Why Do Photographers Fail?

[Paul T.]

I think the quote in the OP touches on exactly half of the problem.

You do indeed need self-esteem to be an artist - ultimately you need to have the confidence that what you do is worthwhile, and to endure.

Yet there's something more fundamental; you need either innate skills - or else you need good critical faculties - to see, or to hear. With the latter, you can develop skill, via trail and error.

Are critical sklls innate or developed? Plainly, they're mainly developed. Yet some people never develop them.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Really Chris? so as an artist you prefer Damian Hurst to Vivian Maier?.
I'd say it's the least honest measure of great art, or even a good measure or are you saying the most successful and visionary artists aren't the ones that project themselves through their work, just sell the most?
Being on people's wall's selling millions is great, but it's not a real measure of art or artistic success–just a measure of commercial success-do you remember the millions of crying children pictures hanging on walls? Blue faced ladies or those foil images of waterfalls? sure they were successful in a commercial way–not successful as art!
People who market themselves and are successful are good self promoters, not necessarily good artists.

Photography is not about people telling 'how great your work is' its about seeing the world though your own vision, making those visions, if you succeeded in that then you don't have to show them to anyone to be successful at what you're doing–creating art.

Being successful doesn't mean selling units.

I agree that VM is better than DH, but the problem is Maier is DEAD. No one gave a damn about her while she was alive. In the long run, I think people like Hirst will not be judged highly by history, and Maier will. The problem is we refuse to recognize them while they're alive. If an artist is good, I do not think it too much to ask that he or she be able to earn a respectable living from it. The fact is, it costs money to make our photographs, and that is true of other forms of art as well. The entire art world is designed to make sure than everyone involved gets rich, or at least makes a good living, except the most important person of all: the artist. That does not speak well of our culture.

 

[Jamie123]

Lack of confidence and self-esteem is indeed a big reason for why people fail (not just in photography but in general). But it is a very particular kind of failure, i.e. the failure to realize one's full potential. The problem is, of course, that even if you realize your full potential, you might not be good enough to reach the goals you set for yourself.

 

[Photo_Smith]

I agree that VM is better than DH, but the problem is Maier is DEAD.

How does that represent a problem? Who could doubt Vivian was successful at seeing a world around her and recording that– her (lack of) financial success and recognition during her lifetime doesn't mean she wasn't successful artistically.
One could argue that it was because she recorded her singular vision without the pollution of commercialisation she was so successful.
I mean Van Gogh or Anne Geddes? Which one was more successful artistically.

Being a commercial success and being successful artist are not the same thing!

 

[pakeha]

OP.Thanks for the link -that last paragraph i am going to appropriate and hang in my office - with attribution to the author of course.

 

[koven]

will check it out later./

 

[mugent]

"Failures are delayed success."

When you start your own business, you will come to know the above statement in a very personal and real way.

This applies to any businesses, photography included.
Any pursuit in life, photography included.

100% agree, as a small business owner, I've had more failure than success, but if you learn from it, it's very valuable.

 

[noisycheese]

OP.Thanks for the link -that last paragraph i am going to appropriate and hang in my office - with attribution to the author of course.

Well I'm glad to hear that someone actually liked the article... 🙄

 

[nikkor-watching]

The ambiguity in the word "fail" quickly leads back to who the author is and what he does. He unsurprisingly earns his money largely from classes. His "fail" is only the subjective why do hobby photographers fail in their own eyes.I am more concerned for the delusional photographers who throw themselves into a business when they have no special vision or technical expertise and built up no market. That's a clear case of too much optimism and hope, not the lack of it.
I have to say I am intrinsically wary of any so-called photographer who earns more babbling about it than actually doing it.

 

[CameraQuest]

photographers can also fail as people
wonderful pics
but no one wants to work with them or hire them because they are a pain to deal with

that actually has happened to more than one well known photog

Stephen

 

[thegman]

Its the only honest measure of your work's quality. People will tell you how wonderful your work is, even if it sucks, to avoid hurting your feelings. That's easy, false praise costs them nothing but their integrity, and few people today have any of that anyway.

Aside from that, if your work is good enough that others want to use it (that includes both commercial uses as well as simply hanging prints on their walls to decorate), you should be paid for it. All other workers get paid for their work, and photographers should too. It costs you money, a lot of it, to produce.

I agree it's the only measure of commercial success, but it depends on your definition of 'quality' if sales are the only measure of that quality.

In the UK, if you look at 'Most watched TV programmes' on Wikipedia, I don't see any items which I would consider 'high qualilty'.

Of course, it's all opinion as to what represents 'quality', but I struggle to think of any product at all which I consider to be a quality item which is anywhere near a market leader, or even surviving.

I think most items for sale succeed on price, marketing, and extremely low standards of the general population. I know that sounds like snobbishness, but I genuinely cannot think of anything which is the best on the market, and is the most successful.

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

Of course, it's all opinion as to what represents 'quality', but I struggle to think of any product at all which I consider to be a quality item which is anywhere near a market leader, or even surviving.

As you say, it's a matter of opinion. Mine is that many of the market leaders today are of exceptionally high quality, thanks to the advances in design and manufacturing technologies.

 

[jsrockit]

The problem is, of course, that even if you realize your full potential, you might not be good enough to reach the goals you set for yourself.

The truth... and there is nothing wrong with enjoying something while sucking at it.

 

[clcolucci58]

Nice read

Nice read

I liked the article very much nicely done. I will say I prefer to shoot film instead of digital but THAT DOES NOT make me a better photographer.
Regards
clc🙂