# I am not going to take that photo because its too cliche!



## runnah (Apr 28, 2013)

Anyone feel this way when out shooting?

I felt this way last night when I was sitting by a lake waiting for the sun to set. Granted the photos came out great, but whoopee ding, another sunset shot. Add the photo to the pile of millions of other shots.


----------



## 480sparky (Apr 28, 2013)

Go have a good cry..... you'll feel better afterwards. :cry:


----------



## amolitor (Apr 28, 2013)

Yes. All the time.

Also, I cave in and shoot it about half the time. It feels so so dirty.


----------



## runnah (Apr 28, 2013)

480sparky said:


> Go have a good cry..... you'll feel better afterwards. :cry:



I am a man, I only cry at the death of my dog or war movies.


----------



## runnah (Apr 28, 2013)

amolitor said:


> Yes. All the time.
> 
> Also, I cave in and shoot it about half the time. It feels so so dirty.



Do you feel it is a requirement along the path of photography? Like everyone has to do water drops and train tracks at least once?


----------



## vintagesnaps (Apr 28, 2013)

Then why press the shutter button?? Why take a photo just because it's what you think you're supposed to do. If it just isn't happening at that moment taking a photo of a sunset or whatever it may be, then why not wait for another opportunity and just enjoy the moment. 

I sometimes feel when I'm looking thru my viewfinder like I'm just not getting anything good, and sometimes I'll turn and see it, whatever it is, and start shooting away. Sometimes I can go thru a roll of film in a heartbeat and other times there will be a roll of film in a camera for quite some time. 

I think creativity ebbs and flows and the more you try to force it the worse it can get; I guess you just gotta go with it when it's happening and when it isn't, try taking a break from it and I think that can help you come back to it feeling refreshed.


----------



## Benco (Apr 28, 2013)

I don't worry about that, if there's something I want to shoot I'll shoot it. Cliche? big deal, I like it, why should I have to conform to some intellectual hair shirt ideal in what I want to shoot. 

 Anyway, people turning up their noses at subjects that they consider have been done to death has been around for a very long time, one could say that 'I'm not going to take that photo because it's too cliche' is also a cliche.


----------



## peter27 (Apr 28, 2013)

vintagesnaps said:


> Then why press the shutter button?? Why take a photo just because it's what you think you're supposed to do. If it just isn't happening at that moment taking a photo of a sunset or whatever it may be, then why not wait for another opportunity and just enjoy the moment.
> 
> I sometimes feel when I'm looking thru my viewfinder like I'm just not getting anything good, and sometimes I'll turn and see it, whatever it is, and start shooting away. Sometimes I can go thru a roll of film in a heartbeat and other times there will be a roll of film in a camera for quite some time.
> 
> I think creativity ebbs and flows and the more you try to force it the worse it can get; I guess you just gotta go with it when it's happening and when it isn't, try taking a break from it and I think that can help you come back to it feeling refreshed.



This, with a slight reserve thought that one man's cliché is another man's classic.


----------



## Overread (Apr 28, 2013)

Nope never had this problem nor even this thought really. If I were at some major event or sight I might be aware that its heavily photographed and that, if I can't get a shot that I'm pleased with of it chances are I can find some I'd like to look at. But the fact that something has been photographed before never stops me.

Now I have often thought "bleh lights bad - my position is bad and I've go the wrong lens on - the shot will be bad" - and sometimes it stops me taking a shot; but heck its digital so half the time I will take a shot (sometime it comes out looking pretty good too!)


----------



## Buckster (Apr 28, 2013)

No, never.

I follow my heart, my mind, my wants, needs, desires and a lot of spur of the moment impulses, as long as it's legal, especially when it comes to photography.  I don't let silly things like pride or ego or some elitist sense that I'm "above that" or "too good for it" to hold me back or dictate what I will or will not shoot.

I may not process it, may never use it, nor even show it to anyone, and might not even give it a second look myself, but those ten thousand look-alike sunsets and tourist snaps are going to get shot by me every time I get the slightest urge.  Better to have it in the can and not use it, then to not have it and wish I did.

I'm well known among family and friends for suddenly pulling over, jumping out of the vehicle with camera in hand, and running off to shoot something I caught a glimpse of while driving down the road, and it doesn't have to be all that special.  The destination will just have to wait, which is why I tend to leave early to go anywhere.  I give all my passengers the same instructions: Other than safety issues, my rules while driving are just one: Whenever anyone in the vehicle wants to stop for any reason, no matter how silly or trivial, we're stopping.  Period. 

My stepfather would force us all to go to the bathroom before leaving the house at the asscrack of dawn, pile us all into the car, and never stop again except for gas until we got to our destination.  I watched out the windows as we drove past a million things I yearned to better see and explore, and I vowed that I would never do that as an adult.  My passengers and I have had an absolute ball in our travels, especially my daughter and me.  I hold to the philosophy that it's all about the journey, not the destination.

I will NEVER EVER say to myself, "now I wish I'd stopped to see that" nor "now I wish I'd shot that".


----------



## The_Traveler (Apr 28, 2013)

Oh man.
What an opportunity for people to proclaim their true 'rebel'-ness and how their inner artist inspires them.


Runnah, take all the cliche pictures you want, just don't show them to anyone.


----------



## sm4him (Apr 28, 2013)

I have absolutely ZERO interest in how cliché a picture is. I'd rather have MY cliché sunset shot on my computer or hanging on my wall than someone else's.

Now, sometimes I see something that *I* have taken so many shots of already that, while it is beautiful or interesting or cool, I just think "how many more pictures of this do I really NEED?" Like, I visit certain areas of the Great Smoky Mountains a lot, since I live so close. There's a particular field at Cades Cove that draws me in EVERY time, and I start taking pictures, because it's beautiful. Then I get home, and realize those shots look JUST like the OTHER 9,998 times I've shot photos of that field.


