Do we shoot for other photographers?

[welly]

Disclaimer: I ask this question with absolutely no experience or undertanding of what collectors and those who love art might be interested in. And I've had some drinks tonight (it's Christmas!).

Who do we shoot photographs for? Are we shooting to show off our technical competence? I've shot and printed a number of photographs lately that, if I was honest, I'd hope to impress other photographers rather than them being "commercially" appealing. I still really like the images I shoot, and am very happy with those I've shared. Obviously if I didn't like the subject, I wouldn't shoot it. I shot an image of vines in the front of a wall of graffiti (http://www.flickr.com/photos/serialphotography/8192434907/), that on this forum had some very positive feedback (thank you very much!). I really like the shot, personally, and my girlfriend really likes it too, but I could capture a photograph of a pebble on a beach and she'd love it (or claim to, at least).

But I often wonder, much in the way that women, apparently, dress for other women, are we shooting for other photographers to gain their respect? I *LOVE* so much of the images that I see on this forum, but I wonder if much of it is appealing to the mainstream? Is the market for the kind of images many of us shoot, limited? And if so, does it even matter? I'm interested in who many of you shoot for. Is it just for yourself, or do you take photographs with the potential of selling that image in mind? I'd be interested to read the opinions of those who are, like me, making photographs for a hobby as opposed to those who are making a living from their art.

I only ask this because my recent photo of the tree roots (http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8495/8287508426_e6a580cdbf_b.jpg)(which I'm really happy with and Harley gave me positive feedback of - thanks Harley!) had me thinking if it's just me who'd appreciate an image of tree roots (obviously I think there's more to it than a bunch of tree roots!) or if an image that like would be commercially viable. Or if people would think "it's a bunch of tree roots.. so what?".

Sorry, I'm a bit insecure, it seems. But I do like what I shoot and what I've printed - I'd just hope that others would too, otherwise it's pointless.

Perhaps I can summarise this question as "Who buys your photographs?".

Cheers and seasons greetings!

[jp]

I don' t make an effort to sell photos, so I don't have people buying them. (Selling is very low priority, since I do this for fun/learning/creative itch)

It seems most of the long dead photographers have an audience of photographer types like us. Older living photographers who aren't part of the contemporary scene have an audience of mostly photographers. In aspiring to gain (or surpass) their skills or abilities, we also look to the same audience. It's the only audience that knows the same language. Obscure things like platinum printing, carbon printing, glass plates, pictorialism, expired polaroids, we can find people here that know the same language.

If we were doing contemporary strobe+dslr creative stuff, a normal audience might see a boring perfectly lit scene, and a "strobist" inspired audience of photographers might see masterful use of lighting, or a lightstand in the corner of the photo that shouldn't be there.

I do enjoy seeing a nice image here and providing some feedback, and likewise participating by sharing an image. It is a helpful means to "up my game" by working with others. You don't easily get to be an excellent athlete all by your self, you need to do things with others that provides challenge from time to time. The print exchange is another example of the fun of sharing while also encouraging a high quality of printing craftsmanship.

While that's all nice, photography is ultimately something I do for myself. I do enjoy some help and participation along the way, but that's not the final goal or primary way of doing things. Most of my photography is for myself, and once in a while I do something nice for a family member or friend with photography since they all put up with me.

[lecarp]

I'd be interested to read the opinions of those who are, like me, making photographs for a hobby as opposed to those who are making a living from their art.

Many of your questions do not apply to the hobbyist, they apply more to the professional artist or commercial photographer.
ie: do you take photographs with the potential of selling that image in mind?, what collectors want, "commercially" appealing"
Is the market for the kind of images many of us shoot, limited?
A hobbyist should be making images for himself, but quite often tries to show off ( the last bit applies to many professionals as well:) )

[Winger]

But I often wonder, much in the way that women, apparently, dress for other women, are we shooting for other photographers to gain their respect? I *LOVE* so much of the images that I see on this forum, but I wonder if much of it is appealing to the mainstream? Is the market for the kind of images many of us shoot, limited? And if so, does it even matter? I'm interested in who many of you shoot for. Is it just for yourself, or do you take photographs with the potential of selling that image in mind? I'd be interested to read the opinions of those who are, like me, making photographs for a hobby as opposed to those who are making a living from their art.

