TXForester
Well-known
True, but a good photographer could still put a lot of effort into several shots of the same subject and then edit the work down to one photo that works better than the rest. The other photos may be good, but not good enough.
V-12
Well-known
I suppose the idea of treating images as stand alone expressions has the dubious advantage of removing context, and so any form of criticism that you might have done just a bit better if you'd explored bit more. Its the safe and I think lazy option if you don't plan to work at a theme or subject.
jpmac55
Established
For me, a wide angle photo tells more of a story than a close up. I also find the wider shot is more forgiving although I really don't think much about technical merits. Taking photos is just a hobby, a fun hobby at that.
robert blu
quiet photographer
When working on an idea I like to tell stories with a series of images. but I shoot looking for "the" photo as well. Sometimes when this happens I think of it as the (possible) beginning of a new story, a new series to be developed. Complicated? yes, a little, like myself...maybe I should call my blog "the complicated photographer's blog" 
robert
robert
fotomeow
name under my name
I like photographic challenges. To me the most difficult is telling a story properly with a standard set of 10-15 images.
How the images relate to the subject, what you are trying to stay, and even more elusive: how the images relate to each other in color or B&W? focal length/perspective, sharp vs OOF, and on and on and on: multiple factors.
Verses a single stand alone photo that any hack can capture once in their lifetime of 100,000 pics taken.
Try taking 2000 images of a project and having to EDIT that down to 12 images that succinctly and cohesively tell your story, move your audience, win prizes in photo competitions, and gets you published. You think this is easy? Therein lies the challenge.
How the images relate to the subject, what you are trying to stay, and even more elusive: how the images relate to each other in color or B&W? focal length/perspective, sharp vs OOF, and on and on and on: multiple factors.
Verses a single stand alone photo that any hack can capture once in their lifetime of 100,000 pics taken.
Try taking 2000 images of a project and having to EDIT that down to 12 images that succinctly and cohesively tell your story, move your audience, win prizes in photo competitions, and gets you published. You think this is easy? Therein lies the challenge.
DominikDUK
Well-known
I believe that there is a third type of photographer Chris Crawford is an example of that. The photographer who makes great single images that fit into a certain idea or more precisely a theme. The Americans is not a series but a theme.I also prefer to work within a theme but try to craete stand alone images within that theme.
Dominik
Dominik
thegf
Established
The only two types of photographers are: those that view things in binary, and those that don't.
BlackXList
Well-known
I quite often gravitate to wide angles, and I think they possibly are more forgiving, which is exactly why I'm trying to make myself use different focal lengths and get closer and really fill the frame, I'm sure I'll regret that decision once I get the rolls processed though.
I'd really like to work on more photo essay type work, I find myself a little at a loss as to how to present it though, blogging seems to be a medium that lends itself well to presenting series of single images rather than a cohesive group. (I'm perfectly willing to admit that it may be an issue on my part of not realising how to present it properly rather than something inherent to the medium)
I'd very much like to hear any suggestions from anyone who feels they have the hang of it
FrankS
Registered User
Perhaps the single stand alone photograph follows more closely the tradition of painting. (While there are examples of multiple paintings presented as a body of work, most paintings are intended as a stand alone work.)
There are so many more types of photographers than just two.
bonatto
looking out
what about fauxtographers?
one90guy
Well-known
I try for stand alone, guess I am a work in progress. But for me it is a hobby and only family sees my work. Two Christmas's ago my wife had 4 framed and they are on our wall.
raytoei@gmail.com
Veteran
this sounds like a 2x2 chart....
Gear Acquirers vs Image Makers.
Que ?
Gear Acquirers vs Image Makers.
Que ?
V-12
Well-known
I think you just made that up. Who did this? Da Vinci in his seascape phase, Pollack in his Pop Art period or Picasso when he had a bash at German Romanticism? Think of any artists work and the incongruity of 'stand alone' paintings becomes clear. Unless you get your art by ordering a specific size and style to fill a wall in the house, in which case it isn't art anyway, but I'm sure some people with a paint brush and palette can do it.
And it's the same reason Dylan my tap his foot at a hip hop number, but with self control and determination he can refrain from having a go himself. Art isn't about making individual pieces, but something that amounts to a body of work over many years. Artists can work on separate projects without flitting from one style or genre to another, so why can't photographers? It is because photographs have it easy, they don't have to consider it art top start with. And if they do consider it art they can get away without having an idea of their own simply by applying a style to the image which comes with its own intellectual tool kit. This is the perfect breeding ground for the 'stand alone' image, Cartier Bresson this week, Ansel Adams the next. They don't have to stand up for anything of their own, they borrow a mantra from somebody else. Perhaps this is the appeal of covering the face with a camera when making the image, it hides any shallowness.
dct
perpetual amateur
+1
Most of my personal work is projects. Am I a story telling photographer? Too, but not only, because within a project (which might span over years) there will be a few images being so outstanding, they can be used as a single work by itself. I have exactly this in mind when I'm going through my projects, but not every single image idea yields to the expected prominent result.
daveleo
what?
In simple terms, this is my style. One image at a time, very much structured around my perception of painted art.
I am still deciding if your "2 kinds of photographers" is too confined, though.
thirtyfivefifty
Noctilust survivor
I want to be a "series" type of a photographer. Trying to make my way out of only producing single images.
FrankS
Registered User
Agreed. I subsequently said that my title was inaccurate, it should have been something like 2 methodologies of/approaches to working.
nikkor-watching
Established
The original post suggests the first example has a kind of unity, whereas the second doesn't. But oh yes it does. People will stay with you the same way they will stay with film stars, if they know what to expect. Your photos will almost certainly represent a certain approach
Lawrence A.
Established
But in a "story" series each image can be edited quite as drastically as any other single photograph. Not all stories are non-fiction. And a large body of work of discrete, self sufficient photos would indicate that the photographer has some skill. I don't think you need a series to tell a story; every photograph points to something in the world, to the other as seen and comprehended by the person behind the lens. Now THAT'S a story!