Topic: Style

[Alan]

Has anyone acheived or even given thought to developing
their own distinct 'Style' in photography?

It is something which I find myself struggling with.

I think I find my different cameras and lenses and films
and subjects kind of distracting !

should I be shooting one specific subject that I really like to shoot,
with one camera format limited to 1 or 2 lenses and a type of film
I really like to use, basically equipment I feel most comfortable with . . .

When I look at some photographers galleries online and possibly some
of my own collections I find the content kind of scattered, just a collection
of really good photographs, but they dont portray a sense of style,
something that makes that artist stand out . . .

is this a result of the digital age, which I am part of. . .

What are your thoughts?

Alan

[Phil Bebbington]

I will need to ponder this more, however, I have found that by pursuing certain projects that often leads to developing a style, generally picked up on by others more than the photographer. I can't say I have ever gone in search of a style as such. Oddly though, a photographer friend from Germany asked me the same question many years ago. He was new to photography and although quite competent seemed to have the need for a style.

I guess have projects, take photos and the style will take care of itself - or not!

[Alan]

. . . well ive been shooting on and off for about 20 years
and I dont seem to have a style . . . 

[Mojave]

I like your take on it Phil. Finding a sense of style is something I have been forced to examine since I started school a few years ago. It seems that you cant ever be anybody unless you develop a specific style that tells the viewer exactly whose image they're looking at. Some folks have done that very well. I think Susan B for one has created a definite style. You can easily tell an image done by her. Same with Sally Mann, Rocky Schenck, Keith Carter, Ralph Gibson, Ansel Adams, James Natchwey, and so on. I think some of the guest galleries here also define clear styles. Zoe Weiseman comes to mind. I went to her nude show in LA and can easily see a style in her work.

My problem with creating a specific style is that it makes me feel pigeonholed and that scares me. I just feel like different subjects require different approaches. Somethings just work better taken with the Holga because they work with the dreamy feeling better but other subjects, like my submission for Noise, worked better in totally clear focus throughout. So yeah, developing a style worries me. I worry that I wont create one and wont ever amount to much in the photographic world and Im worried that I will develop one and will get stuck and wont be able to branch out.

Sorry, I probably just confused the issue even more.  

[moominsean]

I think some of the fw crew have developed a style...skorj with his 665, susan and her blur, leon with his printing, ed developing his tea thing. i'm not sure that style is always a conscious choice but rather just develops in a manner that suits your interests. i think i have a style, or at least people generally seem to be able to identify my work...and i see similarities in my stuff even between formats. i do think a lot about what i want to do with photography and what i'm trying to achieve, but i would never let that get in the way of enjoying myself. i guess it depends on your purpose, if you are trying to make yourself a marketable commodity or what.

it seems to me that style is something that becomes apparent after the fact, when you have a collection of work to look at. most photographers probably don't think so much about it while shooting, they just do what they do however they do it.

[calbisu]

Style; that's a difficult one. Agree on the different approaches to the subject. They are all equally valid to me as I think you go through different stages when related to style. In my current stage I try not to create an style but on the other hand I try shooting on a certain way more or less consciously. As I am quite new to photography looking at others photographers work is paramount to me and helps me exploring new ways, hence modellate again the style. Whatever that means   

[Phil Bebbington]

Sean, I agree with you 100%. If I had gone out trying to get a style it would have suffocated me. You shoot what you like and over time if what interests you remains I think the style develops. I do think though that  for most the style is what others see, I for one don't ever think of style. I know what I like and I know what excited me enough to raise the camera to my eye - what that develops into I don't think enough about, it is what it is. I see myself as having a style, but, it was never a concious thing.

[Andrea.]

I do have a style only I don't like it and I'm working on moving to a new area of photographic imagery.

[Alan]

good reading, nice to know what people think on the subject,
and nice to feed the thought on it too !

Would you not think after a number of years shooting and pondering
over your best portfolio that your 'style' was just coincidence through
sheer quantity and nothing else other than a passion for general photography?

. . . maybe by combining a number of aspects of your photographic
life together with a conscience decision to chase or work on a style
that more could have been acheived?

For instance combining, What you love to shoot, the genre of photography,
Your favourite camera/format and the end effect you envision for your images?

For example, Henri Cartier Bresson shot in 35mm format with mostly
1 lens in primarily B+W, he always made sure there were people in
the scene, he shot when mobile from the hand, etc.
this was obviously what he liked and felt most comfortable with.

I think its good to copy anothers style but ultimately you would want
to be known as a fhotographer with your own individual style or look
something that sets you apart, something that says . . .

ah yes thats Joe Bloggs' style . . .           

