Style, What's Yours?
17th November 2021
Many photographers produce images that are recognisably theirs. Thankfully there's no formula for style, it's down to our individuality, but there are various aspects that combine to create a style
Style, in terms of the appearance of an image, is something we all have. It's our visual signature, and just like written signatures some are easy to read and recognise here are those that are nondescript. Some photographers may have style too, but generally their fashion sense isn't to be noted, so that's best left for their subjects in front of the camera. I'll restrict my discussion to image style and ignore presentation and working styles which are subjects in their own right.
How to define what style is is not easy, but there are some image attributes that can be considered as part of style. Composition is an important part of photography and the way it's used by different people can vary enormously even of the same subject. For example bold tight framing or extreme placement of a subject in the frame. The use of a particular lens can become recognisable, such as very wideangle lenses especially for subjects you wouldn't normally expect them to be used for. Lighting set-ups add another dimension. Post processing can have a big impact on style, so there are innumerable possibilities but examples could include highly saturated or delicate pastel tones, split toned or very lightly toned mono. Subject type isn't really part of style but some photographers concentrate on certain types of subject and combined with the other attributes mentioned all add up to individuality. A decade or so ago having very heavily processed dark skies on landscapes was popular. Yes that's a trend but some people it became part of their style.
Do you consciously develop a style or does it just evolve as your photography progresses? For many people it's the latter as our experiences and influences affect the way we see the world. Sure, some may have a desire to produce particular looks. That's just choosing an element or two that become part of their overall style as a result. Looking through the ephotozine gallery there are thumbnails that stand out that you know are by certain people. Then there are those who have different styles for their colour and mono work.
Does style pigeon-hole you? I guess no more so than being a subject specialist. Style will change over time as experience,trends and techniques alter. That's only natural. By how much and how quickly, that's the big variable. If fashions and trends change your style may fall foul of them, but that's only important if you market your stylised work. On second thoughts, in this age of social media having a popular style may be a significant factor for those that crave 'likes'. If you only produce work to please yourself, then carry on.
Do you, or should you emulate or try to copy someone else's style? In one sense it can be seen as fraud because you could be trying to pass off an image that. There's no reason you can't take some aspect of someone's style and try it for yourself, it's part of the learning and creative process of photography. For example, high contrast black and white images. It's not someone's exclusive domain and many photographers use it. But in different ways. Then there's the fact that by looking at images you admire, that all have one style or another, you will be influenced by those images so a certain amount of style will ub of on you as it were. The same can be said for food where flavours used in one cuisine can be used by chef;s in recipes from different parts of the world. As an example I'll give you an Indian spice inspired haggis, a fusion of Asian and Scottish food (and very good it is too).
You may be able to describe your own style. Some may not give it any thought and just 'do what they do'. Personally I think I'm too close to the wood to see the trees so that's why I leave it to others.
All text and images © Keith Rowley 2021
Style, in terms of the appearance of an image, is something we all have. It's our visual signature, and just like written signatures some are easy to read and recognise here are those that are nondescript. Some photographers may have style too, but generally their fashion sense isn't to be noted, so that's best left for their subjects in front of the camera. I'll restrict my discussion to image style and ignore presentation and working styles which are subjects in their own right.
How to define what style is is not easy, but there are some image attributes that can be considered as part of style. Composition is an important part of photography and the way it's used by different people can vary enormously even of the same subject. For example bold tight framing or extreme placement of a subject in the frame. The use of a particular lens can become recognisable, such as very wideangle lenses especially for subjects you wouldn't normally expect them to be used for. Lighting set-ups add another dimension. Post processing can have a big impact on style, so there are innumerable possibilities but examples could include highly saturated or delicate pastel tones, split toned or very lightly toned mono. Subject type isn't really part of style but some photographers concentrate on certain types of subject and combined with the other attributes mentioned all add up to individuality. A decade or so ago having very heavily processed dark skies on landscapes was popular. Yes that's a trend but some people it became part of their style.
Do you consciously develop a style or does it just evolve as your photography progresses? For many people it's the latter as our experiences and influences affect the way we see the world. Sure, some may have a desire to produce particular looks. That's just choosing an element or two that become part of their overall style as a result. Looking through the ephotozine gallery there are thumbnails that stand out that you know are by certain people. Then there are those who have different styles for their colour and mono work.
Does style pigeon-hole you? I guess no more so than being a subject specialist. Style will change over time as experience,trends and techniques alter. That's only natural. By how much and how quickly, that's the big variable. If fashions and trends change your style may fall foul of them, but that's only important if you market your stylised work. On second thoughts, in this age of social media having a popular style may be a significant factor for those that crave 'likes'. If you only produce work to please yourself, then carry on.
Do you, or should you emulate or try to copy someone else's style? In one sense it can be seen as fraud because you could be trying to pass off an image that. There's no reason you can't take some aspect of someone's style and try it for yourself, it's part of the learning and creative process of photography. For example, high contrast black and white images. It's not someone's exclusive domain and many photographers use it. But in different ways. Then there's the fact that by looking at images you admire, that all have one style or another, you will be influenced by those images so a certain amount of style will ub of on you as it were. The same can be said for food where flavours used in one cuisine can be used by chef;s in recipes from different parts of the world. As an example I'll give you an Indian spice inspired haggis, a fusion of Asian and Scottish food (and very good it is too).
You may be able to describe your own style. Some may not give it any thought and just 'do what they do'. Personally I think I'm too close to the wood to see the trees so that's why I leave it to others.
All text and images © Keith Rowley 2021