I recently attended a workshop in the Tuscany area of Italy.  Many attending were portrait and wedding photographers, others were amateurs at various levels of interest and skill.  Some outstanding and nationally recognized portrait photographers were the instructors during the workshop, and like most photographers they enjoy and even aspire to do other types of work as well.  The challenge was presented to capture what we saw in a way that was different than typical “postcard” type work - expand our vision so to speak. As the group piled off the bus each day there was a flurry of activity shooting nearly everything in sight ... I’m sure an interesting scene to those in the area.  As a newcomer to a group trip like this, as well as this type of location (my first trip to Europe and only second trip abroad) I really didn’t know what to expect. I was a little overwhelmed by the history and beauty of the region, and I will admit I was caught up in tourist mode. “Postcard” or not, I enjoyed trying to capture the emotion I was feeling at the time.  But that’s a little how I see things ... I always see the big vista first, enjoy it, and try to capture it in away that conveys how I feel.  Then I begin to find interest in the details, but nearly always to support that magnificent vista.  All in all a terrific and enjoyable experience.

During the week there were several discussions regarding photographic styles, particularly referencing this idea of images other than “postcard” type images.  We all need to be challenged at times to see the world around us from a different point of view.  Whether I was successful I’m not sure ... after all if I take a picture of a magnificent structure built many many centuries ago and now quite famous, the end result will be like a postcard, because I’m taking a picture of something that typically goes on a postcard.  That’s sort of the definition of a postcard.  Of course, I’d rather have my image of it to put in a slide show back home rather than a postcard, and personally I think my images of these things were better than most of the postcards I saw (I’ll admit a little bias here).  I’m sure no one attending criticizes my efforts, but I digress a little. 

Back to my point, what occurred to me is we each see the world around us from a very personal and even intimate perspective.  It is affected by what we enjoy seeing and what moves us emotionally, all of which is the result of our own life experiences.   I think we all understand that others may not have the same perspective, and may not appreciate or have interest in what we see before us and want to photograph, just like we may not see what they see.

As an example, my personal preference are images with nice balance, pleasant shapes and lines, and interesting colors.  I tend to enjoy long skinny images more than more standard rectangular images ... I find myself looking for and even seeing this as I shoot. I prefer images of nature, whether they are majestic vistas or more intimate studies.  I like to photograph how humans have affected that beauty in positive ways. While I appreciate and admire images that are more detailed and graphic in nature, things like conflict through extreme contrast in colors and patterns are not something I often see and thus photograph when I’m out shooting.  I don’t see myself as a journalist and I rarely include people.  While I occasionally render an image into black and white for effect, I much prefer color.  There are certainly many who prefer just the opposite ... that’s what they enjoy seeing and most likely they have an eye that even “sees” this when they are shooting.

But that’s me. It is only natural that our photography reflects our personal viewpoints.  Sure we can force ourselves out of this mode, and many professional photographers have to shoot what they can sell so they have no choice.  During the discussion, the question was posed “If you were able to take just the images you enjoy what would they be like?”.

I thought about this and realized that’s where I’m at now.  I enjoy photography and currently rarely take pictures other than those I enjoy taking.  Sure I’d like to sell them seriously and perhaps someday I’ll get around to trying that, but for now I just take them for the pleasure I get from viewing them, and am quite content with the occasional sale to make myself feel good.  What I “see” when I’m shooting is a reflection of my personal viewpoint of what is around me and what brings me the greatest pleasure.  As an example, during the week I took very few images that included people.  Certainly there were plenty of interesting opportunities, and many in the group took some wonderful images of various local Italians in a variety of activities.  I enjoy looking at those images, but I really don’t see those types of things when I’m shooting ... I’m just too busy looking at the things that I personally enjoy the most.  Many in the group were looking for simple images with graphic elements or textures, many of which were very interesting.  I took many images that were small studies of various elements as well, but more often I was looking for things that conveyed the atmosphere of the location and wasn’t really worried about the “fine art” aspect of the image.

I guess the challenge to me comes in that my vision - more of a landscape and nature approach - is enjoyable to me, even if some of the images might be “postcard” like.  But I work very hard to capture the emotion and pleasure I have at the time I take an image.  I find it very challenging to stand before a magnificent view and try to capture a piece of it which might evoke in those who view the image the emotions I am feeling at the time.  Sure many times I just snap a wide angle shot to record it, but rarely does that communicate how I feel.  More often than not I fail to capture such an image, but I try, and when I succeed I find myself very emotionally attached to the result ( perhaps too much to be objective about how good it really is).

During the week this sort of led into another more philosophical discussion on occasion regarding the difference between “landscape” and “fine art” photography.  Certainly many of the images taken during the week fall outside of the concept of landscape or nature images ... intimate studies of graphic elements or textures, often depicted in black and white or subdued saturation for effect.  Are these “fine art”?  What is “fine art”?

I guess my real problem is by calling this style “fine art” there is an implication that it is more “art” than perhaps other styles of photography.  This is unfortunate because to me “fine art” is just a name for a style of photography and doesn’t have any relevance to its artistic consideration.  Certainly fine art images can be tremendous and while I don’t really do much of this myself, there are many I enjoy viewing.  But I’ve never felt they are more “art” than many other wonderful images that are different styles, such as beautiful scenes of nature.  Understand I’m not saying they aren’t art ... what I’m saying is you can’t discount the artistic merit of landscape images just because they don’t fit into the description of some as to what constitutes “fine art”.

Another brief discussion was which is more marketable?  Tough call there ... both are challenging.  I know of a fair number of photographers who are widely known and recognized that make their living selling landscape and nature images (I have about 100 book marked in my web browser). I know very few whose livelihood comes exclusively from fine art style images.  But then my personal viewpoint or vision means I look for those types of photographers ... that’s what I enjoy viewing the most so that’s what I look for when browsing the internet. There are probably many more “fine art” photographers out there, I’m just not aware of them.  Which is more valuable?  Good question.  Certainly either can command a handsome price when done well, but relatively few photographers succeed at either when it comes to making a living.

So no answers here ... just thoughts.  What’s your vision?  If you are a professional photographer and suddenly found yourself independently wealthy and never having to sell another image, would you continue to be a photographer?  What type of images would you take?  Do you take what you see and enjoy or are  you more motivated by trying to capture what you think others would see and enjoy?

We all see the world differently, and there are many ways to capture that vision.  Not all will agree with our point of view, but some do, and they appreciate the images that reflect their own perspective.

One challenge I would pose to you.  As you visit a far away place and stand before a magnificent and amazing view, can you capture that in a way that expresses the emotion you are feeling at the time?  I promise you it isn’t as easy at it sounds. If you are lucky enough to do so successfully it’s a great feeling, and most likely it’s better than any postcard you can find.