----------



## runnah (Apr 28, 2013)

The_Traveler said:


> Oh man.
> What an opportunity for people to proclaim their true 'rebel'-ness and how their inner artist inspires them.


----------



## amolitor (Apr 28, 2013)

I shoot the cliches because most of the time they're actually pretty good pictures.

I hate myself for shooting them because they're not my pretty good pictures, they're copies of someone else's pretty good pictures.


----------



## Buckster (Apr 28, 2013)

amolitor said:


> I shoot the cliches because most of the time they're actually pretty good pictures.
> 
> I hate myself for shooting them because they're not my pretty good pictures, they're copies of someone else's pretty good pictures.


The concept of hating oneself over such a thing seems silly to me.

Do you similarly hate yourself for using Blogspot and a template instead of coding your own blog from scratch and putting it up on the net from a server you also designed and built from scratch? Do you hate yourself for eating food that other people eat, instead of strictly sticking to unique recipes you've invented?  Do you hate yourself for using words and phrases that other people invented and that you're just copying?  Do you hate yourself for wearing clothing that looks like the clothing that other people wear instead of designing and sewing your own?


----------



## SCraig (Apr 28, 2013)

Who cares?  If I see something that has meaning to me then I'll photograph it.  I may not share it with many since to them it may be cliche, but every time I look at it I remember where I took it, I can remember the weather, the conditions, the people, everything about it.  In my opinion that is what photography is about, not trying to please a bunch of faceless people on an internet forum.


----------



## amolitor (Apr 28, 2013)

I don't actually hate myself, Buckster, it's just a kind of a metaphor.

There are plenty of areas in life where I am happy to simply use what others have done, but a few areas where I strive to build on those things. I use cameras and materials designed and built by others, using a lot of ideas devised by others, but on good days I push past the pictures other people have taken and make something new or at any rate new to me.

This isn't a judgement on how anyone else takes pictures, it's just how I take pictures.


----------



## bentcountershaft (Apr 28, 2013)

I shoot whatever strikes my damn fancy.


----------



## bentcountershaft (Apr 28, 2013)

SCraig said:


> Who cares?  If I see something that has meaning to me then I'll photograph it.  I may not share it with many since to them it may be cliche, but every time I look at it I remember where I took it, I can remember the weather, the conditions, the people, everything about it.  In my opinion that is what photography is about, not trying to please a bunch of faceless people on an internet forum.



I have a face, dammit!


----------



## Benco (Apr 28, 2013)

The_Traveler said:


> Oh man.
> What an opportunity for people to proclaim their true 'rebel'-ness and how their inner artist inspires them.



And you saw right through it unlike us sheeple eh? wow you're so hip.


----------



## The_Traveler (Apr 28, 2013)

Benco said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > Oh man.
> ...



I didn't say that at all, not did I say that people here were sheep.

Posters create a _persona_, intentionally or not, and some of those personae are more ludicrous than the average.


----------



## Ilovemycam (Apr 28, 2013)

OP, what you going to do? You, must shoot something. Brcome a street shooter.

Bent countershaft sums me up too.


----------



## Ysarex (Apr 28, 2013)




----------



## KenC (Apr 28, 2013)

Really, pretty much everything has been done, so why shoot anything at all?  The ones that people feel are cliches have the elements everyone expects to see, and nothing else of interest, and they have nothing in particular to say.  This last of course is very subjective, so you're just left with how it works for you.  If you feel it has something to offer, then do it, otherwise maybe that feeling that it's "just a cliche" is worth listening to.


----------



## weepete (Apr 28, 2013)

Well from my perspective I've allways taken pics of stuff I found interesting, different or if there was a moment, cool light or anything else that got my interest. 

I'll freely admit I'm not as far along with my photography as a lot of you guys, and I'm still working out the basics of light and compsition.

The one thing I have learned is that when the moment is gone, it's gone, you may never get the chance to do it again, and there are so many times I've passed by an oppertunity that I'd rather try than not.

So I will take the tourist shots, partialy because for me it's part of a learning process, because I want to take "that" iconic shot and see if I can get it near the best shots I can find. Then I try and get a bit creative and fin d a spot or angle that's different. What I do pass on is taking a pic when I know the lighting is not good and I can't sort it out somehow.


----------



## picturehappy (Apr 28, 2013)

This is my photo. There are many like it but this one is mine

I dunno


----------



## Mike_E (Apr 28, 2013)

I tend to shoot less than I used to, usually when I'm thinking that it's too cliche it's because it would make a mediocre picture.

If it's likely to make a great shot then cliche be hanged.


----------



## Benco (Apr 28, 2013)

The_Traveler said:


> Benco said:
> 
> 
> > The_Traveler said:
> ...



What did you say then? I read it as a sarcastic jibe and responded in kind, was I wrong?


----------



## kathyt (Apr 28, 2013)

There will always be an image posted from a place that I have never seen or never will see. So keep shooting and show me.


----------



## runnah (Apr 28, 2013)

Ilovemycam said:


> OP, what you going to do?



Take up painting.


----------



## ZimPhoto (Apr 28, 2013)

Shucks...just read through the whole thread and forgot what the question was but thinking my short memory may be good in this case.  Anyway, if I keep practicing shooting cliches then I'll be ready when I come across some moving water at night next to a highway (with traffic) next to some railroad tracks and a full moon that will look good in b&w or color.


----------



## TATTRAT (Apr 28, 2013)

Benco said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > Oh man.
> ...



The only thing hipper would be making a thread about it.


----------



## Tiller (Apr 28, 2013)

Runnah - ThePhoto'sForum's own personal hipster.


----------



## TATTRAT (Apr 28, 2013)

Tiller said:


> Runnah - ThePhoto'sForum's own personal hipster.



He's riding his fixie all over the forum, just scoffing at all of us, a PBR in one hand, and a lomo camera in the other. . .with a chicken hat made out of a tea kettle cozie. 


At least that's how I see him 

I keed, I keed. I really enjoy his posts, if it's not too uncool to admit that.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Apr 28, 2013)

Does anyone else find the irony in the hipsters moving to the "old time film look" (aka instagram look), and now this type of look has become cliche and the norm? 

Now what hipsters?


----------



## Tiller (Apr 28, 2013)

TATTRAT said:


> He's riding his fixie all over the forum, just scoffing at all of us, a PBR in one hand, and a lomo camera in the other. . .with a chicken hat made out of a tea kettle cozie.
> 
> At least that's how I see him
> 
> I keed, I keed. I really enjoy his posts, if it's not too uncool to admit that.



I admitted it first. You're such a follower.


----------



## TATTRAT (Apr 28, 2013)

Tiller said:


> TATTRAT said:
> 
> 
> > He's riding his fixie all over the forum, just scoffing at all of us, a PBR in one hand, and a lomo camera in the other. . .with a chicken hat made out of a tea kettle cozie.
> ...




Bro, do you even know? Pssht. I'm so going home to my loft and going to listen to records I got at a thrift store, and drowning myself in a wash of pbr and reddit!


----------



## jake337 (Apr 29, 2013)

Just create images that you want to create.  

Who cares if someone else considers an image "cliche".....


----------



## Dikkie (Apr 29, 2013)

runnah said:


> I am a man, I only cry at the death of my dog or war movies.



Poor chihuahua...


----------



## UnknownBro (Apr 29, 2013)

I take pictures for me.  If I like it I'm snapping the photo. If others like it cool; if not oh well I do this for me.


----------



## EIngerson (Apr 29, 2013)

"YOLO, Take the shot."


----------



## pgriz (Apr 29, 2013)

Clichés became clichés because someone took a pretty good photo and others said "oh, that's nice!  I can do that!".  I'm with those who said to take the photo for yourself.  If you really don't want to show a cliché, hang it upside down - that's breaking the "rule" right there.  Self-censorship is a silly thing to do when you're doing art.  As for being hipsters, it's over-rated.  In the 50ies, it was wearing tight-fitting dark pants, and shades, hanging around dark smoky cafés, smoking gitanes, and musing about the inner meaning of Brecht.  In the sixties, it was flowered bell-bottoms, tie-died t-shirts, showers every other month and Jimi Hendrix.  Bonus points if you could wear an Afro.  The seventies witnessed the breakup of the Beatles, death of Elvis, end of the Viet-nam War, Watergate (and the end of Nixon) - If you were a hipster, you kept your head low.  In the eighties, the PC was invented, Ronald Reagan took office, Madonna and Michael Jackson were Queen and King, and nerds ditched their slide-rules for SuperCalc (ask your grandpa).   In the 90ies, we discovered the internet (and internet porn and on-line shopping), cried through the 49th viewing of the Titanic,  and wore scrunchies and tamogotchi games if we were hip.  Also started to understand that the sucking sound we heard was the disappearance of manufacturing jobs to other places.  On the plus side, digital cameras started to enter the marketplace in large numbers.  You were hip if your camera has 4 megapixels AND you had a cell phone.  You were really hip if you understood why 2000 was going to be the end of the world.

Being a hipster is overrated.  Live your life, kiss your spouse and kids, tell them you love them, and admire the sunsets.  Because at some point, there won't be any any more.  And then, all we got are the memories.


----------



## amolitor (Apr 29, 2013)

I think everyone should take whatever pictures make them happy.

I also think people should try to avoid judging others for what photographs make them happy, although judging the work, especially when asked to, is pretty much OK. Judging the work, quietly, with your inside voice or amongst like minded people with quiet snickering it also OK.


----------



## jenko (Apr 29, 2013)

Sometimes cliche images make decent texture layers. 

My absolute favorite cliche shot to hate is the "solitary tree." You know, that agonizingly lonely tree out there in the field, the one that reminds you that we all must die alone. Or perhaps you are more of an idealist, and the tree represents individuality or the power of solitude. 


Whenever you have the urge to photograph a cliche, stop and turn around. Shoot whatever is directly behind you. Don't even change the camera settings, just turn around and shoot away.


----------



## EIngerson (Apr 29, 2013)

I think it's cliche that he didn't take the picture because it's cliche.


----------



## PixelRabbit (Apr 29, 2013)

If you like it shoot it!  Cliches are my happy place, I learned a lot trying them and putting my own spin on them.  Now I revisit water drops and oil and water shoots when I feel down with photography, when things aren't clicking well I use them to refocus myself and make pretty images that make me smile.

There is a reason shots become cliche and that is because they are good shots, if we start eliminating things we can shoot based on whether its been done before we all might as well make ashtrays out of our cameras and find a new hobby.


----------



## The_Traveler (Apr 29, 2013)

Shooting a cliché for technical practice is fine if you need or want to practice but shooting and displaying it is, imo, leaving out the hardest part of the process which is actually attempting to think and create something.


----------



## Benco (Apr 29, 2013)

EIngerson said:


> I think it's cliche that he didn't take the picture because it's cliche.



I said that way before it was fashionable to say such things on this thread.


----------



## PixelRabbit (Apr 29, 2013)

The_Traveler said:


> Shooting a cliché for technical practice is fine if you need or want to practice but shooting and displaying it is, imo, leaving out the hardest part of the process which is actually attempting to think and create something.



Mmmmm I don't know if I can get on board with not displaying these shots and that they require no thought and creation.  I actually find being creative with cliches is a challenge BECAUSE they are cliche, the general public will likely like it just because the visual cues are right, but my goal is to get the photography community to notice them, I think if you can get "those in the know" to like a cliche shot you are successful .

Lets take water drops/oil and water as an example, there are a lot of decisions still to make, background, light, how much, where, where to shoot from, what angle, find a composition, etc... it isn't mindless to take these shots.  As for displaying them, I think there is definitely a place for them.

Young girl's room or a fun decor.






Bathroom, den.







Awesome ipod/phone background (I have it on my ipod).






How about the lone tree, I love the concept and this is my personal take on it, this one is going in my living room. Cliche? Yes, but it's my take on it and I quite like the results.


----------



## runnah (Apr 29, 2013)

The_Traveler said:


> Shooting a cliché for technical practice is fine if you need or want to practice but shooting and displaying it is, imo, leaving out the hardest part of the process which is actually attempting to think and create something.



This is what I was getting at.


----------



## Ilovemycam (Apr 29, 2013)

PixelRabbit said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > Shooting a cliché for technical practice is fine if you need or want to practice but shooting and displaying it is, imo, leaving out the hardest part of the process which is actually attempting to think and create something.
> ...



Those 2 mid bubble shots are nice. I put a copy of the rainbow one in my guest photog portfolio with your name on it. I like showing others all types of work. 

You guys or gals that think too much and quit before you even start will get nowhere. As I told you, do as a street photog does..shoot first ~ think later. 

And if your unhappy with what you do shoot. Make a list of what does interests you and go shoot it.


----------



## Ilovemycam (Apr 29, 2013)

Buckster said:


> amolitor said:
> 
> 
> > I shoot the cliches because most of the time they're actually pretty good pictures.
> ...




Hate? That is BS. All the great artists copied from their predecessors. Just put their own spin on it.


----------



## jenko (Apr 29, 2013)

PixelRabbit said:


> How about the lone tree, I love the concept and this is my personal take on it, this one is going in my living room. Cliche? Yes, but it's my take on it and I quite like the results.






This is definitely of the "we must all die alone" variety. I do like how you processed it. It looks like when you are making a print in the darkroom and you accidentally move the paper while it's being exposed under the overhead projector.


----------



## PixelRabbit (Apr 29, 2013)

jenko said:


> This is definitely of the "we must all die alone" variety. I do like how you processed it. It looks like when you are making a print in the darkroom and you accidentally move the paper while it's being exposed under the overhead projector.





 							Settings: 1/8&#402;/5.6ISO 12800160 mm


----------



## The_Traveler (Apr 29, 2013)

Ilovemycam said:


> That is BS. All the great artists copied from their predecessors. Just put their own spin on it.



This is a common - and ill conceived - trope often used in an attempt to close of the discussion with a win. But it isn't quite correct.
Did Faberge copy a hen's egg when he created his jeweled eggs? Of course not. 
Artists may copy and use forms because a form has symbolism and meaning that comes along with it. 
The form may be very developed - _e.g_ Andy Warhol and his copies of the photograph of Marilyn Monroe - or it may be simple - hen's eggs. 
That which is crucial is what comes afterwards. 
Does the artist imbue the form without enough new and interesting and even insightful to make a significant advance against the original. (Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead for example) 
When a photographer poses high seniors on a railroad track, that cliche isn't added to in any way - and thus the use of its form actually detracts from any impact.

The most obvious use of visual cliche is typical portrait photography with the usually standard poses and standard lighting.
Most studio photographers could save time by just having two stock bodies - male and female - and just swapping heads.


----------



## jwbryson1 (Apr 29, 2013)

picturehappy said:


> This is my photo. There are many like it but this one is mine
> 
> I dunno




Nice pull, Noob.  :mrgreen:


----------



## jwbryson1 (Apr 29, 2013)

I don't shoot photos of the Cherry Blossoms (DC Tidal Basin) in March/April every year because I don't want to look like a tourist...


----------



## Jad (Apr 29, 2013)

It is easy to be influence by a beautiful place and spend your time looking for pretty pictures. If you do photos for travel publications then that is fine. I prefer to get beyond the surface and try to capture how I feel of the subject. Many things can become a distraction to our sense to seeing. Color is one of the biggest for me because I like B&W. So I much prefer to sit and enjoy the special sunset than photograph it.

Image taken yesterday


----------



## cynicaster (Apr 29, 2013)

Yeah, with digital the incremental cost of pressing the shutter is just too low to justify not taking a particular photo due to hipster principles.  Heck, maybe your grandma might appreciate a print of it, even if it makes you cringe.  Worst case is you take it home, review it, and delete it.      

Sincerely,

Matt
President &#8211; Society of Blurred Waterfall Photographers


----------



## spacefuzz (Apr 29, 2013)

The_Traveler said:


> Shooting a cliché for technical practice is fine if you need or want to practice but shooting and displaying it is, imo, leaving out the hardest part of the process which is actually attempting to think and create something.



huh? I call BS on this train of thought. They are creating something for themselves, and so what if they want to show it off?  Who cares if its been shot a billion times.  If its a well done shot others will appreciate it, if its not then the photographer can just appreciate the memory on a personal level. 

All photography is a series of decisions and steps, even if your shooting iconic images in Yosemite valley or another photo of another homeless person on the street you make a series of decisions which involves your creativity and vision for what your going for. I think the idea your not creating something is crass and elitist.


----------



## barbeegirl (Apr 29, 2013)

runnah said:


> amolitor said:
> 
> 
> > Yes. All the time.
> ...



I do the same lol


----------



## barbeegirl (Apr 29, 2013)

Benco said:


> I don't worry about that, if there's something I want to shoot I'll shoot it. Cliche? big deal, I like it, why should I have to conform to some intellectual hair shirt ideal in what I want to shoot.
> 
> Anyway, people turning up their noses at subjects that they consider have been done to death has been around for a very long time, one could say that 'I'm not going to take that photo because it's too cliche' is also a cliche.



Off topic but this reminds me of how I love led zeppelin but my dad who has heard them over and over the years doesn't find it worth listening too anymore.


