Too many good photographs...

[karusel]

It just occured to me when I was browsing through images at photopoints.com page and I also remembered many incredible albums at pbase and other galleries. The thing is, there is like, a gazillion of good photos, and everyone is trying to make his best to take a fresh looking shot, original, as they like to say. You can never be original, the odds are, whatever you're just now thinking to do, it's been done before at least a hundred times. Fine, so you got this wild idea and you barely hold your breath until you can actually shoot it then somewhere you see it's been already done by someone else. It should leave you with a funny feeling, and I'm not talking ha ha funny, unless you find a madman laughing at a lightbulb amusing. You study composition colors, etc, etc, then post a shot of something you put together and it barely gets to people. General rule is, if it doesn't stick out, it's not worth your time and what I'm saying is I guess that a photo needs time, time to be made and even more importantly, time to be looked at, a glance won't do it but a glance is mostly all it gets - unless it sticks out. Since the digital revolution even the laziest of people would take photos and put them on web or wherever and it's a plague, thousands of snapshots that are put to view that nobody cares about and just wants something extraordinary. So then you find some ultra professional galleries that take your breath away, even more than that blonde girl in Top gun, but then again once you've looked at enough of the non plus ultra good archives... you get bored. And are looking for a sensation. Then you see some actually pretty decent shots of some amateur trying hard, and don't even care to comment, the shot slides in and out of your brain in a jiffy.

Now then, what is going to turn you on?

Someone once supposedly said all things that were to be invented have already been invented. That man was a fool that didn't know any better, and I hope I am nothing like him, but I still think it's kind of a tight spot here in photography, nothing much new to discover to present. The only way I see is the 'art' way, to present your reality via camera. To shoot things as you see them, which has to be hard, and I wouldn't know since I haven't tried yet. Then... Why do you shoot? If it's a job, then fine, no argument. For yourself? Gah, ego masturbation. Nobody does that. You shoot for appreciation, be it your wife, family, friends, anyone, the more the merrier. And it's gonna get darn harder to impress them. Also, the prices of professional photos will fall dramatically, I modestly assume.

I hope I've made some sense...

[Scottes]

Now then, what is going to turn you on?

1) Seeing something worth a picture
2) Taking a good picture of it

I personally don't care if 3 million people have taken pictures of X or Y or Z - chances are good that it's the first time I've seen it.

Yesterday I spent the day chasing waterfalls. Saw 5 in a 12-hour period. The pictures are OK, certainly not great let alone outstanding. But I had a wonderful, beautiful, simply outstanding day all the same. And the waterfalls were beautiful.

In the last 3 months I've seen 3 bald eagles - I'd never seen a single one before that. I didn't get a picture of any of them, and that's quite OK thank you.

[nosquare2003]

Now then, what is going to turn you on?

1) Seeing something worth a picture
2) Taking a good picture of it

I personally don't care if 3 million people have taken pictures of X or Y or Z - chances are good that it's the first time I've seen it.

Yesterday I spent the day chasing waterfalls. Saw 5 in a 12-hour period. The pictures are OK, certainly not great let alone outstanding. But I had a wonderful, beautiful, simply outstanding day all the same. And the waterfalls were beautiful.

In the last 3 months I've seen 3 bald eagles - I'd never seen a single one before that. I didn't get a picture of any of them, and that's quite OK thank you.

Well said. I shoot for myself. I see it, I take it and it's mine no matter good or bad shots. I simply enjoy doing it. Anyway, I'm an average amateur with nothing to "show off".

[John_T]

I think photography is a positive outlet for our inherent hunting instinct, something that otherwise finds less positive, downright destructive or perverse expression.

Lately, facinated with the ravens that hang around my house, feeding them, watching them mate, nest, chase anything that enters their territory, tease cats and chase squirrels, and merrily dance out of my sites, even at 300mm, it's a tremendous challenge and I haven't satisfied myself with a good shot yet. And yesterday I managed to smear every shot of a squirrel that teased and posed for me three meters away.

No man, this is a sport and a good image is a goal. Who ever shot enough goals?

[shniks]

I do not shoot for anyone but myself. Its not ego masturbation, its for visual pleasure - I simply get a kick out of looking at photos, be it mine or other people's. I hardly ever show them to anyone, so I must be doing it for myself. And like others mentioned, it gets me out of the house. I never would visit these wonderful places if I did not have this hobby.

