has it all been done before

[Doremus Scudder]

I haven't read the entire thread but I'd like to add this comment anyway.

Originality is highly overrated.

Strive for excellence. Let yourself be inspired by and learn from work from the past that speaks to you and moves you. Do work that is important and meaningful for you and, if you are exceptional and in the right place at the right time, you'll be famous.

Trying to be different for its own sake is a dead end.

Best,

Doremus

[Maris Rusis]

Well said Doremus. And novelty is highly overrated too; even to the point of being fetishised in much modern art commentary.

[rdenney]

Well said Doremus. And novelty is highly overrated too; even to the point of being fetishised in much modern art commentary.

And academia.

Rick "with the obvious exceptions, of course" Denney

[DennisD]

The first question is always not "has it been done before" but is "can I do something personally meaningful with this". If you can accomplish the latter the former question will be irrelevant to you and your audience.

.... One morning I was at Weston Beach with Brett, both of us with 8x10's. I asked Brett, how could I photograph at a place he and his father had so well documented, and make a photograph of any significance. His answer, I carry with me today; Brett said, "everything has been photographed, simply see it your way".

Everyone's thoughts on this topic are important, interesting and meaningful.

I, too, have grappled with "this has been done before" -- especially in locations where a "famous tripod" once landed.
That said, the above quotes parallel my own thought and strike home.

Thank you, Kirk for your insight -
Thank you, Merg for relating your experience -
With special appreciation to Brett Weston who, in 5 words, said it very well....

"Simply See It Your Way"

[N Dhananjay]

Nicely said, Doremus. If you set out to be original, the originality is a reaction to what came before, in which case it is not really original, is it? And more to the point, you do not learn anything or grow because you know what you are going to do before you do it (which again means it can't truly be original).

You become truly original as a result of finding yourself and the work you do helps you to find yourself. In other words, true originality is an emergent phenomenon.

Cheers, DJ

[Drew Wiley]

Next month if I hold out under my heavy load long enough, I'll be crossing another spot where AA made a very famous shot of a meadow, with a peak in the background eventually named after him. Well, he allegedly set up his camera right there to commemorate a famous photographic perspective taken forty years before by the pioneering Sierra explorer Solomons, who got a peak named after himself significantly earlier, in another section of the range. It's certainly not a
heavily visited spot, being well into the back country; but no matter where you put your camera, trees and water have changed, so the picture will inherently come out differently. Even the pools in AA's shot have since been filled in with meadow. On a bookshelf I've got a volume with Vittoria Sella's famous shot of Jannu on the border of Sikkim and Nepal. Beside it is another volume where Shirakawa took the effort to find that exact location, wait out the severe weather,
and take a shot of his own honoring Sella. One can easily see it's exactly the same perspective. But each put their own flavor into the scene. That's all that counts.

[Alan Gales]

Next month if I hold out under my heavy load long enough, I'll be crossing another spot where AA made a very famous shot of a meadow, with a peak in the background eventually named after him. Well, he allegedly set up his camera right there to commemorate a famous photographic perspective taken forty years before by the pioneering Sierra explorer Solomons, who got a peak named after himself significantly earlier, in another section of the range. It's certainly not a
heavily visited spot, being well into the back country; but no matter where you put your camera, trees and water have changed, so the picture will inherently come out differently. Even the pools in AA's shot have since been filled in with meadow. On a bookshelf I've got a volume with Vittoria Sella's famous shot of Jannu on the border of Sikkim and Nepal. Beside it is another volume where Shirakawa took the effort to find that exact location, wait out the severe weather,
and take a shot of his own honoring Sella. One can easily see it's exactly the same perspective. But each put their own flavor into the scene. That's all that counts.

There was this famous image of St. Louis shot at night from East St. Louis through the Eads bridge. I don't know the photographer but it was a beautiful shot. A good friend of mine copied the photo exactly, framed it, mounted it on a wall and then bragged about what a great photograph he took. I called it plagiarism.

The Arch here in St. Louis has been photographed millions of times. Joel Meyerowitz did a book on his photographs of the arch. He did put his own spin on the images. I have a couple of my own images that look different from any I've seen. Whatever you shoot, I feel that you have to make it your own. If you can do that then it hasn't been done before.

[jnantz]

hi alan
why does one have to do it in a way that hasn't been done before ?
i have read hundreds and hundreds of posts of people who hunt down
tripod holes so they can photograph something the same way someone else did.
some people who work for newspapers even have sections dedicated to their "then and now"
series where they rephotograph an exact scene from the exact place as it was done a handful of years
previously. and then of course they go on and on and on about how the city is a living breathing organism
like a park or whatever.
plenty of questions " how do i make my photographs look like this one .." too
while i don't really make it a point to seek out tripod holes
or POV of other photographers or their styles &c .. it seems
people have a certain satisfaction doing that sort of thing.
in art school student-painters are told to go to the museum and copy someone else's work from what i remember
( not sure if they still do that "exercise" ) and there is a whole bunch of art made by "copyists" ...

if it makes someone happy i figure they are going to do it for just that reason, whether they are ripping someone off
or doing something cheezy or don't know any better or peer pressure / social media says otherwise
... if that person isn't selling something and claiming it was done by someone else why not.

[Drew Wiley]

It works both ways. I can walk out the door right now and see the Golden Gate Bridge. I see it every day. On the weekends I am often close to it on the Marin side.
Millions and millions of pictures have been taken it. But I've never taken even one! Yet the point is, I am not even trying to avoid it photographically, even if it has become a worldwide icon or cliche. So if I do happen to spot a personal composition that otherwise works well with the bridge in the scene, so be it. Until that happens, I'll just keep pointing my camera some other direction. I really don't care what others have done with it.

[Alan Gales]

hi alan
why does one have to do it in a way that hasn't been done before ?
i have read hundreds and hundreds of posts of people who hunt down
tripod holes so they can photograph something the same way someone else did.
some people who work for newspapers even have sections dedicated to their "then and now"
series where they rephotograph an exact scene from the exact place as it was done a handful of years
previously. and then of course they go on and on and on about how the city is a living breathing organism
like a park or whatever.
plenty of questions " how do i make my photographs look like this one .." too
while i don't really make it a point to seek out tripod holes
or POV of other photographers or their styles &c .. it seems
people have a certain satisfaction doing that sort of thing.
in art school student-painters are told to go to the museum and copy someone else's work from what i remember
( not sure if they still do that "exercise" ) and there is a whole bunch of art made by "copyists" ...

if it makes someone happy i figure they are going to do it for just that reason, whether they are ripping someone off
or doing something cheezy or don't know any better or peer pressure / social media says otherwise
... if that person isn't selling something and claiming it was done by someone else why not.

Hi John,

I should have elaborated more in my post.

I didn't mind that my friend took the same shot. I even gave him due credit for how well he copied the image.His exposure and framing were perfect. It was just that he was bragging to others about how great his shot was and made out to others like it was his own which it wasn't.

I had recently taken a shot of St. Louis at night from East St. Louis too. The St. Louis Cardinals football team were playing Monday Night Football so all the buildings were lit up for the TV broadcast. My friend told me that his night shot was better than mine. I replied that at least mine was my own.

Yes, this was all back in the 80's. No more Big Red and no more Rams now.