----------



## spacefuzz (Apr 29, 2013)

Runnah if you want to avoid the cliche, you can always try the method I used this weekend in Antelope Canyon. I have of course seen many images from there over the years, but while planning the trip I didnt do any research on popular compositions, and just explored the place on my own, shooting whatever I saw. At the end of the day I have several "common" images, but I have a lot of stuff that I havnt seen elsewhere as well. Discover the places for yourself, screw the haters


----------



## The_Traveler (Apr 29, 2013)

spacefuzz said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > Shooting a cliché for technical practice is fine if you need or want to practice but shooting and displaying it is, imo, leaving out the hardest part of the process which is actually attempting to think and create something.
> ...





spacefuzz said:


> Runnah if you want to avoid the cliche, you can always try the method I used this weekend in Antelope Canyon. I have of course seen many images from there over the years, but while planning the trip I didnt do any research on popular compositions, and just explored the place on my own, shooting whatever I saw. At the end of the day I have several "common" images, but I have a lot of stuff that I havnt seen elsewhere as well. Discover the places for yourself, screw the haters



Your arguments seem to be based on simple insults 'crass and elitist', 'haters'

Every little child when first toilet-trained thinks that pooping in a potty is incredibly important. While you are perfectly welcome to praise that as much as you like, I am perfectly happy to ignore that little pile of crap.
If enjoying seeing creative efforts is elitist, that's me.
Seeing people shooting the same shot over and over and mistaking a technical effort for an artistic one is boring and wasteful of my time and theirs.

That being said, I do think that shooting pictures of the homeless, that you seem to think is somehow artistic and just fine, is usually cheap, easy and exploitative.


----------



## Mike_E (Apr 29, 2013)

If I want to wear a Fedora while shooting film it's because it's a fine, comfortable hat.

I'm too hip to actually _Be_ hip.





btw, if you're going to shoot a homeless person at least buy them a beer.  And not pbr, that stuff is nasty!


----------



## Derrel (Apr 29, 2013)

The internet and photo sharing sites have caused more cliche proliferation that I ever thought possible. The degree of cliche and parroting and outright re-creating of photos has grown simply ridiculous in some genres.

Horseshoe Bend - Google Search

I could die happy if i NEVER, ever,ever, were forced to see another view of Half Dome again. Same with Horseshoe Bend. WHat makes all the parroting WORSE is the widespread identical equipment people have now...SAME, exact camera, same EXACT lens model, used by sooooooooo many people. Look at how almost identical some of the Horseshoe bend views are. I swear, there are three 4-inch deep holes when one plants his or her tripod feet to make the photos shown in that image search.


----------



## spacefuzz (Apr 29, 2013)

The_Traveler said:


> spacefuzz said:
> 
> 
> > The_Traveler said:
> ...




As a personal opinion, I agree photos of homeless are generally cheap, easy, and exploitive which is why I avoid that photographic style. 

You do come off as elitist, it bothers me because that kind of opinion can harm the enthusiasm of begining photographers who suddenly feel their work is worthless because someone belittles them for not being "creative enough". I think its a bad attitude and all to prevelent in the hobby today. I think we can appreciate the effort of beginers and guide them into being more creative without being demeening. I dont see how this detracts from appreciating or lauding the top tier of photography in any way.


----------



## barbeegirl (Apr 29, 2013)

Derrel said:


> The internet and photo sharing sites have caused more cliche proliferation that I ever thought possible. The degree of cliche and parroting and outright re-creating of photos has grown simply ridiculous in some genres.
> 
> Horseshoe Bend - Google Search
> 
> I could die happy if i NEVER, ever,ever, were forced to see another view of Half Dome again. Same with Horseshoe Bend. WHat makes all the parroting WORSE is the widespread identical equipment people have now...SAME, exact camera, same EXACT lens model, used by sooooooooo many people. Look at how almost identical some of the Horseshoe bend views are. I swear, there are three 4-inch deep holes when one plants his or her tripod feet to make the photos shown in that image search.



Holy cow I just did a simple search and thousands of each came up. This thread really opened my eyes never thought of some of these things before. When looking for a spot to capture I always think of the book tuck everlasting.


----------



## The_Traveler (Apr 29, 2013)

spacefuzz said:


> You do come off as elitist, it bothers me because that kind of opinion can harm the enthusiasm of begining photographers who suddenly feel their work is worthless because someone belittles them for not being "creative enough". I think its a bad attitude and all to prevelent in the hobby today. I think we can appreciate the effort of beginers and guide them into being more creative without being demeening. I dont see how this detracts from appreciating or lauding the top tier of photography in any way.



Two things.

First, you decide to call me names rather than counter my opinion. That gives me the impression that you don't have any counter.
Second, I'm not against beginners, I'm not against learning, what I'm against is the experienced photographers taking the same stuff over and over and portraying it as art.  If there is nothing added to the original concept, it's a technical achievement at most. Finding something new to say with one's pictures is difficult and I think that's why many, if not most just give up being creative and try to be perfect as some achievement.
That is what the wrong goal - teaching people to be pixel peepers, to see technical perfection as a laudable goal. It's like a sculptor being excited about the lack of porosity of a casting or a woodcarver loving the sharpness of a blade; that's not the end point here. 

I'd rather see a botched attempt at being creative than yet another perfect picture of a wall or a building or a senior on a railroad track. 

These damn stupid pictures where inevitably someone pipes up that what the photographer needs is fill flash. 

Technology has conquered most of the issues that plagued photographers, now we are free to capture what we think we see without worrying so much about focus and processing and printing.
Hell, what the photographer needs is a basic idea of how to run a camera and then the ability to interact with the subject as a person so that person and that personality comes through the lens - not the frigid still pictures we see here. Or to actually see the beauty around him or her and then work towards its capture or creation. 
Our cameras are damn near magic and yet we perseverate on technical crap.

We see a great movie. Is it the cameraman who gets the credit or the director?
We need to be the directors of our photography.


----------



## amolitor (Apr 29, 2013)

It depends on what you want to DO.

Some people just want pictures of their kids. I do, for sure.

Some people want to record what they see, and try to communicate how they feel. That's cool. It might or might not involved cliches. Sometimes we feel cliched. If everyone feels pretty much the same way when the see the Eiffel Tower, maybe they'll all make pretty much the same picture. Who am I to judge?

Some people view being able to simply reproduce existing photographs with a fair degree of precision as a worthy goal. There's nothing wrong with this. It's basically a technical challenge, not an artistic one, but so what? A challenge is a challenge, regardless of the form.

Some people want to create something new, that's ok too. It's basically an artistic challenge and in the land of photography quite a difficult one. We're seen.. a lot of what there is to see already. In certain pretty broad areas, "all" the photographs have been made, in some meaningful sense.

Lots of people basically enjoy more or less undirected screwing around with cameras. That's cool.

Of all the above and all the other possibilities, there is is basically one (1) that fits me. Maybe two. I tend to disdain other approaches to photography -- but when I do, I am wrong.


----------



## The_Traveler (Apr 29, 2013)

amolitor said:


> - but when I do, I am wrong.



No you're not, you are representing exactly your preference.
I am totally bored by most pictures of buildings, flowers, ball games, etc until I get to see the really good ones.
And I am completely disinterested in trying to do them.
If I were to just gooosh over stuff I don't like, I'd be lying to someone.

It's OK to have likes and dislikes and it is surely OK to express them.


----------



## Ilovemycam (Apr 29, 2013)

barbeegirl said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > The internet and photo sharing sites have caused more cliche proliferation that I ever thought possible. The degree of cliche and parroting and outright re-creating of photos has grown simply ridiculous in some genres.
> ...



2 billion pix a week to Facebook. Tumblr has another half a billion a week. World is just polluted with pix.

Does not matter. None of you or me will ever reach the top pinnacle of succes with our pics. Should that stop us?? No, do what you love. 

Keep your eye and trigger finger in shape... shoot like hell!


----------



## Ilovemycam (Apr 29, 2013)

barbeegirl said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > amolitor said:
> ...



I've never done water drops. Would like to shoot in the rain though. I did some train tracks. I just shoot what catches my eye.


----------



## Ilovemycam (Apr 29, 2013)

amolitor said:


> It depends on what you want to DO.
> 
> Some people just want pictures of their kids. I do, for sure.
> 
> ...




Good rundown, all true. No excuse is needed to pick up a cam. 

Bresson said we need a finger an eye and 2 legs to be a street photog.


----------



## Ilovemycam (Apr 29, 2013)

The_Traveler said:


> spacefuzz said:
> 
> 
> > You do come off as elitist, it bothers me because that kind of opinion can harm the enthusiasm of begining photographers who suddenly feel their work is worthless because someone belittles them for not being "creative enough". I think its a bad attitude and all to prevelent in the hobby today. I think we can appreciate the effort of beginers and guide them into being more creative without being demeening. I dont see how this detracts from appreciating or lauding the top tier of photography in any way.
> ...




Not exactly true with the tech.

While our current tech is far beyond what we shot with in the stone age. The cams do not compose the pix nor capture the decisive moment. Although they are using video cams for that now...to 'distill a still' of the decisive moment.

Vast majority of what is on these forums is poor... as far as 'high quality keeper / portfolio photographs' is concerned. And if the tech is great on the forums, the pix are boring as hell...glorified snapshots. (I seldom say anyhting, I'd rather encourage others to keep trying.) I just sift through the garbage to find a few gems every so often.

Star trails are all over. (I don't shoot them, no timer and never tried.) I saw one that caught my eye, but I lost track before I could save it. It distinguished itself from the hundreds of others by the star trails being in rainbow colors. That is how you do it...be above the crowd.

Same with levitation BS. I found a couple of decent ones on Google images. (I don't do them myself. I don't know how to do them anyway.) But I will show a few in my guest photog portfolio to others that like photography. Something to add to a well rounded book. 80% to 90% of what I have in the guest portfolio is along the lines of my speciality...street / doc pix.

Botched great pix _versus_ perfect boring pix? You can crap up a great pix pretty bad and still have a museum piece.

Look at this messed up gem from MEM...

http://www.bulgergallery.com/dynami..._a_Wall_Central_Park_New_York_Cit_2125_41.jpg


----------



## The_Traveler (Apr 29, 2013)

You are posting opinions a lot, but no pictures.


----------



## sleist (Apr 29, 2013)

Derrel said:


> The internet and photo sharing sites have caused more cliche proliferation that I ever thought possible. The degree of cliche and parroting and outright re-creating of photos has grown simply ridiculous in some genres.
> 
> Horseshoe Bend - Google Search
> 
> I could die happy if i NEVER, ever,ever, were forced to see another view of Half Dome again. Same with Horseshoe Bend. WHat makes all the parroting WORSE is the widespread identical equipment people have now...SAME, exact camera, same EXACT lens model, used by sooooooooo many people. Look at how almost identical some of the Horseshoe bend views are. I swear, there are three 4-inch deep holes when one plants his or her tripod feet to make the photos shown in that image search.



This is why I love the work of William Eggleston, or Alec Soth, or Hin Chua to name just few.  You can't parrot vision.

At the same time, one should not be shamed by taking a beautiful photo of something - cliche or not.  Photography is about capturing what you see.  A slice of your life.  Attempting to share how you see the world around you and maybe, if your lucky, allowing others to feel what you felt when you saw.  If you're worried about being cliche, then you care too much how others see you.  Such insecurity is what stifles creativity.  It's the fear of cliche that will make you a boring photographer.  It means you're afraid to be you.


