I have some of my recent favorite photos hanging in my office. The thing is they are mostly of (all color neg):

people candids

poor people

peasants

street shots - env. portraits

postcard shots

Am I to be faulted because I do only a few types of photography? Am I limiting myself? I like all kinds of pic's (except posed and staged shots) incl. b&w, but don't own a lab and need the conv. of local labs of varying quality.

I guess that I need to be strongly motivated by new and unfamiliar surroundings. I'm tired of going to the zoo to take candids of children. no their parents don't mind, and no i'm not a deviant. they're just more natural.

Do I have to be able to do it all to call myself a photographer whether I choose or not to make it a profession?

-- steve (leitz_not_leica@hotmail.com), May 07, 2002

Answers

Do I have to be able to do it all to call myself a photographer whether I choose or not to make it a profession?

No. I don't recall seeing any scenics or wildlife shots made by HCB, and he is considered a photographer.

-- Douglas Herr (telyt@earthlink.net), May 07, 2002.

"No. I don't recall seeing any scenics or wildlife shots made by HCB, and he is considered a photographer."

HCB has done some incredible scenics pictures.

-- Arie Haziza (nhaziza@northrock.bm), May 07, 2002.

I think your problem is a lack of imagination.

I do not mean that you do not have an imagination. Rather, at least until your post, you were not thinking about the purpose or underlying concept of your photography. Instead, you were subliminally recreating the photographs (ideas) of others that at some point in the past were new and original and fresh. Now, because most if not all of us have done the same as you, these images are tired cliches.

You would likely benefit from setting your camera aside and reflecting on what it is that you are trying to accomplish. Is it to recreate what has already been done a thousand times over and probably better in many cases? Or, are you trying to create something or express some idea of your own?

-- pinhead (blieb@sheridanross.com), May 07, 2002.

pinhead, i wouldn't go so far, as you cannot see what i'm looking at here. only one postcard pic here is almost a dupe of a nat. geo. photo, guilty. the other 2 dozen or so are quite original, unique and they get a lot of comments, but of similar subjects and styles. someday i'll learn how that scanner down the hall works.

i admit, something needs to be done.

-- steve (leitz_not_leica@hotmail.com), May 07, 2002.

Firstly, most photographers do specialize, for a number of reasons. If you are really empathetic towards people and enjoy being around them, that's probably what you'll want to photograph. If you feel that the beautiful grove of trees down the road should be cut down to make room for housing or a highway, you're probably not a landscape photographer. So my advice is, for the most part to photograph whatever you have a passion for, such as your candids and street shots. At the same time it does not hurt every once and awhile to attempt to shoot something you have no particular affinity for just to try and push you imagination its limits. 'Pinhead' also makes a very good point. Most photographers start out emulating others work. You see images you like in books and such and it is natural to go out and see if you can do it better. But you should definitely work to get past this stage to the point that you are trying to convey your viewpoint and feelings of a subject rather than parroting someone else's. This however can take years and requires a real commitment to the craft of photography as a medium of expression rather than just being a 'fun hobby'.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), May 07, 2002.

phil the funny, actually not era but what AREA. some places in the world don't have electricity, running water, FOOD, etc., even in this era. it just so happens, some of the nicest places, people, and things are in these areas of the globe. funny!

-- steve (leitz_not_leica@hotmail.com), May 07, 2002.

hey, do i get a prize for giving the tin a beans the boot?

-- steve (leitz_not_leica@hotmail.com), May 07, 2002.

On the one hand, it's good that you are asking this question. You have far more chance of improving your photographer than if you asked questions like "Which Noctilux should I buy next," "Does the M7 Look Good," or "HCB: Boxers or Briefs?"

On the other hand, it's really like asking for a portfolio review without showing the portfolio. Scanning from prints can be done at any neighborhood Kinko's, and most labs will do a PhotoCD (not optimal, but fine for web posting) from negatives, all at reasonable cost. Do that and come back and ask the question. The questions really can't be answered without some idea of what the pix are.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), May 07, 2002.

With THAT kind of querry, you don't get ANYTHING. Bored, are you? And, pray tell, where is the Leica link?

-- Alec (alecj@bellsouth.net), May 07, 2002.

where is the Leica link?

"Can I call myself a photographer if I don't use any camera bigger or more programmable than a Leica?"

-- Douglas Herr (telyt@earthlink.net), May 07, 2002.

Am I to be faulted because I do only a few types of photography?

Yes, but only if you desire to be a versatile photographer (whether amateur or pro).

Am I limiting myself?

Yes. Being able to see, understand and capture the essence of a variety of things is a fabulous journey and expands both the mind and the soul. Stretching one's boundaries occasionally is a good way of keeping the creative juices from becoming too viscous. That does not mean, however, that a photographer has to be equally inspired or touched by every subject. Do I have to be able to do it all to call myself a photographer whether I choose or not to make it a profession?

No, I don't think so. Even professional photographers will usually specialize in one or perhaps a few types of work, or at least become known for such. I think there is, however, an extra pride of craftsmanship - a personal bonus, if you will - in being able to do almost anything reasonably well. I wouldn't suggest anyone become obsessed with that objective, however.

-- Ralph Barker (rbarker@pacbell.net), May 07, 2002.

....people candids...poor people...peasants...street shots - env...portraits

I think the word here is people. If you're photographing people, then you are the limiting factor, not lack of fresh subject material. I dont mean that in a degrading way, but instead hope to highten your awareness in what is the best of all subjects: People.

-- Charles (cbarcellona@telocity.com), May 07, 2002.

You don't have to photograph poor people (or peasants) to call yourself a photographer

-- Steve Wiley (wiley@accesshub.net), May 07, 2002.

great answers all, and i do mean all, esp. ralph.

i cannot find inspiration in my own back yard. how does one find it worthy of publication, or modestly place an enlargement on the wall for more than a few weeks?

thanks

-- steve (leitz_not_leica@hotmail.com), May 07, 2002.

Steve, I bet there is a lot of worthy subject matter in your own backyard. It's a real challenge to make great photographs in a place that you you take for granted or find mundane.

-- Steve Wiley (wiley@accesshub.net), May 08, 2002.