“The reality is that it’s easier to be inspired than it is to create an original idea and we are hardwired to take the path of least resistance. It’s easier to jump onto a design inspiration gallery site than it is to sit down with a blank sheet of paper and a pencil. It’s easier to follow a pattern than it is to test-drive new options. It’s easier to copy a style or idea that works than try something that might miss the mark or outright fail. Above all, it’s cheaper mentally for us to rally around what’s already been done and emulate it…”
The above excerpt is from a brilliant post by Owen over at Viget.com. Well worth the read. Do it.
Personally, I couldn’t agree more. How much time is the right amount to stroll thru galleries, troll creative sites, and watch online videos?
And what about you?
Are you too busy getting inspired by the work of others to create your own?
Do you read about the failures of others, so you don’t have to try?
Is the convenience of information actually reducing your willingness to struggle to make something worthwhile?
Consider that Shakespeare, perhaps the greatest creative genius in the English language, never wrote a play that wasn’t based on a previous source.
‘There is an upstart crow beautified with our feathers’ (Robert Greene 1592)
If being inspired by something is good enough for Shakespeare then it is good enough for me. There is no such thing as a original idea, we all carry creative baggage that we copy or are influenced by, even subconsciously, if you sit at home waiting for a truly ‘original’ idea you’d never take a picture.
@Tobias Key I agree with you, sir. Sheer imitation isn’t even such a bad thing, initially. It makes sense to hone one’s technique and to expand upon the knowledge/inspiration gained from others to develop one’s own style. So many illustrators developed their ability by attempting to replicate the work of artists they were drawn to as children. I think adults can benefit from the same approach. The idea isn’t to get stuck riffing any one artist but rather to build a foundation of capability whereby one can pursue their own unique expression (i.e., “unique” inasmuch as anything can be unique anymore. Maybe the correct word is heterogeneous.).
Creativity is related to originality and to me is different than inspiration. One is not unoriginal if inspired by (not copy) someone else’s work and able to creatively adapt it on their own and for themselves. From my perspective, this statement is preposterous. It implies that you aren’t creative if you ‘walk’ into a gallery site and see something that appeals to you and that there’s something you then try to gleam from it. How is it any different than going to an art museum and looking at a Picasso or Monet and going home and painting in a particular style? Just because it’s virtual, doesn’t make it bad. The hard part is realizing that there is less and less a chance that traces of what one is doing has not been done before. The key is doing it better and for yourself. Be creative, be inspired to be original by yourself AND OTHERS!
I did read that blog post last week. I can’t agree with everything said. There are scenarios where you have to build from previous work. If not, I cant imagine in which world we would be living.
…”influenced by” and “inspired by” are not the same thing. Sometimes it’s just easier to check out what others are doing and leap from there. But Honestly thats why I think digital-photography IS fast-food-like. So many times I see photogs with new DSLR’s and they seem to be in for the right reasons. But 1 minute into a conversation and you find out they are usually just GWC’s with no real ideas, opinions nor direction. I still shoot film (won’t give up my Hasselblad 500CM for anything!) Even though I started with digital I soon realized that real photographers should understand film. Setting my nikon on blast and parsing through photos in LightRoom is creatively stale. How can anyone learn from mistakes if photoshop fixes everything? (like Auto-tune for singers). I’m not saying digital is evil and that all digital-only photogs are weak. It’s just the digital workflow is the breeding-ground for laziness and being able to re-create a look or mood in photoshop doesn’t make anyone any more of a photographer then Garageband makes anyone more of a musician IMHO…
The problem with creativity is time. A luxury everybody can´t afford more and more less. After doing 12-14 hours and more on commercial work to get the business run, your head is just like a black hole. Sometimes, when you´re lucky, you get inspired by something and a little flame of ambition and creativity brings you back to the origins of photography and your aspiration to become a real good one. Willing to become better an more creative. Sometimes the little light blazes bigger. Sometimes it´s getting dark. Just a question of time.