a wonderful description of style. When I made my initial post, I was thinking of photographers like Adams or Karsh but should have included Edward Weston. Your statement: "Westons peppers looks like his shells which look like his nudes which looks like his cloud photographs which look like his peppers." is exactly what I think style represents. I also like your phrase "visual signature" to describe an artist's style.

Great post, and much appreciated. And, as an aside, your photography over the years at FM and here have proven that your work has a distinctive style...or, as you say, a "visual signature."

Tom

 

[airfrogusmc]

Thanks Tom. Great topic.