Competition within Conformity
Whenever I speak to art and photography groups the audience is
supposed to learn something from me.
They usually do, but I always learn something from them. After a lecture I gave to a digital arts club
I was asked to critique and judge their monthly assignment and I selected
prints for first, second and third places.
The first-place photograph was a lovely desert landscape image that I
found very intriguing. As it goes with
‘winners’ (and I really don’t like the concept of ‘winning’ and ‘losing’ in the
arts, but that’s the competitive system our society has provided for us) the
creator of the first-place image wanted to talk to me after the ‘judging.’ As it turned out his image was of an obscure place
in a State Park I’ve visited many times; Valley
of Fire State Park in Nevada.
I told the photographer I’ve been there many times, I love the place,
it’s beautiful, and it can be seen in the backgrounds of over half the car
commercials on TV today – but where’d he find that particular spot? I’ve
never seen it and I am pretty darned familiar with Valley of Fire.
“Oh, just download the eBook about Valley
of Fire, it’s got all the obscure photo-spots identified complete with GPS
coordinates,” he told me.
I found the eBook online, paid the four bucks for it via PayPal,
downloaded and printed it out. And sure
enough, there were all those obscure locations, clearly marked with GPS
coordinates – easy to find! Perusing the
eBook I decided I needed to go back and photograph some of those things.
I had the same thoughts a year ago when I was researching The Palouse, a beautiful area of farmland
in eastern Washington. Yes, The Palouse was someplace I needed to go
to photograph and as I did online research I found a lot of information. There were numerous ‘photo workshops’ held at
The Palouse, I also found
‘photography maps’ complete with marked locations of ‘red barns,’ ‘lone trees,’
‘abandoned buildings,’ etc. etc. I
downloaded and printed that map and used it when I was photographing the
area.
I’m sure the Valley of Fire
eBook will be just as helpful as The
Palouse ‘photography maps’ I used when I was photographing that area. But what is going on? There are maps of photographic hot-spots now?
It seems that photography is no longer an act of discovery.
I do online research before almost every location shoot I’m more and
more amazed by the sheer amount of photography-specific information available. There are workshops where ‘experts’ will take
you to ‘photogenic’ locations where you can shoot all the same photographs for
yourself that have been shot before. You
can find maps where you’re practically told where to place your tripod, which
way to point your camera, which lens to use and what time of day to shoot.
I was once in Monument Valley – a place where photo-workshops are held
nearly constantly, where city-dwellers can come and shoot the exact same
‘western’ photos everyone else does – and a fellow pointed to a photo on a
brochure and told me, “I shot that!”
“Good for you,” I replied, “Does the Park Service pay a decent license
fee for using the photo?” He gave me a
confused look and then said, “Oh I didn’t shoot that photo; I shot one just like it.”
“Good for you,” I said again and then walked away, shaking my head and
thinking, yeah good for you, you shot a
photo exactly like one in a brochure, how unoriginal.
But to the amateur (and many pro) photographers, originality doesn’t
mean much, what they’re trying to do isn’t about being unique, creative or
original, it’s about competition and conformity. They see these pretty places, see other
photographers’ photos and think, I can do
that. I’m sure some think they can
do it better, but most just want to ‘do it too,’ to shoot their own version of a timeworn, cliché image. They take zero risks whatsoever, they’re
shooting the same, pre-approved cliché images and adding nothing of their own
vision (assuming they have a personal vision) to the scene. These aren’t the people who go to the Grand Canyon,
point their cameras, look around in frustration and think, what could I possibly photograph that hasn’t been done a zillion times? No, these are the folks who point their
cameras at the same thing millions of other people have seen and think, Yeah, now I can get my photo of it!
It’s competition-within-conformity. It’s conformity because they’re
all shooting the same thing. It’s competitive because photographers are
thinking, my picture is better than the
other guys’.
Competition-within-conformity isn’t confined to the amateurs and
camera-clubbers, we can find it among commercial photographers and fine-art
photographers as well. Look at any
energy company’s annual report or capabilities brochure and you’ll find the
same stock-and-standard executive portrait and you’ll also see there are only a
few ways to photograph an oil well at sunset.
Very few corporate or industrial photographers have a point of view,
they’re all essentially interchangeable because there’s only so many types of
photographs that are acceptable to corporate clientele, and too much
originality is too scary for them. We can’t really blame the commercial photographers
for this, they’re in it to make money, earn a living and provide a
service. Their ‘success’ isn’t based on
art or creativity but rather, on figuring out just how close they can get to
the edges of the creative box and still make an acceptable image.
