Do you have a style?

BillP

BillP

Rangefinder General
Local time
11:48 AM
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
828
There's been a lot of talk here lately about HCB, Salgado, etc and their styles.

Do you (think you) have a style of your own?

Is it acknowledged as such by others, or are you deluding yourself?

Have you worked to develop a style? If so, do you think you have succeeded? How did you go about it?

Does it matter?

Discuss.

Regards,

Bill
 
My story about my style is looong. I'm not saying it's unique nor good... It was just hard work.

I think it takes about 10 years for someone to acquire a true, solid style. This still doesn't mean the given style is appealing, though. It only means it's constant and understood.
 
Pitxu said:
Having a style can mostly be a handicap, limiting, a trap even.

"Oh yeah, your the guy who does them ****** photos."
Click to expand...

I guess it can be, but in general I would disagree. One can have a style, a process and all that in which he is comfortable, but not be constrained to only that type of shooting.

A style would allow for growth and improvement in production of a consistent and certain quality of image, but there can always be diversions. If that becomes a handicap, then that is a problem with that individual and his approach.

Have you worked to develop a style?
Click to expand...

Absolutely not enough and I am not delusional enough to say that I have. There are images that I like, images that I make that I like tend to be in ballpark of that "style", but I have by no means worked hard enough to even make believe I have a style.

I do a lot of diversions.
 
I think that everyone has their own style, and that it is constantly evolving, or should be. The more experienced one becomes the more consistent this style becomes, (even as it is still evolving), and the more recognizable it becomes to others. A raw beginner's style is typically all over the board.

The appreciation of different styles is purely subjective.

The big question in my mind is: can a style be consciously developed, or does it just happen on its own? Sure, another photographer's style can be immitated, but one's own style, I think just "becomes" without effort beyond the hard work of improving one's craft.
 
No method, no guru, no teacher.

Or, to put it more simply - no. I have no specific style. And that's ok.
 
Yeah, you need a style. It's like picking a topic for a paper when you are in Jr. High: the narrower the better, otherwise you are just spinning your wheels. This is the most important thing for a photographer who wants to make a contribution to the field.
 
I do think to some extent you need to specialise or standardise your equipment to achieve a style... Although I have differing styles with each camera, I am lucky enough in that use too many different cameras to settle on one 'style'. Having a 'style' is a goal that is not without merit, if that's what you want.

I enjoy exploring a range of styles and equipment, and whilst that may make me 'Jack of all trades and Master of none', its great fun. :)
 
NB23 said:
I think it takes about 10 years for someone to acquire a true, solid style.
Click to expand...

A few years ago I read it takes seven years to really get photography and now you've added another three - at this rate I'll be dead before I've got the hang of this game.

I 'm with Pixtu that a style would probabley be limiting. I have yen for detail and the macro as it makes my world bigger but lifes too short to be so restricted. I've also toyed with structured images but jeez how tedious would that become. I am addicted to the sound of the shutter and have realised I am something of a diletantte so everything is up for grabs.

I think my personality and situation dictate my style but given a a different array of subects and a different enviroment I'm sure it would change.

I've too many cameras, lenses and formats to get a consistant look and while I'm going through a servere cull at the moment I'd be suprised to ever reach the one camera/lens senario.


I'm still learning so maybe style comes later.
 
feenej said:
Yeah, you need a style. It's like picking a topic for a paper when you are in Jr. High: the narrower the better, otherwise you are just spinning your wheels. This is the most important thing for a photographer who wants to make a contribution to the field.
Click to expand...

That is the funniest thing I've read in a long time. I mean, in a purely horrifying kind of way.
 
I have lots of "styles". I'd like to think of this a sign of my limitless artistic versatility. But realistically the ways my shots turn out probably just depend on what I'm trying to photograph, what camera I'm using and whose work I am subconsciously copying this week.
 
If I have a style, I am unaware what it would be. When I can make time, I enjoy taking photos. When in Korea, I used to enjoy taking photos of what I considered their culture or history. Especially of the three kingdoms era. But I don't consider that a style. That was an interest. What is style? Is there a style that hasn't already been done?
 
I have no idea. It's a lot easier to identify someone else's 'style' than your own. I think a lot more of it has to do with editing (in selecting which shots to present) than your actual photos.
 
I don't think you can define your own style, or rather it's something that happens that you're not conscious of. It's something that develops based your photographic eye and evolves over time. Sometimes other people relate to it, sometimes it doesn't. It's like your style of dress, you dress a certain way to your preferences and sometimes people like it, others will hate it. It's just something that naturally happens over time as you develop an affinity of shooting one way vs. another.

...so just like how people develop personal style, dress and persona...so does everyone has a photographic style.
 
I've noticed, especially after walking through a local art fair over the weekend, that the "style" people in this thread are talking about are two different notions.

One idea of style consists of a conscious decision to shoot with a predetermined idea in mind so as to create a look. It's a matter of your "syle" dictating your content.

The other idea is that a person just shoots what interests them. The more they photograph, the more refined the person's photographic interests become, and thus, a "style" emerges naturally. In this case, the content dictates the "style."

It just comes down to why a person shoots in the first place.
 
I have a style that people recognize when they see my work in galleries and exhibits. It comes from having worked on several very long term projects over a period of years (two of my projects have each taken over a decade and are still in progress). I think the reason many photographers never develop a style is that they are snappers, not artists with something to say. I've noticed over the years that photography as a hobby attracts people who own expensive cameras and never produce anything with them. There's also those who do take a lot of photos, many of them quite good, but they photograph in a disorganized way that reflects the fact that they are not interested in anything specific. Instead they constantly search for the 'pretty picture', and they might end up with many good images but as a whole their body of work does not show a as the life's work of an artist with a vision or a message.
 
uptown top rankin

uptown top rankin

I'm not sure if I could possibly have style - having only been taking pictures for less than a year...ha
Unless you call naivety a style!
 
I have no style, or so my friends always tell me, though they're usually talking about my clothes.

As for photography, I don't consciously look to develop a style as I don't want to force myself down an unwitting route whereby I merely ape the style of photographers I admire - I believe its all too easy to do this at the best of times. I do however hope that the interests I have in life, my outlook upon life and the elements of it will be reflected in the photographs I take. Also, if there is a strong compostional awareness in the majority of my images (or certainly those I deem successful enough to show to others) then this may all come together to be thought of as a 'style.'

I haven't taken any personal photographs for a while as I've been busy starting a business but one of the last ones I did, a month or two back, was a snap in Cambridge (England) on a misty morning of a guy on the river in a punt. I rather liked it and put it up here and on Flickr. Someone, either here or there, came back to me saying they liked it but it was a 'definite departure from my usual style which was far edgier.'..........I was unaware of any real set style I may have had and found it quite amusing that somebody else had thought of me having a style when it was utterly unapparent to me.

I just do my thing and what comes out is hopefully a reflection of me and my thought processes on a subject. However, I would say that *I* need to follow my interests more fully, to explore them in greater depth now that I have the time and to hopefully produce projects and a true body of images rather than a series of fractured images loosely connected by the fact that I took them.

We'll see how that goes :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom