Personal style

In recent blogs I have briefly discussed issues surrounding the 'construction' of images with particular reference to cropping, sharpening and tonal range. I have argued that in each case it is the decisions of the photographer that should drive the final outcome.  It is, of course, essential that the photographer takes cognisance of the probable audience. However, because how each individual sees and interprets an image will be different,  the reality is that only in a very limited number of scenarios can there be any real confidence in what the photographer intended and what the viewer sees coincide.

During my studies it has been suggested that I should develop a 'personal style'. At first glance this would seem to be good advice but the more one examines the statement the less meaning the statement carries. One presumes that what the student produces is, at that moment in time, his personal style. It may be naive, untutored or poorly formed but if it is an honest submission then it is personal. Over time the style may change but many of the elements seen in the first attempts will remain. The question to be asked is whether what is produced is an honest submission or whether there has been a calculated attempt to provide something that the tutor and assessors will like or appreciate. I would suggest that the pressure is such that the 'pleasing' submission is more likely than the honest one. If a tutor suggests a number of changes to what has been submitted then it seems reasonable to incorporate such changes both in future work and in the re-working of a particular assignment. (Attempts to second guess the assessors at the end of the Course is to take the road to madness. Given the difference between the tutors comments and advice towards the end of the Course and the marks and comments of the assessors that has been such a problem recently in the OCA one wonders whether there is any consensus of opinion amongst those who carry out these tasks seems highly unlikely). The question that then should be asked is how much of the work is the students own personal work and how much is of an unthinking acceptance.

I once heard a comment from someone who had been through the process that it is a case that one has to 'jump through the hoops'. By this was meant that one's own feelings should be subsumed in order to achieve the final aim. If this be true then what is the output from such a process? The most likely is someone who apparently succeeds but who is still locked in to a process that is stultifying and counter-productive. Whilst researching the work and life of Andrew Moore (1957 - ) I came across a response during an interview  (www.wsws.org/en/articles/2011/01/inte-j05.html)  in which he states that he studied for three years at Princeton .... "but it wasn't until I was in  my 40's, some twenty-odd years later, that I finally figured out how to make good pictures."  It struck me at the time that there may be something wrong with a teaching process that requires twenty years of following practice to come to the realisation of what is a "good photograph".

Based on the opinion of a number of others whose advice I appreciate my photography has shown a marked improvement over the years that I have been studying. Most of this I put down to the advice received from my tutors on the images that I have submitted. Over the past four years I have taken 1000's of images of which only a small percentage have been formally commented upon or assessed. My experience is that there is very little agreement about what is a 'good' picture amongst tutors and assessors or indeed anybody else. Given this I have taken the view that by all means try out the suggestions and advice given but if the resulting product is, to you, unsatisfactory then discard it. Ultimately staying true to yourself is the key to success in any walk of life.