I only ask this because my recent photo of the tree roots (http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8495/8287508426_e6a580cdbf_b.jpg)(which I'm really happy with and Harley gave me positive feedback of - thanks Harley!) had me thinking if it's just me who'd appreciate an image of tree roots (obviously I think there's more to it than a bunch of tree roots!) or if an image that like would be commercially viable. Or if people would think "it's a bunch of tree roots.. so what?".



As a woman, I'll admit that we do sometimes (frequently?) dress to impress other women. Mostly because we pretty much know that most guys won't be able to tell the difference between a pencil skirt and an A-line - they have their own priorities in evaluating our appearance. We sorta like to show off that we can be stylish and look good and be creative (at least those of us old enough to know whether or not to wear something fad-ish).
In some ways, I do think that's similar to what photographers shoot and show to other photographers. In a way, we're saying, "See, I can take a picture of a river/mountain/flower/ just as well and with my own stamp on it." Like some women wear an outfit that's exactly like the one in the magazine, some photographers will make a shot just like one they've seen. Others in both groups will do their own things with the same basic tools.

I didn't check out your tree roots, yet, but I've shot roots, too. :) It's one of my favorites so far on 4x5. I actually got busted on at a photo club meeting because of it. The person said, "Only Bethe would go to Ohiopyle and take pictures of tree roots and rocks instead of waterfalls."

As for commercially viable - I think every image has a chance of being liked by someone. Trying to predict how many and who they are is not nearly so simple. I shoot what I like, primarily for me. If someone likes one of my prints and wants to buy it, great. But I don't really count on that happening much.

[jcoldslabs]

I agree with just about everything said above. Personally, I shoot for the joy of doing it. Period. I have no audience, so there is no "other" person or group for me to consider when taking photographs. When I am unhappy with my work, I am unhappy with it regardless of any external praise. And when I'm happy with my images, no amount of praise makes me like them any more, and no amount of criticism makes me like them any less.

For example, tonight I took some 4x5 shots of the inside of my refrigerator. Why? Partly because I'd never done it before, partly as a document of what was there. Is it art? Nope. Will it impress other photographers? Most certainly not. But I had fun doing it and that's what matters to me.

Jonathan

P.S. Pencil skirt? A-line? You're speaking a foreign language there, Bethe! ;)

[Gary Tarbert]

I sell some images just last last week sold one for $400 (and have achieved the magical $1,000 mark albeit framed), Do i shoot to sell no ,I like others shoot as a hobby , But i am noting what is selling what people like what people don't ,More from the point of view as to what to frame and what not to . Do i shoot for other Photographers again no !!Because they they will never buy my images but i do enjoy feedback from my peers . So in conclusion i shoot for myself but with a lean to commercial sense . Cheers Gary

[Winger]

I sell some images just last last week sold one for $400 (and have achieved the magical $1,000 mark albeit framed), Do i shoot to sell no ,I like others shoot as a hobby , But i am noting what is selling what people like what people don't ,More from the point of view as to what to frame and what not to . Do i shoot for other Photographers again no !!Because they they will never buy my images but i do enjoy feedback from my peers . So in conclusion i shoot for myself but with a lean to commercial sense . Cheers Gary

Oddly enough, only one of my sales (ok, we're talking 1 of about 6) was to a non-photographer. The others are all to photographers.


When I am unhappy with my work, I am unhappy with it regardless of any external praise. And when I'm happy with my images, no amount of praise makes me like them any more, and no amount of criticism makes me like them any less.
Jonathan - I agree completely.

[ROL]

"We" shouldn't be making photographs for anyone other than "us". "I" only make photographs for "me", which is what makes "me" a fine art photographer/printer, whose prints are either priceless or worthless, depending on "your" point of view.