But we can blame the ‘fine
art photographers’ because they’re the very ones who call themselves ‘fine
artists’ while safely staying within the comfortable bounds of what’s accepted
as ‘fine art.’ Like corporate
photographers the fine artists also know their clientele, and for their
‘success’ they’ve also got to stay within their own box of acceptability. Right now, in terms of contemporary ‘fine
art’ photography, the box is full of documentary photographers and there’s very
little room for anything else.
I once asked a curator at a Major Museum what it would take to get my
photography noticed by someone in her position and she actually answered with:
“Study what successful contemporary photographers are doing, and do that.” That
advice is institutionalized conformity at its worst, and very bad advice too!
I’ve examined all four corners and all six sides of that box and I’ve
memorized it. There’s nothing new in it
for me (although it’s a comfortable box, it’s too crowded) and I don’t want
in. But where exactly is ‘outside the
box?’ It’s far from the crowd, on a
trail blazed by yourself; it’s alone and scary and original and outside the box
is someplace where some people might not
like your pictures because they’re different.
If you’re really trying to discover something original with your
photography you won’t find a map of all the cool ‘photo spots’ because the map
doesn’t exist, you’ll have to make that
map yourself. Originality doesn’t
come in a box either. Originality is so
far out of the box that you’ll have to become a free-range artist to pursue it.
It’s very lonely and frightening so far away from the box of
familiarity out on the free-range of creativity, seeking to discover something
new. It’s risky and the outcome most
sane people try to avoid is when the ‘audience’ doesn’t like your
pictures. Competition-within-conformity
is risk-managed creativity that almost always guarantees a positive outcome –
people will like your pictures
because they already like all the preexisting pictures that look just like
yours.
Yet I printed and used the map I found of The Palouse and I’ll use that map I just downloaded of the obscure
locations within Valley of Fire State
Park; aren’t I doing the same thing?
Yes and no.
Sure, when I get to Valley of
Fire with my new map I’ll find some of those locations I’ve not seen
before. And sure, I’ll probably shoot
some typical stock-and-standard images (which I won’t show as-is). But I’ll
shoot it my way and I’ll shoot photos
with an eye towards future digital composite images. For me, I’m not using these maps to shoot the
same photos others have, I’m simply taking a shortcut by using someone else’s
research. Yeah, sure, I’m at the same
place but I’m there for a different purpose and that purpose is to specifically
not to make the same photo as
everyone else. By using others’
information and research I’ve saved the time and effort of finding the place while accepting the challenge of photographing something different at the
same place. Finding the interesting
location isn’t a process of discovery, the discovery now is how to create new art from the already familiar. It’s a personal challenge!
When a commercial photographer makes the same image as another he’s
rewarded with money, payment for services.
The client is happy because they can relate to the image, the image
brings the comfort of familiarity.
When an amateur or camera-clubber (and even many pros) makes the same
image as another photographer they’re rewarded with acceptance. The image is rewarded or ‘liked’ because it,
again, is familiar and relatable. These
images require no analysis, interpretation and very little thought, they’re
pretty – just like all the rest. They’re
easy and safe.
When a ‘fine-art’ photographer makes an image that’s similar to other
‘art’ images their image is also accepted because they’ve faithfully stayed within
the box of ‘fine art acceptability.’ It’s
artistic safety within the confines of the pre-accepted.
All three of these types of photographers are rewarded with positive
feedback that makes them feel good about their imagery and themselves – which
are their goals. Discovery is not their goal.
For the few of us (maybe up to 10%) who do wish to discover something
new, to blaze a new trail or go (artistically) where no one has gone before the
path is much more difficult. Our images
aren’t pre-approved before we make them.
We don’t have a ‘built-in’ audience that already knows about, relates
to, and likes our imagery. The newness
the ‘ten-percenters’ seek requires more thought from the viewer. Yes, the viewer must work harder with our
pictures because there may not be very many preexisting similar images as
reference. With truly creative art the
viewer has to decide for themselves
if the work is ‘good’ or ‘valid.’
A lot of viewers (and ‘experts’ like curators and gallerists) are
reluctant to express an original opinion about truly original art. They prefer the comfort of ‘running with the
herd’ and expressing their own acceptance of the already-accepted.
Competition-within-conformity is a great way to receive positive
feedback on your artworks, but it’s not a way of discovery.
