This morning I read about the angst of two photographers who are despairing of so many rejections.
I know there are a quite a few who feel the same and while this has almost certainly been covered
before I will put another thought forward that may help.

Occasionally when looking through a photographers portfolio I am struck by how many pretty good,
or even very good images there are. However, equally I am more often struck by the lack of 'flow',
the lack of 'progression' and the lack of that illusive quality 'style'.

I am not even coming close to telling good, well established photographers or artists how to approach their
work. This is solely aimed at those who may be a bit despairing and becoming a little de-motivated.

Go to a portfolio of someone well established here. For example Rui Pires or Andre du Plessis (I hope you
don't mind guys) and don't look at one image at a time but the complete portfolio. The style & progression
I think is clear, even if it can't be put into words. Those guys have got it !!!

Also spend a few days (yes days) at http://www.magnumphotos.com

Absorb. ( I love the work of Mikhael Subowtsky for example, a very young man)

Don't hurry, don't worry and don't forget to smell the flowers on the way !

Find a genre that really turns you on. Think, think, think. Make your own style, your own new portfolio,
look at it over and over and over. Remove EVERYTHING you think is OK but no better than OK. Sit on
it a bit longer....and THEN and only then think about sharing it with the world. If the screeners don't
like it....and more importantly if you start not to like it....just carry on and develop that style. You will make it !

Stephen are you saying pick a subject you feel comfortable in and pursue it only?

Glen

That's basically the reason I bought a camera Glen, not intimating I'm any good or anything but I bought a camera simply to see if I could record the scenery that I spend all my spare time in. Landscapes and ocassionally wildlife within a landscape are the only things I'm interested in photographing, my passion is being in and doing stuff in the outdoors so consequently I've found it quite easy to learn enough about my camera and photography to get reasonable results.

JP

Well said Stephen. No Glen I don't think he meant "subject" that's why he used the word "style" repeatedly. This idea of style in photography or in art in general is to me, somewhat overrated. I am much simpler about such, I have said several times here: I see, if I like I shoot. I develop, if I like, I post. When looking at others' work, I "walk around" and spend time looking at what I like. I think if we over-think this art thing we will miss a lot of stuff we would otherwise be perfectly comfortable "liking".

I asked this question as i feel that at present Im a little stuck and fall in the category that stephen mentioned.

"Occasionally when looking through a photographers portfolio I am struck by how many pretty good,
or even very good images there are. However, equally I am more often struck by the lack of 'flow',
the lack of 'progression' and the lack of that illusive quality 'style'." Stephen's words!

I have noticed that you are very focused on your outdoors and it shows as they are wonderful images.
I guess i just need to sit down and soul search my direction!

Glen

Over thinking at present is exactly what i am suffering, because of this i now i am missing so many good opportunities!

Good advise thank you!

mmm...I don't want to get into a tangle on this one.

I have to slightly disagree with Clyde. But then again we may be saying the same thing in a different way and different
things work for different people.
Yes 'style' is different to subject. It is often the way you approach composition, the way you use light and most
importantly the way you 'see' an image. It is an interpretation...yes a better word than style perhaps. It is that virtually
unteachable ability of 'eye'.
There is a philosophical difference between what Clyde is saying and what I am proposing. It is a purely pedantic argument
perhaps but I would say this. Don't create work whether it be a painting or photography that you LIKE ! Like is almost as
bad as NICE !
I like this glass of wine in front of me (dangerously close to the keyboard) but I wouldn't rush out and buy a case ! Do you
see what I am hinting at ? It simply isn't enough to like something.
Clyde in order to try and help these guys who are losing heart a little, LIKING isn't enough, for me anyway. I don't know
why you are worried you would 'miss' something ?

I don't LIKE beautiful black naked women (see portfolio) I adore them, or at least adore the look, the 'feel', the power ( oh
help I hope my wife doesn't read this !!! ) . The greatest compliment ever paid to me is that someone once said that I had
the ability to photograph the soul !!! Maybe completely over the top but it is something I have never forgotten. Andre, I can see
has this 'eye' to see what is 'beyond'.

I think in a way you have to know what you want to shoot BEFORE you see it....not see it and then shoot it. That is why you
need to think carefully and for a long time what it is that will passionately drive you. Of course that doesn't always apply
but in terms of the development of style I think it does.