BTW, not that my taste matters much to you or anyone else (nor should it), but I like your roots plenty.

[rdenney]

Yeah, the only photographer I try to impress is me. And I fail far more often than I succeed.

If I defined my photography by what other photographers thought, I'd be suicidal.

Rick "who isn't really trying for impressiveness in any case" Denney

[Peter Lewin]

It seems to me that the responses are true, but mostly slightly incomplete. I agree that I, and I believe virtually all of us who are not making our living as photographers, do make images for ourselves. But the very popularity of the "Post Your Images Of..." threads in this forum, and the websites that many of the more accomplished photographers among us maintain, prove that while we don't "shoot for other photographers" we certainly like to show our work and see what others have to say.

[IanG]

Aside from some commercial work I shoot to say something through my images. I shoot very little outside of specific projects and to a large extent the whole (as in project) is more important than an indivual image.

So no I don't shoot for other photographers and my work is likely to be most widely seen by the general public through exhibitions etc, although I do sometimes give talks and hold workshops attended by photographers where I discuss my photography.

Ian

[Gary Tarbert]

Interesting Bethe that you sell too other photographers at that percentage .I suppose when i think about it if i really love an image and the price was right i will buy actually have bought an image from someone on this forum come to think of it . And i have sold to artists many times mainly watercolourists .Cheers Gary

[jcoldslabs]

It seems to me that the responses are true, but mostly slightly incomplete. I agree that I, and I believe virtually all of us who are not making our living as photographers, do make images for ourselves. But the very popularity of the "Post Your Images Of..." threads in this forum, and the websites that many of the more accomplished photographers among us maintain, prove that while we don't "shoot for other photographers" we certainly like to show our work and see what others have to say.

Peter,

Positive feedback from one's peers is always a pleasant thing, and I am certainly not immune to the fleeting glow that compliments inspire. But that's not my main reason for sharing my images here. For me it is to be a full participant in the forums, to put my images out there so other people know where I'm coming from photographically. Plus, I so enjoy seeing the work of others that I feel like I should give back. Not that I assume others will like my work, but if I'm going to take (in the form of consuming the images posted by others), I feel compelled to give back, too. Given that ours is a purely visual medium it surprises me that more people don't post their work here; talking about it only gets you so far. But to each his/her own. There ain't no law.

Jonathan

[Bernice Loui]

Part of photography is a language. Like music, as one becomes more fluent in the language and culture one may be drawn to these art forms with more subtle and deeper meaning. Photographers as a group may tend to be more fluent due to their involvement, but there are many others who are not photographers that are equally or more fluent. This IMO, does tend to drive some photographers to produce certain images as a means to communicate to other photographers. Like musicians, there is also a technical aspect to image making and some may seek respect or notoriety for highly technical images they create.

Photographers who making a living at image making do not always have the luxury or freedom to produce works their creativity will allow, while some hobbyist/ not "professional" photographers might not have the technical skills or resources to fully express their creativity.

It does appear that the initial audience for photographer's images are other photographers, yet there is a larger audience depending on the images created. Like pop music, some images have very broad appeal while others that require a deeper understanding on the language may have a much smaller audience.


Bernice

[C. D. Keth]

I think every artist at some point is working for other artists. The best artists, or at least the most marketable artists, get past that and find an audience in the general public. When you read Edward Weston's daybooks, you notice that for a solid decade, most of the print sales he mentions are to painters, sculptors, and other photographers.

[Tajmul12345]

Yes,As i am photographer i have to do capture for other because i can compare with other that make me more inspire.

[Greg Miller]

Disclaimer: I ask this question with absolutely no experience or undertanding of what collectors and those who love art might be interested in. And I've had some drinks tonight (it's Christmas!).