. . . or maybe not 

[Francois]

Style is something so personal, it's weird to be discussing it.
I for one never went looking to develop one. I think style is something that develops organically through the photographer's eyes (thus personal tastes).

I for one don't think I have a particular style yet I'm sure others will strongly disagree with that.
When I shoot something in which I include a very strong composition... I guess that's probably very "me"...

I guess style is anything the photographer is comfortable with...
It's not so much related to the subject matter than to the way it is approached.

[original_ann]

Forgive me, but why does the question 'what's your style?" vaguely remind me of being asked by (potential cupids) "what's your type?". 

Enjoy and forget labels 

[Terry]

I think you answered your own question: "...what he liked and felt most comfortable with."

I was out with a friend one time when she was accused of not being spontaneous enough.  She was really upset, and after stewing about it a while said to me, "I"ll show them--I'll do something really spontaneous..."

[Mojave]

I like the idea of not trying to create a style and letting one happen naturally through the choices we make to make the images we want. Its one of the things about school that drives me crazy. I like that Im being forced into thinking outside of my comfort zone, which is just shooting from the hip at what attracts me, but what I dont like is the super close examination of why I shoot and how.

[Windy]

I'm still at an early stage of trying everything and anything. Maybe a style will develop with time?

[LT]

I'm going to go all touchy-feely artyfarty nu-agey words-with-no-substance etc on this ... I think the main concern for me is trying to get some 'soul' into the pics. I cant really define what this is, but I know it's important to me. A picture (by me or anyone else) has to have this in order for me to connect with it. I think that once it's there, a style will emerge. I know when it's there in my own prints - it's when I get an adrenalin rush as the print emerges from the developer tray and it looks good.  

[Alan]

Forgive me, but why does the question 'what's your style?" vaguely remind me of being asked by (potential cupids) "what's your type?". 

Enjoy and forget labels 

. . . Well nowhere on this thread have I asked that specific question.

I have never been asked by anyone 'Whats your Stlye?' and I have never
asked any one else that either ! I am not trying to find out what everyones
stlye is I just want to see if anyone has made a conscience decision to
Specialise or spcifically made a decision to concentrate on a unique
and personal way of approaching photography.

Leon has touched on it, he sees something in his images or is seeking
a specific requirement or element that he strives to seek it again and again
and then as mentioned a style developes.

This I dont think is not the same as shooting just because you like to.

[Photo_Utopia]

I've been thinking about this, and here is my 2p worth.
I think its' good to develop a style, Phil has a good strong style as already stated, I think Vicky has too.

 Some people worry about being 'pigeonholed' — "he always shoots mono with a 50mm lens" I think they should relax.

I can think of many great photographic artists whom I think have a stong sense of stlyle some of may favourites like Brandt, Arbus, Brassaï and Sander all defined by their art.
I can't imagine Bill Brandt shooting long tonal scale colour images or August Sander shooting colour abstracts.

So style is good so that you have a strong directional force propelling your work.

That said in my own case I feel pulled in lots of directions, I prefer mono but shoot colour sometimes, I prefer portraits but shoot landscapes, I prefer 6x6 from my Rolleiflex but sometimes shoot 35mm or even 4x5.

I guess I think my own style is mono square portraits, and to be a strong artist with recognised work those are the images I should show.
When I first started my earliest mentor told me to be brutal in my image selection and not to show anything that I wasn't 100% proud of.
I guess once you've found the style/message you want to convey it would be best to keep the photographs in a quite narrow range.

So I feel finding a style is important to get you noticed, sorry for the ramble

Regards to everyone
Mark

[original_ann]

Forgive me, but why does the question 'what's your style?" vaguely remind me of being asked by (potential cupids) "what's your type?". 

Enjoy and forget labels 

. . . Well nowhere on this thread have I asked that specific question.

No, no aoluain - - I think you misinterpreted me.  (*Probably my fault for not filling in the blanks).  I certainly wasn't insinuating that you'd asked that question.  Yes, Phil mentioned that he's been asked that before, but that's neither here nor there. 

I should have typed out in my preface what I thought was clear (and what definitely wasn't) "forgive me for going off topic...   

[Alan]

Forgive me, but why does the question 'what's your style?" vaguely remind me of being asked by (potential cupids) "what's your type?". 

Enjoy and forget labels 

. . . Well nowhere on this thread have I asked that specific question.

No, no aoluain - - I think you misinterpreted me.  (*Probably my fault for not filling in the blanks).  I certainly wasn't insinuating that you'd asked that question.  Yes, Phil mentioned that he's been asked that before, but that's neither here nor there. 

I should have typed out in my preface what I thought was clear (and what definitely wasn't) "forgive me for going off topic...   

Absolutely no problem!
____________

Good points Mark,

I think I would be worried about my photography being pidgeonholed
if I wasnt happy with it myself, but if I was happy with my work
I wouldny mind being pidgeonholed at all, it means your work is
recognised and people have noticed enough.

[Mojave]

Looks like I started something with that word, didnt I?

And Mark, I am quite relaxed so you can stop worrying. 

I am a new artist and want to be free to follow whatever path I want to get the images I want and so it bothers me when some students and some teachers tell me that I have to develop a specific style if Im ever going to get anywhere with my work. It gets frustrating but I still work the way I want to work.

[Photo_Utopia]

Mojave
I don't think you need to restrict yourself to develop a style, that style can run though differerent bodies of work.
But...
I think its very hard to be noticed in a crowd if your shooting style doesn't differentiate you.
No one ever told Bill Brandt to use colour or HCB to use large format.
 Those two are famous for their styles are are most great artists.
I think the same is true with any art-form painting, music etc-people are often defined by their style (Kraftwerk with guitars playing R&B anyone?) that is a strength not really a restriction.

Of course feel free to differ
Regards
Mark

[Mojave]

I dont completely differ and I meant no disrespect to anybody who has developed a style so I hope it didnt sound that way. All of the artists I mentioned and more are my favorite artists and they all have easily recognizable styles. My whole point about not getting caught up in trying to create a style is to be free follow any path I need to right now.

But here is something else to consider. What if Sally Mann suddenly stopped shooting with a large format camera and stopped doing her own darkroom work. What if she thought shooting with a DSLR was the best way to get her meaning across. Would anybody receive that work in the same way? I doubt it. So in my opinion, that is getting trapped in a specific style. Actors and painters and writers and even athletes all have this same problem. To be defined so specifically, or typecast, means that you take the risk of never being able to branch out and having your work as accepted as the work that typecast you in the first place.

[Francois]

If anybody asks me what my style is, I think I'll start answering from now on that I shoot in a Post Post-Modernist Traditional Neo-Picturalist Style

[moominsean]

Forgive me, but why does the question 'what's your style?" vaguely remind me of being asked by (potential cupids) "what's your type?".  

Enjoy and forget labels  

. . . Well nowhere on this thread have I asked that specific question.

I have never been asked by anyone 'Whats your Stlye?' and I have never
asked any one else that either ! I am not trying to find out what everyones
stlye is I just want to see if anyone has made a conscience decision to
Specialise or spcifically made a decision to concentrate on a unique
and personal way of approaching photography.

Leon has touched on it, he sees something in his images or is seeking
a specific requirement or element that he strives to seek it again and again
and then as mentioned a style developes.

This I dont think is not the same as shooting just because you like to.

but i think anyone that doesn't like to probably won't have a style worth noticing. if you are doing it because you have to or only because you need to pay the bills, your style will definitely be more contrived and artificial. i think liking what you are doing is part of what helps your style develop. that doesn't mean that you will have skill or talent to follow it up, though! there are plenty of people that like to take pictures but suck at it.

[gregor]

my two cents is that most of us mess with so many cameras, film types and lenses - and display the work on the web less than selectively - that subsequently it appears there is a 'lack of style.' However, if we were to selectively edit our work into main themes, or even series, a style would clearly be apparent.  

Style is something that emerges out of a photographic praxis, rather than something that is sought after...

[Mojave]

Gregor, that is exactly what one of my teachers just told me. 

[John Thawley]

The word "style" is not unlike the word "quintessence" - what makes something uniquely special is almost undefinable. When something as "it"... the subtle detail and differences that dictate "it" seem to escape us.

We've all been asked "what is it you're looking for?" And we've all answered, "I don't know... but I'll know it when I see it."

Every year the fashion industry releases "what's new" and tells us what's going to be in style. Yet... if you look at fashion through the eyes of history, it's more likely to discuss what people WORE during an era... not what the designers were showing.

Then there's a tendency for company brands to release "collectible" editions of items or products. Again... you can't truly predict what's collectible. A lot of things go into the "why" something becomes a truly valuable collectible. A Patek watch may become collectible simply because it was expensive and very few were produced. Whereas a Time Mercury is collectible because it was a symbol of simplicity, style and affordability.... and because they were somewhat disposable, there aren't many around. Similarly, the most valuable baseball trading cards didn't come from the "collectible" gum packets... they're the ones that were on cigarette packets produced by the kjillions.. and like wise thrown away when the cigarettes were gone. Who knew?

So I feel, personally, style is something that must accumulate over time and from a body of work containing elements which uniquely compile to a total sum. - I think.

I don't know that you can pro-actively develop your own style. Certainly you may end up with your own style... but it's like the old saying goes... you can't just give yourself a nickname.