Most of that was probably crap...but heck it's fun to think about these things !!!

Stephen, I'm not really sure we ARE saying anything too different. I am just trying to say to those who seek to enjoy photography/art to do just that: enjoy it.

First and foremost we should enjoy our artistic endeavors, we should "like" both the process and the product. Same for others' art. "Nice" and "like" are not at all the same thing in my mind. The word "like" for me is MUCH deeper than "nice". For example, I "liked" the move "The Hurt Locker" VERY MUCH, but I would not begin to describe it as "nice", it is way beyond nice. It is strong, provocative and, in many ways, sad.

My main point in posting to this thread was to try to get folks like David and Glen to stop over-thinking their art and maybe, especially stop putting too much emphasis on what THIS community thinks of their work. Get back to the basics of why we pickup the camera, we like to look at photographs.

This was posted to the other thread:

"Only upload a photo you are 100% positive is going to make it !! This might sound
daft but it helps a lot because what you are then doing is hard self-editing."

I actually think that is a "daft" thing to say to someone who is struggling with their art. So, maybe avoid that type of thinking too.

Anyway, cheers!!

Many thanks for consideration and words Stephen, but many times i´m feel slave of "that" style. Whatever ... i like it :)

If you have a specific "style" and everybody (friends, family and public) knows you by that style, when you make something diferent you allways listen :

buuuu ... horrible ... i prefer goats ... etc etc

I always felt when a great artist (in my mind) like Frank Stella changed his "style" of creating, it is because change it good, and they didn't want to just be known for one style. Also, it stagnated their creative process, even it they had great monetary success and critical acclaim. These guys were not afraid to change it up and to create some terrific new art. It's also important for artists to explore different styles till one speaks to you and continue exploring. And when that style stops speaking to you, change it up!

I'm coming from a painting background. Is it different in photography? I don't think so...

Right. That's gotta be it. Most of my shots that were rejected on 1X were shot first, thought of and checked out later. Not the other way around. Got to get to switching that order...

It's a good thing, but it doesn't always work that way. With my photograph Apple and Orange, I went to the Apple store with the clear intent of shooting down the spriral staircase. With Kinetic Spokes, I happened upon it, had no intention of shooting bicycle spokes that day. It was beautiful, so I shot it, with no idea how I would work with it. Clearly, Kinetic Spokes is the photo that more resonates with viewers. I do agree with Stephen (on many points) that you have to know what you want to shoot before you shoot it. But, that can translate to: I want to shoot something of spectacular beauty this day. It can work specifically and generally. Sorry I can't be clearer...

When I went to art school there was a notion that if you knew how a piece would look when finished then it wasn't art. By that criteria, then I guess I'm not an artist as I often pre-visualize what I want to see on the film or the print (or the pixels), then make it happen.

I simply love photography and have lots of fun taking pictures. I don't know if I have a style or many stles. I consider myself to be a generalist with special expertise in ballet photography and a feel for portraiture. Two differences between me and many others here at 1X.com...I've been shooting for over 40 years and I have had an excellent, broad and thorough education in photography (besides self-education).

Stephen suggested spending hours and days looking at the work of others. I think that's very good advice. Before the Internet, I collected photos published in magazines and kept them in a file folder with the title "Swipe." It was my Swipe File and most of my contemporaries had one. For those who aren't familiar with the term, "Swipe" means to steal and the file was used to inspire by way of emulating (stealing) the most brilliant, evocative and meaningful others...but in one's own way, of course.

Here's a published image that was deliberately copied (swiped) from a photo by Francesco Scavullo, the fashion and portrait photographer who had many magazine covers to his credit in the 70's (I haven't been able to find the Scavullo original on the Web):
Anyway, keep shooting and be true to what moves you.

LOL... "Before the Internet, I collected photos published in magazines and kept them in a file folder with the title "Swipe."
I'm an art director who started my craft before computers... I still tell my designers to collect "swipe", whether it be from magazines or internet! they do...

As I said at the beginning this was one way, one idea, as to how we can help those guys who
are struggling to get published after dozens of attempts. A way of focusing and channelling their
obvious enthusiasm.

I was not suggesting that there was one 'method' for everyone, especially those who are established
and comfortable with what they are doing.

When learning to ski we all 'snow plough' first, only after weeks of practice do we go parallel and go
'off piste'.