To be totally honest with you, I do agree with some of your points - eg there's just so many good photos out there. I think digital has allowed people to get more practice, and post processing helps achieve the amazing results.
But no matter how many I see, I still get excited when I look at a beautiful photo. Maybe you just need a break from this, you may come back with a renewed interest.

[cloudless]

You can never be original, the odds are, whatever you're just now thinking to do, it's been done before at least a hundred times.

I know my photos are always original because nobody else can take the photo the same way, at the exact same time and location. There could be hundreds of similar photos done before, but my memories and creation are unique.

I do shoot for myself because I enjoy the process and the results. And I love to see my older pictures like reading an old diary.

[SWPhotoImaging]

Karusel,

I regularly look through all the new postings in both the share photos and the critique forums here. I also peruse numerous other internet photo sharing sites. Although I learn from nearly every image I view, only 1 in 100 make me stop and look closely at the composition, lighting, subject, exposure, etc.

Most of these are the same subjects that the other hundreds of images captured. Most of them even contain many of the same elements of lighting, people, places, etc.

The difference is the confluence of subject, conditions, capabilities (photographer), lighting, and a number of other elements that made the same old sight that others may have seen or even photographed become an image to remember.

Sure, most situations have been seen, most places have been captured on film over and over, most conditions have been experienced. Still, when you find the perspective that allows your capturing of that moment in time to be different or special, to pull you and your viewers into the emotion of the moment rather than just viewing a moment in time, them you have succeeded in creating a photograph.

I have captured possibly two such images in more than 30 years of taking pictures, with all manner of hardware. I look forward every day to my next one. To think that it has all been done, or that others have already captured all the possible images under all the possible conditions would be to end my dreams. I know better. I have seen with my own eyes far too many sights that were worthy, but that I was un-prepared to capture for various reasons. Many of these are waiting all around us for the moment when preparedness meets opportunity. I will pursue my goal of capturing both time and emotion in images for as long as I can lift a camera.

You should never stop trying to do the same.

[JadeCat]

Everyone brings their own particular perspective to their personal photography.

Much like books: there have been tons written on every potential genre out there, yet millions of books are still being produced within the same genres, same themes, similar plots, etc. And there are hundreds of aspiring writers out there.

Yet, each one comes from a different perspective. Each writer has a different "voice" from every other writer. Every writer looks at something just a little different from another writer. Every writer has a different experience or background that they bring to their writing. Consequently, even if you give several different writers the same assignment, you get very different pieces of work.

Photography, IMNSHO, is much the same way.

Your experiences, your background, and your unique perspective bring something to your photography that is 'unique-ly' you.

[stopbath]

There is but a scant 26 letters in the alphabet, and 8 notes in music, but neither books nore music show any sign of not being original any more...

Photographs combine the elements of shape, light, texture, composition, colour, depth of field, and motion. As with music and literature, the choices are boundless when the elements are combined and worked with.

Even if you photographed a statue 100 times before, there are always untold new ways to photograph the same shape.

[IanBMW]

I was once on the same page as this guy. You feel frustated because you browse through pbase and see thousands of awesome photographs and wonder how someone could even make it in the photo world. You either A do it for personal pleasure or B you do it for a living. A photographer isnt just a guy who walks around shooting photo's and handing them into SI for money , you have to sell yourself , your a bussinessman really. Just my twist on it that I stole off of the laters Digital Photo Pro mag.

[DocFrankenstein]

I am comfortable with mastrubation 8)

I take pics because I want to have some memories left for when I'm old
I take pics because it's fun and I like getting to know my camera
I do it cause I can

There a law... of something...

It states that the amound of new or original information is drastically less than of the information already discussed.

[karusel]

Is it therefore no sin to copy? Or is one allowed to copy and improve? Or neither, but knowing that one can never be original regardless of knowledge? So, if everything has already been invented being original now equals copying.

But I think I've found what I can satisfy myself with. You know what the difference is between a hobbyist and an artist? It may not be true for really all, but artist has that invisible, ungraspable something - style. I think this is what I will strive for - eventhough I realize it is much harder to develop in photography as it is in painting - and it should be enough. 8)