A few months ago, I was out at dinner with a couple of friends of mine. We had each just finished up our respective shoots and had settled into a booth where the conversation inevitably turned toward who we shot, where we shot, and whether or not we were happy with the in-camera results (we were). That night, we spent the better part of two hours eating, drinking and sharing our techniques with one another.
As I drove home that night excited to get home and try some new techniques I'd just learned, I thought back to a conversation I overheard about a year prior between two photographers. The first, an older photographer, was chastising the second for showing a younger, less-experienced photographer how he had edited a set of photos. "Why would you tell someone how you edit your work?" the first photographer said. "That's giving away your bag of tricks!" The second photographer seemed taken aback for a moment, as if he'd never considered what he was doing to be such an offense. "I never thought about that," he said. "I was just helping someone out..." The conversation carried on for a little while longer, until the second photographer agreed he shouldn't be giving away and/or sharing his "bag of tricks," especially in a industry which relies so heavily on one's own creativity.
Shortly afterward and still with that conversation in mind, I found myself looking through some of my old photography albums. Focus, tone, fashion, and composition issues aside, I realized was that while I was coming up, someone else (of lot of someone else's for that matter) had shown me their technique and their secrets. The more I looked through my work, the more I saw how it had evolved and I knew that reason for that was because I had so many others who took the time to share their techniques with me. The feeling of indebtedness was overwhelming. And it was one that I immediately felt needed to be paid forward. But how?
The opportunity arrived later that month, when a younger, less-experienced photographer contacted me and told me that he loved a couple of the photos I'd recently posted. He asked me what my process was for shooting, retouching, and toning, and not only did I explain to him what I'd done and how I'd done it, but I went ahead and gave him the presets I'd created for that particular set of photos as well. In effect, I'd given him all the tools he needed to recreate my work. Sharing my technique in such an open way was a first for me, and it was one that I found to be really quite liberating; knowing that someone could reproduce meant that if I wanted to keep my work fresh, I need to learn something new.
I realize giving away secrets and/or technique is never going to be a popular idea. Photographers, on the whole, tend to be very protective. I’ve found that if you ask someone about the settings they use, the teams they work with, the spots at which they shoot, how they edit and retouch, and even the gear for which they shot a particular photo with, you’re more likely to get a blank stare than an answer. And I think that’s wrong.
As a working photographer and as someone with a desire to keep my work current, almost nothing stands out to me more than the fact that when we keep our technique so close to our vest, we're prevented from learning something new. Personally, I discovered that when I was trying to keep my techniques a well-guarded secret, my work neither grew nor changed. I was stagnant and everything I produced all seemed to have a similar, almost lifeless feel. But in giving it all away, in emptying my bag of tricks so to speak, I was forcing myself to push forward. I’m convinced that our competitive spirit sees giving everything away as a challenge and thinks, “someone else knows what I know, someone else can do what I do. it’s time to step it up, it’s time to learn something new - it’s time to take my work to the next level.”
To be honest, the thing of it is, there really are no secrets and there aren't any tricks. This is not the ethereal world and we're not wizards (sorry). We each use what we know and have available to us at the time. And when our style and our tastes change, we move on to something new. What we're giving away isn't secrets and tricks, they're just shortcuts we've learned, mostly likely from someone else who told us their technique in which we tweaked to make our own.
It's simple really; when we give away what we know and we allow ourselves to start over. As artists, isn't it our job to keep pushing forward? Shouldn't we constantly be looking for anything which will bring about a new style, a new look, and/or a new direction which keeps our work fresh? And shouldn't we, when we're feeling comfortable with all that, give it away and start all over again?
I think we should.
Besides, it’s 2014. We have the Internet. People are eventually going to figure it out.
I've started doing some screen casts with other photographer friends I have while we're editing. It's really interesting to see how others work their files, and let them see how I work mine.
The end result is that we're both refining our techniques and making ourselves better photographers. The fastest way to grow the talent of the community is to share what you know.