Who do we shoot photographs for? Are we shooting to show off our technical competence? I've shot and printed a number of photographs lately that, if I was honest, I'd hope to impress other photographers rather than them being "commercially" appealing. I still really like the images I shoot, and am very happy with those I've shared. Obviously if I didn't like the subject, I wouldn't shoot it. I shot an image of vines in the front of a wall of graffiti (http://www.flickr.com/photos/serialphotography/8192434907/), that on this forum had some very positive feedback (thank you very much!). I really like the shot, personally, and my girlfriend really likes it too, but I could capture a photograph of a pebble on a beach and she'd love it (or claim to, at least).

But I often wonder, much in the way that women, apparently, dress for other women, are we shooting for other photographers to gain their respect? I *LOVE* so much of the images that I see on this forum, but I wonder if much of it is appealing to the mainstream? Is the market for the kind of images many of us shoot, limited? And if so, does it even matter? I'm interested in who many of you shoot for. Is it just for yourself, or do you take photographs with the potential of selling that image in mind? I'd be interested to read the opinions of those who are, like me, making photographs for a hobby as opposed to those who are making a living from their art.

I only ask this because my recent photo of the tree roots (http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8495/8287508426_e6a580cdbf_b.jpg)(which I'm really happy with and Harley gave me positive feedback of - thanks Harley!) had me thinking if it's just me who'd appreciate an image of tree roots (obviously I think there's more to it than a bunch of tree roots!) or if an image that like would be commercially viable. Or if people would think "it's a bunch of tree roots.. so what?".

Sorry, I'm a bit insecure, it seems. But I do like what I shoot and what I've printed - I'd just hope that others would too, otherwise it's pointless.

Perhaps I can summarise this question as "Who buys your photographs?".

Cheers and seasons greetings!

It sounds like you are looking for feedback from other photographers as a validation of the work you have created. There's nothing wrong with that, but eventually, as your vision and skills mature, you won't need that any longer. The sooner you get there, the better, because there are very few people on internet forums capable of giving you proper feedback, and you will soon get confused by all the different information that you will receive. If you can, find a qualified mentor that can guide you, and then ignore most other feedback.

You will also find that as your vision and skills mature, the work that you are happy with today will no longer satisfy you. That is a good and healthy thing.

Accomplished artistic photographers have a vision and have an idea, concept, or emotion that they want to express. That vision has nothing to do with other photographers, so they rarely are shooting for other photographers. They are shooting for themselves only. Even if other photographers do not like their work, that is OK. If the artist is pleased with their work, then that is all that is needed.

If you are not shooting your own vision, then your passion will likely not last. Successful artists have a passion for their work and their vision, and that passion is what drives them. If you are only shooting for other photographers, then you vision will go stale and your work will be empty. Unless you are trying to make a living from your art, then forget about who buys your work. It is irrelevant. If you are trying to make a living from your art, then it is a totally different situation. Shooting someone else's vision is very different than shooting your own vision, and most people end up relying on their personal work to satisfy their creative needs.

[Bernice Loui]

+1

This is so true in many ways. Art and images produced are an expression of an individuals creativity and contains many aspects of their personality.

Photography and the tools, methods and related to image making should be viewed as a means rather than a process for expression. There must be passion and sensitivity for the images of the noun that are produced, if not the images produced tend be lacking in some way regardless of the hardware or image creation process used.

Initially, there is the process of gaining the skills and tools required to create images, once a set of tools and skills required to create images have been secured, the next step is much about the image maker alone.


Bernice



It sounds like you are looking for feedback from other photographers as a validation of the work you have created. There's nothing wrong with that, but eventually, as your vision and skills mature, you won't need that any longer. The sooner you get there, the better, because there are very few people on internet forums capable of giving you proper feedback, and you will soon get confused by all the different information that you will receive. If you can, find a qualified mentor that can guide you, and then ignore most other feedback.

You will also find that as your vision and skills mature, the work that you are happy with today will no longer satisfy you. That is a good and healthy thing.

Accomplished artistic photographers have a vision and have an idea, concept, or emotion that they want to express. That vision has nothing to do with other photographers, so they rarely are shooting for other photographers. They are shooting for themselves only. Even if other photographers do not like their work, that is OK. If the artist is pleased with their work, then that is all that is needed.

