Street Shooting Style - Be Original ?

[glenerrolrd]

To be noticed in as a Street Photographer(or really any type of photographer ) ..it seems you need a identifiable style . Since I am primarily a street photographer (getting close to 200 000 street photographs )...I can only speak to STREET . When I look at Instagram and the street photographers I follow ...I can almost immediately guess the photographer . I saw this photograph on the Leica Store website and thought ..do I really want to be unique ? Or do I want my photographs to have an aesthetic I like .

I started seriously in street photography in about 2006 ..so that's 16 years of work . My first dozen years all my work was in color and mostly with various Leica digital M cameras . About 4-5 years ago I started shooting more in Black and White (because all of my numerous street shooting workshops preferred B&W ) ...first converting color files and then going all in with Leica Mono bodies .

Today I shoot both color and B&W using the M11 and the M10M ...it depends on the subject and time of year .

I have been noticing quite a lot of maybe gimmicks by photographers in an effort to build an identifiable style . Strong backlighting ,reflections , creative (?) blur are examples. I would like my photographs to have a cohesive aesthetic (for example the color should look like Kodachrome or maybe the Leica M9 files ; the MONO files maybe like Fuji Acros or maybe TRI X ) . I am not sure I want an identifiable style based on gimmicks or fashion ?

What do you think ??? No right answer just perspective . I do like this customization of the M bodies although not sure I could take the hit on resale !

 

[MGrayson]

Roger,

Disclaimer: If I had to make a living off of my photography, I would starve.

IMHO, getting a look you like and doing that superbly well will be more satisfying than finding a gimmick. The two are not mutually exclusive - sometimes what you think of as a gimmick will work out really well for your style. For example, Mark Mann was asked by an Art Director to use a ring light on a big project, but then adopted it for a lot of his future work.

In the areas where I can claim some accomplishment, I was much happier and more commercially successful once I found MY style and got away from thinking of the works of the titans in each field. When you can look at (or listen to) a masterpiece and seriously think "I can see why they did it that way, but I think they missed an opportunity HERE," that is the best. (More realistically: "Their vision of this work downplayed an element I would have accentuated, but that wouldn't have been consistent with what they were after.")

Matt

 

[KeithL]

The development of personal signature as opposed to that dreadful term *style is essentially an unconscious and evolutionary process and the result of the collective and progressive work of the individual.

*Style - the way something is written, said, shown or done as distinguished from its substance.

Style - fashion led, frivolous, temporary, lacking in substance.

In the style of - imitated, copied or plagiarised.

 

[glenerrolrd]

Ok I think the word style is close enough and simple to understand by most . My question and its personal to each photographer ....how far should you go to be unique and why does it matter ? Let me provide a few examples of photographers I follow and what appears to be unique about their style .

Allan Schaller ...uses Leica M gear and mostly wide angles (24 ) . His work is filled with silhouettes and very graphic architecture . His work is all B& W and very easy to pick out of a group of photos on Instagram . New as a professional .

Alex Webb...uses Leica gear mostly (35perspective) . His work is extremely complex with many layers and colors that he blends into a unique photograph. .

Paolo Pellegrin ...Newsweek , National Geographic and NYT . Primarily B&W but recently more color for NG . His style is very messy ...photos are not straight ,often slightly out of focus and blurry . His B&W look like dark chalk drawings ..crushed blacks and blown highlights .

Mark diPaola .... out of focus magician . His photos are all jpegs straight out of camera ...not in focus and plenty of motion blur . Very distinctive models . Noctilux shallow depth of field .

I could list out a dozen more . What is consistent is that each has a unique signature or style that identifies their work . This is not just a random process but rather an intentional focus of their photography . I have spoken to each of the photographers listed above and dozens more including dozens of photo editors . Being retired and not a professional has its advantages .

