I get more questions via email and social channels than I could answer in a lifetime, but occasionally one jumps out at me as incredibly worthwhile to share. The answer to this question is important, and my response is below. Chime in and let me know what you think:
“What’s more important as a photographer… to remove yourself from the photograph, or to make the photograph about you as a photographer?”
-from photographer Jay McLaughlin
In order to make the most successful, effective (read: insightful, moving, impactful, beautiful, etc) image, the photographer must be “present” in the image. Simply put, this is crucial–perhaps MOST important for any shooter– you should strive to make a photograph that no one else in the world can make. And the primary mode of being able to do this is to infuse your personal vision to the image. Period, whether it’s reportage, fine art, or a fashion shoot. Doing otherwise is creating a commodity – something that anyone, or an “other” can make– that can be bought or sold like a pork belly or a barrel of oil.
Making such a photo that no one else can make can take many forms–technical excellence is a part of that–but at it’s essence is the need to reflect a mood that only you can capture or evoke, based on your access, your knowledge, your interpersonal skills or otherwise. So you absolutely must put your fingerprints on the shot. It’s not “about” you (sic), but you are clearly present…
Thanks Jay for the evocative question. Readers please chime in below if you feel inspired, otherwise go make that photo that no one else can make.
Right on.
I’d agree with this. I mean you can never really remove yourself from any work of art. Anything created can be linked back to it’s creator.
The truth of the matter, is that you can never remove yourself from the equation. Photography, like any art (and life in general), is simply a medium with which you can express yourself.
Perhaps this is a question of style (do I want my photograph to appear like I’m simply documenting it vs add my specific flare to it)? Or obligation (the client’s vision or the photographer’s)?
Because the only way you can “remove yourself from the photograph” is to NOT take any photographs at all.
plus 1 for this! I also think it boils down to style. I just can’t really imagine me having to think about what’s making this specific work or photo “mine” or exclusive to my unique view. it’s really a confusing way to approach. but that could also be yet another tool, and very individual in this sense.
I find the debate very interesting either way!
I agree 100%, your photos have to be by you and only by you. They’re only interesting if no one else can take them.
Say what needs to be said, I like it. If the artist is not part of the wor he is doing then why do it and why did that client hire you to do it. My guess is because youput some of yourself in every shot thats what makes your work yours and special.