----------



## kundalini (Apr 29, 2013)

barbeegirl said:


> Off topic but this reminds me of how I love led zeppelin but my dad who has heard them over and over the years doesn't find it worth listening too anymore.


Quickly, go check his pulse.  He may be dead without realizing it.


----------



## runnah (Apr 29, 2013)

kundalini said:


> Quickly, go check his pulse.  He may be dead without realizing it.



Pretty sure I could never hear stairway to heaven again and be fine.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 29, 2013)

kundalini said:


> barbeegirl said:
> 
> 
> > Off topic but this reminds me of how I love led zeppelin but my dad who has heard them over and over the years doesn't find it worth listening too anymore.
> ...



Led Zep was fine back in the 1970's. BY the end 1990's everything in their catalog sounded, and was, indeed, old and outdated. They were however a very good band. They had a great run, but just as Miss America 1969 is not young and sexy and fresh enough today to be crowned Miss America 2013, there are many photographic efforts that merit just about the same yawning attention and unruffled observance as yet another rendition of Stairway To Heaven on the oldies rock radio station.

What's weird is that oldies rock radio plays "almost" the same playlists today as it did in the early 1980's! NOT kidding either...it's like an entire generation of listeners are stuck in a time warp. Maybe the same is true of many photographers?


----------



## amolitor (Apr 29, 2013)

The_Traveler said:


> amolitor said:
> 
> 
> > - but when I do, I am wrong.
> ...



There's a fine line between expressing preferences and making personal attacks. I try to stay on the one side "I don't like your pictures" and avoid the other "You are a terrible person who should not be permitted near a camera". I often feel the latter, which makes it hard to say the former without some prejudice leaking through.


----------



## amolitor (Apr 29, 2013)

Also, the fact is that this forum tends to be pretty technically oriented.

If you're really interested in good photography, there are other forums out there where they really try to think about those things. They're rare, simply because technophiles are more common on the internet than actually sophisticated art lovers.

So, anyways, TPF is what it is because it's populated by people who are interested in technique more than art. That's not a sin, technique is certainly a thing to be interested in. I'm interested in it, a bit. So you get a lot of seniors on railroad tracks, and discussion about how to "correctly" shoot the senior on a railroad track. It's a technique, it's a technique used to create a product, a product which sells. That's a fine thing. A fine thing I'm pretty uninterested in, but harping on about how uninteresting I find it, and why, and how stupid everyone else is isn't something I feel is a great use of my time.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 29, 2013)

amolitor said:


> Also, the fact is that this forum tends to be pretty technically oriented.
> 
> If you're really interested in good photography, there are other forums out there where they really try to think about those things. They're rare, simply because technophiles are more common on the internet than actually sophisticated art lovers.
> 
> So, anyways, TPF is what it is because it's populated by people who are interested in technique more than art. That's not a sin, technique is certainly a thing to be interested in. I'm interested in it, a bit. So you get a lot of seniors on railroad tracks, and discussion about how to "correctly" shoot the senior on a railroad track. It's a technique, it's a technique used to create a product, a product which sells. That's a fine thing. A fine thing I'm pretty uninterested in, but *harping on about how uninteresting I find it, and why, and how stupid everyone else is isn't something I feel is a great use of my time.*



But Lew likes to harp on that kind of stuff, and tell us how uttlerly boring anything except street photos are... ;-)

We gotta face it...almost EVERYTHING in this world has already "been done to death".


----------



## amolitor (Apr 29, 2013)

It's true that "all the photos" have been made, with a couple of exceptions, among them:

- unique events (THIS wedding hasn't been shot, although many similar ones have been)
- portraits (for pretty strong scientific reasons there's a pretty much bottomless well of novelty in portraits)
- collections and collages

The last is particularly interesting to me. Even if every picture has been made, not every picture has been put down next to every other picture. It has the interesting property of asking the question "do *I* even need to take the photos, or can I just appropriate suitable already-made images?"


----------



## Derrel (Apr 29, 2013)

amolitor said:
			
		

> SNIP>>>the interesting property of asking the question "do *I* even need to take the photos, or can I just appropriate suitable already-made images?"



*Pinterest* would tell you that NO,there is no longer any need to take one's own pictures...there are PLENTY there to steal. Ermm, I meant, "to appropriate".


----------



## amolitor (Apr 29, 2013)

I think of it as "sampling"!

Actually I'm totally uninteresting in appropriating, and (obviously) I am setting aside the issues of copyright entirely here. This is about creating new art, not about the law.


----------



## spacefuzz (Apr 29, 2013)

The_Traveler said:


> spacefuzz said:
> 
> 
> > You do come off as elitist, it bothers me because that kind of opinion can harm the enthusiasm of begining photographers who suddenly feel their work is worthless because someone belittles them for not being "creative enough". I think its a bad attitude and all to prevelent in the hobby today. I think we can appreciate the effort of beginers and guide them into being more creative without being demeening. I dont see how this detracts from appreciating or lauding the top tier of photography in any way.
> ...



If you were offended by elitist, then by all means come up with a synonym because offense was not the point. I like though that questioning you has forced you to expand on your thoughts because at least I can see where you are coming from now. 

I still feel your wrong though due to the basic principle that creativity is a nebulous concept at best and is a continually evolving "idea" depending on the skill of the photographer.  What may seem extremely creative to the beginer no longer seems creative to you or me, but is that because we have done it and lost perspective on what it feels like to not know?  If you look back at your old images are there shots where you were trying to be creative but in the end were imititing someone elses concept, perhaps without conciously realizing it? Or using someone elses concept in what you feel is a different way?  Does that negate the "creativity" in your mind?

Yes the image content needs to be the initial priority when composing an image, but it cant be all their is. The focus on tech is because with all of these tools it opens up new possabilities for image creation. And due to the increased quantity of photographers in the market, competition requires precision and quality for the top level, its what diffarentiates them from the rest and thats not a trivial point.  The people I shoot with are absolutely meticulous with all aspects of in camera and post processing to make sure its the best that it can be, because quality is part of the process. They couldnt make 8 ft prints if they didnt have the quality to sell it.