Its even more complex today with the evolving capabilities of post processing . Its not hard to obtain sharp ,noise free files with terrific dynamic range . Factor in AI based AF systems and AI based sharpening and noise reduction . Shoot in continuous mode and your biggest issue is time wasted finding your selects . Recently I watched a ton of YouTube videos on post processing ....landscape... change the light ; add clouds ; remove objects ...more dynamic range than you can see naturally . No thanks !

Maybe you do have to be unique as craft skills are getting easier everyday ?

 

[Knorp]

Well Roger, after 16 years and 200.000 images you surely must have developed some kind of style or signature by now. Or perhaps even used and explored different techniques or ideas over time.
But how can we tell …

 

[glenerrolrd]

Yes of course I have a style . The discussion point was ...Does it need to be unique ...to be considered good . Most professionals would tell us that unless you have recognizable ..signature style ...no one will hire them . Thus the desire to find something different or unique .

When I go out to shoot I try to take interesting photographs of people that are aesthetically pleasant and hopefully occasionally capture a worthwhile moment . I set a high standard for craft skills but there isn t much that is unique about my work . I should look for it but I once had a set of guiding principals ..that I referred to when evaluating my progress as photographer .

I don't really have a question rather I was seeking a discussion about setting a goal of being unique. The photographer that had his Leica engraved surely felt it was very important .

 

[glenerrolrd]

Well Roger, after 16 years and 200.000 images you surely must have developed some kind of style or signature by now. Or perhaps even used and explored different techniques or ideas over time.
But how can we tell …

Bart

You have me there . My website lapsed and was lost . I need a new one .

 

[Knorp]

I think yes you need a unique signature to stand out of the crowd and make yourself noticed, whether it's good or not is another matter.
Perhaps you should even thinking of developing a suitable identifiable signature for a specific project ?
After all - what is considered 'street photography' ...

 

[KeithL]

Bart

You have me there . My website lapsed and was lost . I need a new one .

Yes, I also clicked on your website link in order to gain some form of enlightenment, but alas no joy.

 

[glenerrolrd]

Bart

I think you are correct but at the same time ..I think the signature can be subtle . I am not interested in being different just for the sake of being identifiable . I found the photo of my intent .....came from a Holiday collection I did in NYC years ago . I strongly favor HCB philosophy of capturing that "magic moment " . Within any collection I favor high craft skills and consistency . But overall the photograph has to be something that is worth your attention . Attached are "the guiding principals " I try to remember when creating my selects from a shoot .

About 10 years ago I put a lot of effort into Portfolio reviews . Had my favorite (who knows if its my best ) reviewed by a dozen famous photographers and photo editors . I even had a small portfolio of a dozen photographs reviewed by two winners of the Pulitzer prize . I included the photograph attached photograph to introduce my intent .

 

[KeithL]

The Holy Grail surely has to be originality, delivered via personal insight and honesty.

Style, no.

 

[glenerrolrd]

Keith we just disagree on this perspective .

The capture ...was based on seeing these dogs run down the steps every morning at exactly 7AM for years . They run every day to the point behind me and back to the owner waiting in the background fro their treat . I knew they would be coming fast so I prefocused on one of the leaves in front of them . This was a Leica M Summilux 24/1.4asph on an M9 . Success was pure luck ..one shot prefocus and wait . Maybe a little original in that the dogs have their heads up and obviously moving fast . I think they were surprised I lowered the camera and it shows well in their faces . (JOY?).

The style ...color balance was bluish and desaturated (I could fix that easily but it would not look like 7am light ) .(Summilux lenses are often cold in rendering ). The format was originally 3:2 but for my card I had to go wider ....not sure if its 16:9 . Both choices . I could have framed the image differently in post but I liked the balance . The choice of a 24FOV and a pretty close focus point ..made it way harder but established the context verse just an action shot . Those in my vocabulary are elements of style .

This what I would call a " very nice photograph" well crafted but not really all that unique ..maybe a little . Its pleasant to view and people enjoy seeing it and often ask questions .