Can a personal unique vision in Photography be taught?

[Merkin]

Thanks!

Part of the beauty is that not many people do. I try to not bring it to people's attention, unless there are some of those bothersome prudes about, who like to take offense at (read whine about) any little thing.

[semilog]

Originally Posted by barnwulf

I don't think a personal vision can be taught but a good mentor or photography instructor can help to guide you and help you to develop your vision. I know this from personal experience and excellent critiques and encouragement from an amazing professor of art that I had the privilege to study under. There are no real shortcuts to becoming a good photographer. You have to do the work yourself but others can help. - Jim

At its best, that's exactly what teaching is — and what it should be.

[Araakii]

Originally Posted by redisburning

I agree with this.

talking about it is important. I really wish I had someone to do that with; but generally speaking the people I know would rather keep it shallow =/

I am a pretty straight forward person and I tend to speak out what I think on most things. However, whenever I criticize a photo, I get labeled as discouraging and mean. Maybe that's how the internet culture is like.

[Araakii]

Originally Posted by PKR

I think one of the problems with web posting is that all the crap images I see are full of back patting comments. Rarely anything critical or helpful. The blind leading the blind.. An academic or other than a flicker or rff type environment might help with visiual growth.

Ya, some of those back patting could be genuine. With so many viewers looking at others' work every day, how many of them are actually literate in photography? The environment that people were brought up also didn't help. Now in the age of photoshopping and HDR, that's what people think is cool and if you don't do any of that, you are considered cynical and old school.

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

I am a pretty straight forward person and I tend to speak out what I think on most things. However, whenever I criticize a photo, I get labeled as discouraging and mean. Maybe that's how the internet culture is like.

As a consequence of your honesty, you will be lambasted by aggressive individuals, who will tell you how many pictures they have sold, how many competitions they have won and how you are too stupid to understand art.

Just remember the little boy, who pointed out that the emperor was naked

[Gabriel M.A.]

I can see someone teaching how to make exceptional wine, as the wine is a palpable object. But "a vision" is not an object, and cannot be taught. One can be taught "how to see" and "how to think", but you cannot create "personal unique" stuff on somebody else's "soul".

This would mean one can create people at will. I like to think that people have their own will.

I think people are getting confused with the question --I'm not sure if the question itself is correct. I believe that the question meant to be "Can someone be taught to create their own photographic 'vision'?"

Call it grammar "gymnastics", but the answer(s) is(are) usually as good as the question.

[Araakii]

Taught is just the wrong word. Guided would probably be more appropriate.

[DominikDUK]

Can a persons unique vision be taught, no simple because it's your or some other persons unique vision emphasis on unique.
You have to find your vision look trough all your photographs and with some luck you'll find a common denominator in your photos. Finding your voice/vision takes time or sometimes none at all. Get out take some pictures. A mentor can help you realize that you have an unique vision but he can't teach how to get there.

Dominik

[daveleo]

Originally Posted by Araakii

Taught is just the wrong word. Guided would probably be more appropriate.

Yes !

As several folks above have noted, "teaching" is (at its core) encouraging, guiding, mentoring, nuturing, supporting people on their path to learning stuff.

I think that most people are not "creative" because they are never encouraged to take risks, to get out of the boxes their parents and teachers and bosses (and sometimes their families) want them to stay in. A really great teacher will get you out the box and encourage you to "find" yourself and be bold and bring something new to the party. Most everyone else won't "get it".

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by peterm1

Look, for example, at the kids doing graffiti on walls and fences in city streets. Some think these have a unique vision.

I am yet to see any graffiti "art" that is worthwhile and think the "artists" are just destructive little ****s who have no respect for others' property, who should be made to pay for the damage they cause - but thats another story.

(OK I know some people are collecting graffiti art - that does not make it good or worthwhile art it simply demonstrates the depths to which our western culture has sunk.)

Wow, really? Way to lump them all together.

[Spyro]

havent read the whole thread but here's my 2c anyway

Originally Posted by jsrockit

Can a personal unique vision in Photography be taught?

no, because then it would probably not be personal, or unique...
but you can learn from somebody else a tried process that *might* take you there. For example, most people learn to edit their work from the first few painful encounters with more experienced peers. I dont know how you can ever produce something unique and personal without that skill, or how you can be so conscious of the quality of your work and so honest to yourself to develop it by yourself, in the void. I've seen Trent Parke once in my life, he had a bag full of developed 6X7 colour slides and he was going through them super quickly against the light (no light table) and it was literally a case of nah-nah-nah-bin the roll. I think he kept two rolls that had one "maybe" in it each. To scan and have a better look (and maybe bin). How the hell do you get there on your own?