Great article buddy!
Great article. I used to hold my secrets close, but I've been trying to open my fists and share what I know, and it's been so freeing. We'll see what it does for business long-term, but in the short-term it's opened me up for friendships I would never have made otherwise.
Great great post, and we agree wholeheartedly
We firmly believe that you find inspiration by inspiring others.
Thank you for sharing.
Props!
I use duct tape on photo retouching
Very good idea. Helping someone by telling them how you achieved certain results really can't hurt you at all, nor does it make you foolish for doing so. A) You never know, that person may send a client your way or B) may even become a client .
If i ever learn some secrets, I might give them away.
Great post man!
"Besides, it’s 2014. We have the Internet. People are eventually going to figure it out."
I love that haha. It's so true. Most of what I have learned as a photographer has come from googles searches and youtube.
I made a point early on to share as much as humanly possible. Best business practice I ever made :)
Love this article. I'm a firm believer in sharing what I know with those who ask. I've learned a lot from others, and it's just good manners to pass it on down the line. Plus, there have been those I've helped who have been grateful enough to refer others to me (weddings they couldn't take, subjects they don't specialize in, etc.) I don't think I've ever regretted sharing knowledge with other photographers - it just increases the quality of the industry as a whole and makes ME want to grow and learn even more.
I have found that sharing a technique, whether in music or photography, forces me to re-exam it while sharing. Maybe I can think of a better way while I'm explaining and then apply that to my own work. If I didn't share, those "tricks" would be frozen at v1.0
Totally & sometimes sharing helps us enhance the same techniques with others ideas too.
Exactly. Every time I teach something, whether it is woodworking, photography, cooking, whatever by verbalizing my technique I am forced to reexamine it and frequently think if something else. Also the questions I get asked make me think of things in different ways.
There's a huge difference between sharing your techniques with your friends at dinner, and the whole world. Your friend is most likely as established as you, and not going to try to use your techniques to improve his technique for personal gain.
Curious why that is a bad thing?
Who said it was a bad thing?
The people I originally have shared with are sharing now what they know with me. Brilliant.
I totally agree with this post. I recently had a shoot with a fellow photographer and after shooting a few portraits I began to edit them as well as retouching one and basically walked him through the entire process of what I was doing. He was totally amazed and appreciative of what I'd been showing him and the funny part about is that all I was doing was dodging and burning, which I learned a while back from awesome photographer, Ahmed Klink. Nobody can duplicate a photographer's vision even if they can have a similar "look". Anybody who knows how to use Google can learn just about any editing technique on the planet so why not help somebody out? They may teach you something, as well.
Sean, I agree totally. Techniques can enhance my craft but without the vision it's all crap. When I look back over the scope of my work, I see my vision evolving. Saying technique is what makes us or breaks us as working photographers is rather like saying my camera is the reason I take great photographs. Technique and camera are tools only. When asked about her favorite photograph, Imogen Cunningham said this: "Which of my photographs is my favorite? The one I’m going to take tomorrow."
Great article. Sharing your best stuff has SO many benefits, not only does it challenge your creativity and push you forward as an artist; but it also helps people recognize your generosity and return the favor in some way.
Whether or not you believe in Karma, helping people out does benefit you as well.
It's interesting, giving away everything I have in creating Fstoppers has directly allowed me more freedom, success, and happiness than anything I would have gained by not sharing. I can't imagine it any other way now.
"Ask and ye shall receive"
On the one hand, it's generous to be open about information and make it accessible to others. On the other hand, photographers should remember that other people need to earn something in order for them to consider it valuable. There is an unbreakable connection between accessibility and value. The more accessible you are as a photographer, the less valuable your information becomes to others.
The point is that it's OK to expect people to earn the information that you give to them.
What theology have you been reading Mike?
Just my completely opposite way of looking at things...I answer most every question any other photographer ever asks, but I don't, for the most part offer information without being asked.
And I never ever ever ever ask other photographers how they do stuff. As a general rule I don't look at other photographers work, and I don't have any interest in how they do it.
I think of photography as an art...the more you look at other people's work, or learn from what they did, the less of what you do is YOURS.
So I don't steal the opportunity to invent something from someone else, by telling them stuff they don't ask to know, and I don't ask anyone ANYthing :))
Another thing to consider.....there are about a zillion people calling themselves photographers right now....and not to knock anyone, but the vast majority never EVER do anything original. They hunt around the net, around FB, around Pinterest for ideas, and just copy what they see.
Most things that photographers do.....settings, lighting, posing, retouching.....are things that MOST other photographers also do....we're not talking about UNIQUE things, or original anything. Just a bunch of people copying off each other.
It really is a different thing, when you think up a DIFFERENT THING. If you're doing ORIGINAL WORK, of your own design and inspiration, you're not doing the "ART of photography" any favors by explaining to people looking to just mimic the creative ones.
I think, if anything....we have epidemic of mimicry.....
I don't mind answering technical questions, even artistic questions that apply to GENERAL PHOTOGRAPHIC KNOWLEDGE. But it's unreasonable and unfair to ask another ARTIST to explain how they do something....
ORIGINAL.
You just need eyes to see how they do something. There are no secrets.
Lol, believe that all you want.
Don't you fear though that if you don't look and study other photographers then the "art" you put out is really just a lesser form of potential greatness?
Maybe I'm being entirely too cynical here, but imagine if you played guitar and you told yourself that you weren't going to listen or learn any of the riffs, licks, and chords of other guitarists because it would block your own vision of guitar playing. Unless your mind was truly filled with amazing music the world has never known, I would find it hard to believe that you would produce anything that is really worth listening to. Every great musician has studied, copied, or flat out stolen other musician's work only to produce a unique fingerprint that is often times better than their predecessors.
I think all good art follows this pattern. Why reinvent the wheel when you can study what others have done (many of them whom will be much better at it than you ever will be) and combine your influences to create something unique to you?
It just seems hard for me to believe that any artist can have so much original art pouring out of them that they do not feel the need to study or at least check out what else is out there. Plus if you are a fan of good photography, wouldn't it be a waste not to appreciate others who share your own passion?
Why re-invent the wheel.
The person who invents the wheel is an artist. The person who watches him make the wheel and then makes the wheel again, is NOT an artist.
You're actually making my point for me. If your only goal is to produce, by any means, beautiful things, then there is nothing wrong with copying other people.
If your goal...and mine is....is to make beautiful things only to whatever degree I'm capable by myself, then you make an effort to avoid learning from others.
It's like this......I only want to WIN the hundred meter dash by myself, or do the best I can....BY MYSELF. I have no interest in owning a gold medal for the hundred yard dash if someone pushed me down the track.
You don't have to think that way, but I'm 100% happy, 0% frustrated, and never ever ever at a loss for things to create using my own vision.
It's EASIER to accept the premise of the original article. Because most artists copy and mimic, it's easier to believe that's "ok" than it is to adopt a "no copy" policy. My way is HARDER, so I understand why so many people have a hard time understanding it.
Really? Your words sound a bit self-centred.
If you were a "real" artist, in your words, you may be inventing a whole new camera (who knows, not even working with light), a whole new way of seeing (who knows, maybe not using your eyes), a whole new way of distributing (who knows, maybe telepathically, just like bending a spoon), a whole new way of conceiving...
Guess what? We, humans, have, biologically, the same structure to perceive, you have five senses, and that alone discards your "invention of the wheel from zero".
Do you really believe in "own vision"? Really???
Just to finish this, the way you see, your "own unique vision", is learnt because you live in a society that already has it way to organise visual things. There are systems of representation in which you create your "original" works, even if you say that you absolutely avoid them. The camera you see through hiddenly makes you use a system of representation.
Good luck on your "original" journey.
I get the feeling, Omar, that your ego feels attacked. It's pretty common, when artists mention they work with less help than you do.
You're misunderstanding, and that's common too, when your ego runs your head.
I'm not saying I'm not influenced. I'm not saying I don't copy. I'm not saying everything I do is 100% original. I never said anything like that. In fact, I was pretty clear, and it's not hard to understand, unless you just don't WANT to understand.
I choose to TRY to avoid being influenced. I try hard not to copy. I try hard to be original. Rather than seeking out other people's ideas, I try to avoid them so that TO THE HIGHEST DEGREE I'M CAPABLE, my creations are MINE.
That's not complicated, and it certainly doesn't warrant your response, which is attacking, condescending, sarcastic and frankly in my opinion kinda juvenile.
I try to create on my own. You can't say that if you're INTENTIONALLY SEEKING OUT OTHER PEOPLE'S techniques. You don't have to understand...you're obviously not going to agree, but grow up a little when it comes to respecting how other people think.
Fortunately for a LOT of people, a lot of people get it. If you DON'T get it, oh well, how you "create" is your choice.
I don't feel attacked. I just see that you have no clue what art is and that you have deaf ears.
Good luck again.
Dave, I agree with your basic premise
It might not even be possible for most to understand valuable information even when it is presented or explained. The reason is because most concepts need to be learned in a sequence. Easier concepts are presented at first and then progressively made more difficult. So, by the time an artist has gone through the "gauntlet" of many years of difficult learning of a sequence of concepts then it might not even be possible to explain something from an advanced level to someone still at an elementary level.
The problem with the internet is that there is no sequence. An aspiring photographer doesn't have a definite place to start. He may begin with lighting when he hasn't even learned exposure. Or maybe he starts doing retouching when he still can't focus his camera. The result is that all order breaks down and the concepts that come to the foreground are the simplest ones for a general audience to understand.
It's very easy to fool people into believing that they're getting (or giving) valuable information when they're not. People are very susceptible to what made the characters "Echo" and "Narcissus" famous in Greek mythology. In other words, most are condemned to repeating information from 2nd hand sources and/or seeing information as valuable only when it confirms (reflects) views and beliefs that they already possess.
You explain that very well. I have a habit, when people ask me general questions, to ask them "what specific thing are you trying to accomplish?"
Because I believe learning in ART, starts with a vision you want to create, then you problem solve to get there. If you start with someone teaching you METHODS, then just "see what comes out the other end," that's not creativity at all.
But when you ask people "what specific thing are you trying to accomplish," you almost always find out they had NO vision whatsoever, lol......and that helps me escape from the conversation without giving them advanced ideas they're not ready for, and it forces them to build a foundation first... (or not grow at all, which is far more common, but hey, it's art, not everyone is supposed to do it, lol)
Yes, I'm totally with ya Dave. It's good to ask "what specific thing are you trying to accomplish" because oftentimes we talk at cross-purposes. For example, in this thread alone there are multiple senses of the word "share." So, I might be talking about one sense of the word and another guy might be talking about another sense and it could look like we are disagreeing but in actuality we may just be talking about the same word in different contexts.
Also, what you appear to be talking about is the difference between personal expression and craftsmanship. A craft can be learned through formula. Meanwhile, personal expression can never be reduced solely to a formula. If you're interested, there's a famous philosophy book on this subject by Collingwood called "The Principles of Art."
Formulas are necessary for maintaining genres and conventions. Landscape, portrait, glamor, fashion, wedding, architecture etc are some of the genres that make up the content of photography. People learn to shoot successfully in those genres because of their ability to follow a pre-conceived formula. So in essence, any photographer that wants to be a "fashion photographer" etc is pursuing a road that has already been traveled. It would make sense for him to want a map of that road.
So how does a photographer avoid formulas and learn to personally express? That's a question that I've tackled for 20 years and am only now starting to understand an answer. The way to do it is to approach photography from "parts" instead of "wholes." For example, a genre photograph is a whole. Any photographer that wants to imitate it must reverse engineer the whole into it's basic parts. If the photographer is successful, then he will have learned to reproduce the formula of the genre. This is how most photographers learn photography today.
If a photographer wants to personally express and avoid formulas as much as possible, then he has to approach photography from the opposite angle and start with parts and then create his own individual formula from the parts. The parts of photography obviously include all of the technical things like focus, exposure etc. But they also go into formal concepts from art like static/dynamic symmetry, identity, similarity, opposition etc. For example, a photographer that works from parts instead of wholes might spend a great deal of time practicing composition with the element of "repetition." Meanwhile, a fashion photographer might spend his time practicing by finding and shooting new models. In the end, the photographer that worked from parts will see pictures in all kinds of content that defy genres while the fashion photographer will never see a picture in content that doesn't include models or the regular ingredients of the fashion genre.
That's the first time I've tried to explain to anyone on the net the difference between an approach from parts and wholes. I'm sorry that it's so long and don't feel obligated to reply. But I hope it might help to clarify an alternative approach for folks that want to avoid imitation in photography as much as possible.
Nice reply! I just thought I'd add that this post seems to be aimed at "photographers" in general and not those at the top of their game. Because any of the "top" photographers will tell you that a shooting is a team effort, just like making a film. They "collaborate" with the others on the team to get the most out of each person's specialty. They do not try to do everything themselves, being the clichéd "Jack of all trades... Master of none".
In the capacity as a team effort, everyone "learns" automatically, and if members of that team work with other pros which is most often the case, they certainly take that experience automatically with them. Might I add that all of the team members are being paid, which makes the idea of "sharing" a rather profitable endeavor in order to get the next paid job.
IMO... sharing for sharing's sake is quite often an ego-driven desire to be seen as "knowing what you're talking about" by your peers and bettering those you feel below your abilities. Also trying to promote yourself, just as much as selling your kraft.
Art Teachers vs. Real Artists comes to mind... which I think you @Dave Melges were getting at, if I'm not mistaken.
Disclosure: Yes... I'm one of those that get paid to "share" my specialties within a team effort. It doesn't make me against sharing, just the rewards of doing so is against my better business judgement, that's all.
As a seperate reply, I just thought I'd ask the question, "how do you further your OWN abilities if you're afraid to experiment or use someone elses recipes for success?" It is experimentation that "aha moments" arise, that further exploration into your own vision and style. Failure is often the first step towards this process. It is the #1 secret of many a great artist.
Hey look... I'm sharing :)
In my opinion, it's IMPOSSIBLE to further your OWN abilities by looking at someone else's. You can only further your mimicry.
Leave this in your head for a few days......is it REALLY art, if you got it from someone else? I have a very extreme view on this, I work hard not to be influenced by other photographers....it's impossible of course, but if I do something someone else has done, but I haven't SEEN what they've done, it's still INVENTION.
I have not interest in being the best I can be with help.....I'm only interested in creating....NOT mimicking.
Extreme yes... but I'll second your devotion and desire to be and stay original! BTW: I wasn't expecting the "you" in my question, to be answered by... uh... you personally. I was questioning the "recipe sharers".
You're talking a lot about business too, and while I'm a full time professional photographer, I'm really only talking about the process of creativity.
For the purpose of making customers happy, and making money, you are obviously correct, there are huge advantages in teamwork, collaboration, etc....in fact, there's never been a doubt in my mind that refusing to collaborate costs me money, lol.
I'll be terrrrrribly stubborn about that, and it absolutely costs me money.
So because I have an interest in say Long Exposure by your rule of thumb it's wrong for me and I can't learn. So I shouldn't try and emulate those images / artists that I look up to and then it's still mimicry to then take that knowledge and improve, adapt, etc it?
Here's a question for you - how do you know you aren't guilty of mimicry if you are never looking at other photographers images?
Odd way of looking at the world but it's your choice I guess.
I am a professional who does this full time. I have not looked at another photographers website in years. Don't want it to cloud my vision and way of doing things. Its always great to share knowledge but we also need to face some facts. I have seen my work and unique ideas copied time after time. Most of the time the copycats achieve less than stellar results but if we share too much all it does is result in competition that will severely undercut you in price. I believe too much info has been given resulting in people doing it as a hobby stealing work from professionals who feed their families with photography. Give knowledge, share the basics, but like great artists you can guard your secrets. I literally am watching the photo industry and especially wedding industry self destruct in so many ways. I can't tell you the number of times I heard in 2013 that we were going to use you but my uncle or friend said they would shoot our wedding for free or very little. They then came to me asking if the images could be fixed or to say that the wedding photos were ruined all together. I hope pros band together to save the industry. Teach without creating competition that will price you out of existence.
Sorry but you contradict yourself entirely. By your logic (as true or untrue as it may be in reality) you would rather their exist more "hacks" in the market therefore driving prices lower as bottom feeders edge themselves closer and closer to an unsustainable bottom line.
Educating and helping to cultivate and grow more "artists" will empower the industry keeping prices and work at sustainable standards. Better photographers is better for the industry of photography. If by your account others are taking your work anyway, wouldn't you rather they be on your level thereby strengthening the industry, not watering it down?
Do you make a living off of photography alone? Are you part of the industry so you can truly understand? Have to ask these questions because your logic is flawed. Would you trust a Doctor or contractor who wasn't truly a professional with the training and experience to back it up? In the photo industry that is happening. People are trusting untrained photographers who ruin their wedding day and most precious memories. Meanwhile there are plenty of pros who could have given them an amazing experience with amazing memories to match. It's very easy for untrained photographers to post a few good images or post images they have stolen just to get started. I am just saying there are plenty of pros who would love the work that already exist. The ratio of pros to the untrained is becoming severely unbalanced and the industry and customer are suffering for it.
Yes I'm a pro, and all of what you just wrote while maybe true are untrue has nothing to do with the article we are discussing. As far as the doctor comparison, sorry I have been a photographer my entire life since a teenager and I would never even try to compare capturing moments with life and death.
I feel that nobody has the right to tell anybody whether or not to share their techniques. It's all a matter of preference. Some people learn by sharing and feel that this is how they grow as artists. Not wanting to share your techniques is perfectly fine but, I think stating that the industry is hurting because uncles and novice photographers are replacing pros is untrue. Real artists and professionals do not feel threatened by novice photographers because they play in a different playing field altogether. If you're worried about a bride's uncle stealing your gig, I think it's time to re examine your work and your abilities as a businessman.
I think a bigger problem is technology and how the camera companies are pushing better and better cameras out the door cheaper and cheaper, which is good for photographers, but everyone thinks they are a photographer now because they bought an SLR. Most don't realize equipment doesn't make a photographer. It's training, experience and skill, like most other professions, not the doctor's suit.
Sorry, but your arguments really don't hold any water with me.
When I got married (28yrs ago) we asked a friend who had a good eye (as could be witnessed by the images he had already taken) to take candid shots for us. In the end, he got shots that the pro never did (but should have - like my wife with her veil down) and much better shots at that. It's life, folks will get over a bad image or two - but the reality of that is it's on the shoulders of the couple getting married if they haven't done any due diligence.
At days end it's your choice not to share but equally it's my choice to do so.
I agree with the "secrets" part and everybody including their Unkle and the Cat think they can become "pro" or paid photographers, and make a sustainable business of it over night.
However, the only part of "band of pro's" I would like to see is a "The Band of Pro Silence" regarding:
a) the wish for any organizations to regulate the industry;
b) B & M'ing about the Wanna Be's; and
c) pro photographer's thinking they are something overly special in the creative arts and need to be treated differently i.e. better... than any of the other pro's that make up a cohesive Creative Team, which includes just as many pro's in their fields for a successful product.
Silence can be golden.