On a personal level I enjoy the work of photographers and artists with a strong style.

However having said that my wife and I recently visited Madrid and saw hundreds of great masters
and their masterpieces. I had only ever associated Salvador Dali with surrealism and remembered all
those posters of the 60's and 70's we had on our walls as students. His 'style'. So to my great
surprise my 'picture of the week' was this !!!

http://fractalontology.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/philmusart-dali-figure-1.jpg

See there, folks! A swipe file is a good thing. I haven't found the equivalent in electronic media. There's something about tearing (or cutting) a photo out of a magazine and adding it to other treasures in a folder. The folder contains a wonderful thing...inspiration! You can take it almost anywhere and dwell on images that stir your emotions and get your creative juices flowing.

How do you get the same thing from electronic images without printing each one?...and you know that wouldn't do.

I suspect when members on this site create "Favorites" or other albums, they are doing the same thing. Granted it is limited to this site.
Nice thread and responses Stephen.

I do print out.. Ugh, but I have folders and folders that I just LOVE going through for inspiration.

I don't really see why photographers should settle down into a 'personal style'. I love experimenting, trying new forms and genres of photography, seeking out subjects, lighting conditions etc. that I haven't taken before. Just because I don't shoot a single genre doesn't mean I'm not passionate about what I shoot - like Patricia, if it's beautiful, I shoot it, and beauty is everywhere. This is just a reflection of the sort of person I am - I'm intensely interested in almost everything.
Neither would I! I would buy bottles of as many different wines as I could find, dip into them, revel in variety, the spice of life.
Perhaps my utter failure to get anything on 1x (7 rejections and counting! whoohoo) has something to do with this, but I'd much rather sacrifice 1x publication than stop experimenting and find my 'niche', even if I'm a worse photographer for it.

I agree 100%. Keep trying out new things and learn a lot by doing it! A lot of it ends up in the reject-file, I know, but you also get some pretty good shots in between - at least in you own eyes (and that's what counts)! :-)

Lars :-)

A few stray thoughts..

Could a definiton of style be something like the photographers "toolbox" of stuff that works? I mean lightning, exposure, compositions, postprocessing, pose, you name it..? Or is the the goal to obtain recongnazabilty? If the latter staying true to subject might become important. Or maybe the goal is to become recognizable without having to stay true to a specific subject?

I certainly fall into Stephen description beeing a restless photgraphic vagabond but I think that is why I love photography it is like there no limit to what you can try out - I do however think that it is wise to focus on less than everything and try to evolve a toolbox.

Johannes

Also, it's good to sit on some shots for a while. My latest publish is something I shot a couple of months ago and forgot about it. Some of the shots I'm instantly excited about usually fall flat when I see them full size. I like going through all of my older shots, to see, like a fine wine, how they matured. One never knows what gems you may find within your older work!

I have read through this thread, and in a nutshell, here is my view. I am not going to emulate any personal opinon or directive but I will say that I myself have learned SOO much by looking at the portfolios of other photographers; and not just here on this forum.
Secondly there has; as long as I remember; been way to much emphasis placed on counting rejections, rather than counting ; or evaluating what is learned.
I have been away for a few months, and in that time I have learned to get into a mindset. And that is; DONT focus on rejection; DONT focus on publishing; DONT focus on recognition and verification; choose and walk your own path!

My grandfather used to say:
"For every two individuals who offer praise... three will reject you. To create balance in this process... you always have a choice. You can join those who reject you and suffocate your creativity by rejecting yourself... or you can stand balanced in the middle; taking both praise and rejection for the value that they are; so that you continue to grow."

Style, motif, rejection, published. These are just words, labels we place on a given intention or subject.

Vision; learning; persistance; experimentation. These are processes, tools that we use so that we grow beyond labels.
IN the end, the ONLY task master we must please, is ourselves.

Just my 0.02

Completely agree with Ian. It is so difficult to find ourselves to loose track focusing on rejection.
An artistic way is so personal, so special that nobody can say "you are on the wrong way".
The artist himself has only a tiny voice inside who said "yeah, it's ok, it's your path" and usually, he can't achieve to listen it.
So "shhhhhh" ! Listen your inspiration. She is the only one who know your style, your photographic way.

To collect "swipe" on internet, I use "Evernote", a freeware to collect information and classify it.
Before, you can search on it with tags in texts or pictures.