Besides, there's always more of other peoples' vision to learn and be aware of, and that can be taught. There is no such thing as parthenogenesis in art, consciously or subconsciously you always mix and match different things you've seen somewhere or impressed you recently, try to add your thing, fail, start over, master, rinse and repeat until your work starts to stabilise and create a concrete repeated pattern, a visual platform which is now yours and allows your own personality and input to show through. Hopefully

Like I said just my 2c, possibly gibberish

[Sparrow]

... and sometimes they even reward the buggers :shocked:

http://www.viewbristol.co.uk/listing...ture-3057.html

[Merkin]

Originally Posted by peterm1

"Originally Posted by peterm1
You got that or you aint!


That would be really sad."

Maybe I am overstating it a bit Ferider and I understand where you are coming from I think.

But my point is that not everyone who comes out of art school is going to be a great artist. Yes they may graduate having developed a "unique vision" - its just that its a unique vision that is crap.

Look, for example, at the kids doing graffiti on walls and fences in city streets. Some think these have a unique vision.

I am yet to see any graffiti "art" that is worthwhile and think the "artists" are just destructive little ****s who have no respect for others' property, who should be made to pay for the damage they cause - but thats another story.

(OK I know some people are collecting graffiti art - that does not make it good or worthwhile art it simply demonstrates the depths to which our western culture has sunk.)

When uptight, middle aged, middle class white guys don't get your work, you are probably doing it right.

[semilog]

Originally Posted by Araakii

Taught is just the wrong word. Guided would probably be more appropriate.

A theme in this thread is it can be difficult to criticize. Well, here's some criticism. A lot of you need to seriously re-think what teaching actually is.

Many here appear to think that the word "teach" is identical to the word "tell" -- that teaching is by definition rote instruction.

It is not.

Teaching, done properly, provisions a student with the tools needed to reach her goals: technical tools, yes, but also ways of approaching a problem, ways of evaluating performance, patterns of working and analysis and critical thinking that lead to progression, and historical context to build upon or rebel against.

Consider one of most revered teachers in western history, Socrates. By the above-quoted definition, the Socratic method would be "guidance" but not "teaching." That is clearly and obviously wrong.

Let's put it this way. It may not be possible to "teach a personal vision," but for many, it may be impossible to find and implement a personal vision without good teachers.

[Turtle]

IMHO, no, you cannot teach personal vision as a '1,2,3 there you have it', but you can help people identify the mental processes and experiences that might result in them finding their own, as well as create a conducive environment. This is like so many things in life. It is not so much a case of being taught information, but learning how to learn... being inspired and a good teacher helping you move towards greater self-awareness.

My own creative journey took an upturn when I met a wonderful woman with whom life became a hugely open and expansive emotional and intellectual playground. Sadly we are no longer together, but spending several years of my life with her changed how I see life, how I see my photography and the clarity of the relationship between the two. Was she a teacher? No. Did I learn a lot through sharing ideas and feeling inspired and free? Oh, goodness yes. Never more.

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by photomoof

True, although from my perspective it is just chance [almost miraculous] that some fall into a situation where they can grow and excel.

Everyone cannot be Lance Armstrong or Pablo Picasso, but it is doubtful that Picasso could have won the Tour, or Lance become a great painter.

I have seen so many students trying to force themselves into an inappropriate career -- it is often obvious that there is no hope in the "chosen" field, but some persist. But then again - you never know, some surprise everyone.

I believe it is impossible to gauge genius, until after it has manifested itself.

Was that conflicted enough?

Nothing like conflicted enough!

Even so, I cannot argue with your premises, except to suggest that 'genius' is not an absolute and id therefore open to influence; which is, come to think of it, close to what you say in "But then again - you never know, some surprise everyone". Maybe, then, we aren't arguing after all. But gosh, our failing to argue has never happened before, has it?

Cheers,

R.

[semilog]

Originally Posted by Merkin

When uptight, middle aged, middle class white guys don't get your work, you are probably doing it right.

That might or might not be fair, but no question, it is funny.