If you are not shooting your own vision, then your passion will likely not last. Successful artists have a passion for their work and their vision, and that passion is what drives them. If you are only shooting for other photographers, then you vision will go stale and your work will be empty. Unless you are trying to make a living from your art, then forget about who buys your work. It is irrelevant. If you are trying to make a living from your art, then it is a totally different situation. Shooting someone else's vision is very different than shooting your own vision, and most people end up relying on their personal work to satisfy their creative needs.

[Chuck P.]

I photograph for myself----it is an awesome feeling when it all comes together, when the image is a direct expression of your visualization of it at the time you released the shutter. I saw Steven Spielberg on TCM last night, he was talking to a room full of aspiring directors, he made a statement and I wrote it down, thought it easily applies to what I do when I'm doing what I love to do:

"Never think of yourself as an artist, let other people think of you as an artist", and he emphasized to them that what they should always concentrate on is.............. "their craft".

The only thing is, not a whole lot of "other people" see my photography, so who knows? :rolleyes: The key point of his statement, to me, was to always concentrate on your craft. And that's what I most enjoy doing when it comes to my photography.

I should also add that it is nice when other photographers like what you have done, often it is only another photographer who can appreciate what it took to do it. I realize that if I sold a picture, and I never have, the person who bought it is most likely appreciating it for something entirely different.

[paulr]

This is a question a lot of people have been struggling with for a long time. It's a frustrating one, because it tends to push us into dichotomies that are generally unsatisying.

For instance, "do you make art for yourself or other people?" If you choose other people, it can seem like you pander, or that your interests are merely financial. If you choose yourself, you can seem self indulgent and unconcerned wtih the world.

And then, "do you shoot for other photographers, or for regular people?" If other photographers, it seems insular and tribal. If for civillians, it seems like a dodge of higher, more refined standards.

Luckily, I don't think we really operate inside such rigid, either/or choices. When I look at my own drives, I see ones that have got to be pretty common. I make the kind of work that I like to look at. Or at least I try to. And while this makes me one of the audience members, my hope is that other people will be interested too. Presumeably they will be people who like the same kinds of stuff that I like. And since I'm a photographer, and have had my sensibilities influenced by being a photographer, it would make sense that some of these other people will be photographers also.

Luckily it's a messy world, and people tend to be as different as they are alike, so the risk of my audience being a roomful of nerdy photographers named Paul is pretty low. The unpredictablity of the world keeps the whole question of who will like your work mysterious and interesting.

[DrTang]

I shoot for the subjects mostly...I like it when they like it... and I shoot to a smaller extent, for my friend who is a photographer. We shoot together often and it is always interesting to see how we each tackle the same subjects.
while we each have our distictive look - our styles also tend to rub off on one another in small ways

Also..I shoot to amuse myself

[Brian C. Miller]

Who do we shoot photographs for?

Try this:
If you don't mind, it doesn't matter.
Don't worry, be happy.
Hakuna matata. (There are no worries.) (also "hamna shida" or "hamna tabu")
(Add on whatever other one-sentence sayings as found.)

I photograph because I must. Psychosis. Complusion. I got started with photography because of moonlight. And I keep photographing because of what I've seen of the moon or by moonlight.

Who was Vivian Maier's audience? She didn't need one, and just went and photographed, again and again. If you are doing something for pay (one way or another) then of course you are photographing for someone. But who knows if you are photographing for other photographers? Really, it doesn't matter, so pay it no mind.


Well you're in your little room
and you're working on something good
but if it's really good
you're gonna need a bigger room
and when you're in the bigger room
you might not know what to do
you might have to think of
how you got started sitting in your little room
-- White Stripes, "Little Room"

[John Kasaian]

Photographers are not good eating! They are either too fat because they survive on junk food, or they are too skinny because they can't afford groceries. Save your shots for more nutritious game.:rolleyes: