William Eggleston famously described himself as being "at war with the obvious," a compelling concept for any photographer to consider. Exploring what exactly counts as obvious—and why steering clear of it might make your work stand out—can help you create photographs people remember.
Coming to you from James Popsys, this thoughtful video examines Eggleston’s philosophy through the lens of his renowned photo book. Popsys points out a curious contradiction: Eggleston photographs everyday, sometimes even mundane, scenes yet claims to resist the obvious. Popsys suggests that perhaps the obvious isn’t simply about subject matter—like iconic landscapes or famous landmarks—but about predictable compositions that answer too many questions upfront. He argues that memorable photographs often leave viewers with more questions than answers, sparking genuine curiosity rather than simply admiration for aesthetics. This insight challenges the typical approach to photography that prioritizes clear and complete subjects.
This idea leads Popsys to experiment with compositions himself, notably featuring a lighthouse. He demonstrates how cropping or excluding parts of the scene—such as the lighthouse's top—can provoke curiosity and imagination. Instead of presenting the whole story in one frame, Popsys deliberately leaves visual information out, inviting speculation. It’s a practical approach, useful when you're stuck creatively or find yourself repeatedly capturing scenes in the same predictable way. Popsys further notes that timing and context also play roles in raising questions—shooting the lighthouse after golden hour, for instance, provided a less expected setting that naturally added mystery.
Beyond framing techniques, Popsys reflects on the importance of choosing inherently intriguing subjects. While it's tempting to rely solely on dramatic lighting, he cautions against becoming overly dependent on golden hour. Light itself, he explains, can sometimes overpower a subject, reducing its narrative potential rather than enhancing it. The video suggests focusing instead on subjects or scenes that inherently prompt questions, even if the lighting isn't traditionally beautiful. This pushes your photography toward storytelling, prompting viewers to wonder and remember. Check out the video above for the full rundown from Popsys.
My opinion of William Eggleston is that he was more of a historically significant photographer than a photographer who made great photographs. Let me explain...
None of his photographs are anything I would care to own. However, he was among the first photographers who popularized the role of color in photographic art. Up until then photography as an art form had been expressed only in black and white. And it was generally for commercial applications where color photography first gained an audience. While he was well known for capturing photos of the ordinary and mundane, I would argue that it was the printing methods employed by Eggleston, more so than the image itself, that stood out in his work. Through the use of dye-transfer printing, he could make a picture of which Eggleston said, "The Red Ceiling is so powerful, that in fact, I've never seen it reproduced on the page to my satisfaction. When you look at the dye it is like red blood that's wet on the wall..." So is the photo "Red Ceiling" memorable, or is the printing technology that made it so? I certainly would not be interested in acquiring that photograph. Technology has changed so much of the way we create and view art and photography. Guys like Eggleston and Eliot Porter made a name for themselves because color film was relatively new. Nowadays technology advancements come in the blink of an eye, but that was not so true in the 1960s.
As far as making a memorable picture is concerned, what impacts one person won't necessarily speak to another. The choice of subject may have something to do with that. With so many images circulated around the globe every day, it's nearly impossible to stand out from the crowd. Even the most unusual photographs have probably been done before.
So what is worth chasing after in photography? There are numerous Ansel Adams prints made 70 years ago that I would dearly love to have. Why? Because they stand the test of time. What was extraordinarily good then is still good today. So that's pretty much my goal with photography: make something that would be good by standards today, 50 years in the past, and 50 years in the future... no matter the technology differences between those years. Don't fret over making memorable images. Memorable can take on a whole other dimension in the form of bad art as well as good art. Make good solid interesting images. And seek inspiration from sources which resonate with you.
Seeing beyond the obvious may or may not produce an exceptionally strong photograph; the same for capturing the ordinary and mundane subject. Maybe those are just starting rather than ending points.