----------



## Jad (Apr 29, 2013)

Photography is supposed to be fun. If you are having fun you will make good pictures, for you and no one else. Don't fall in the trap that you need to copy someone else to be a good photographer. I like B&W and images that have a little sense of mystery to them, Does that mean I haven't taken thousands of pretty sunsets photos? Of course not. And are they as meaningful to me as some of my other images? No, but they do record the end of beautiful day lived. I have found in my years of photographing that some people become so critical of style and technique that they end up talking a lot while their camera sits in the closet. Just keep taking pictures and you will find the ones that make you happy.


----------



## Benco (Apr 29, 2013)

Derrel said:


> Led Zep was fine back in the 1970's. BY the end 1990's everything in their catalog sounded, and was, indeed, old and outdated. They were however a very good band. They had a great run, but just as Miss America 1969 is not young and sexy and fresh enough today to be crowned Miss America 2013, there are many photographic efforts that merit just about the same yawning attention and unruffled observance as yet another rendition of Stairway To Heaven on the oldies rock radio station.
> 
> What's weird is that oldies rock radio plays "almost" the same playlists today as it did in the early 1980's! NOT kidding either...it's like an entire generation of listeners are stuck in a time warp. Maybe the same is true of many photographers?



I'm listening to Lead Zep right now...on itunes.....I feel so old.


----------



## bentcountershaft (Apr 29, 2013)

Can't believe some people not digging Zeppelin anymore.  For shame.  I get that they have some songs that are way overplayed.  That's just the ways of the corporate world.  

Ignore these twelve songs: 

Whole Lotta Love
Ramble On
Stairway to Heaven
Black Dog
When the Levee Breaks
Rock and Roll
All of My Love
Fool in the Rain
Kashmir
The Ocean
The Immigrant Song
Dazed and Confused

And spend a week exploring the other 74 songs they gave us.  A few to start with:

Hots on for Nowhere
Friends
Poor Tom
Black Country Woman
Ten Years Gone
In My Time of Dying
Since I've Been Loving You
How Many More Times

I could literally go on and on but I won't.  The first set of songs are all excellent, but through no fault of their own they have been overplayed.  However, there are dozens that haven't and most of them are very good.  Not a lot of crap in their discography, hell, even Hot Dog is fun to listen to every once in a while.


Now, back to the subject while still keeping music relevant.  When someone is learning to play an instrument, be it a guitar or whatever, they start out playing cliches.  Scales and easy songs like Smoke on the Water and Iron Man.  Some of these people have fun playing these covers and advancing on to more difficult ones while putting their own spin on them.  These people are called musicians and there is nothing wrong with that.  Some people learn the basics of songwriting from these early songs and start doing their own stuff as soon as possible.  These people are called songwriters and again, there is nothing wrong with that.

Musicians however usually can only go so far.  If you want to make steady money playing music there isn't a much better way than being in a popular cover band.  You won't get rich or famous, but if your group is good enough, professional enough and willing to work a lot you can make a living at it.  On the other hand, if you want to create something the world has never heard and take the risk of being dead broke for the rest of your life just for the chance of fortune and fame, you better be a songwriter.


----------



## Mike_E (Apr 29, 2013)

Derrel said:


> amolitor said:
> 
> 
> > Also, the fact is that this forum tends to be pretty technically oriented.
> ...




Sex has been done to death too



although, that doesn't seem to be stopping anybody.







me included!


----------



## Overread (Apr 29, 2013)

amolitor said:


> Also, the fact is that this forum tends to be pretty technically oriented.
> 
> If you're really interested in good photography, there are other forums out there where they really try to think about those things. They're rare, simply because technophiles are more common on the internet than actually sophisticated art lovers.
> 
> So, anyways, TPF is what it is because it's populated by people who are interested in technique more than art. That's not a sin, technique is certainly a thing to be interested in. I'm interested in it, a bit. So you get a lot of seniors on railroad tracks, and discussion about how to "correctly" shoot the senior on a railroad track. It's a technique, it's a technique used to create a product, a product which sells. That's a fine thing. A fine thing I'm pretty uninterested in, but harping on about how uninteresting I find it, and why, and how stupid everyone else is isn't something I feel is a great use of my time.



I think TPF partly gets its heavy tech side because its also beginner focused - and many beginners generally need to learn their aperture from their ISO before they can progress toward artistic application of the method. I also agree, the internet does attract the more technical minded people over the more artistic (even the artistic tend to have a stronger technical approach to their artwork - that isn't saying its lesser it means they tend to be more method and technical aware). 

We've always welcomed artistic discussion and indeed we've had some great topics on it. The problem tends to be that, sadly, many discussions on artistic method get  trapped in the argument between:

"It's art you just feel it man you can't teach/learn/study it" and the "It's got RULES MAN you gotta follow the rules!" (with a special note that the latter group tends to just know rule of 3rds )

It tends to mean that many art discussions, instead of focusing upon the art and understanding, instead end up in the same old fight and debate - which mostly is just rehashing old ground.


----------



## manaheim (Apr 29, 2013)

I usually take the cliché shot just to say I've done it.  Then I delete them all and smash the memory card.

Oh and hey... another runnah thread.


----------



## runnah (Apr 29, 2013)

manaheim said:


> I usually take the cliché shot just to say I've done it.  Then I delete them all and smash the memory card.
> 
> Oh and hey... another runnah thread.


----------



## Rafterman (Apr 29, 2013)

I'm such a unique individual, that I refuse to post in this thread because all of you have already done it.









_Dammit._


----------



## Qveon (May 1, 2013)

runnah said:


> Ilovemycam said:
> 
> 
> > OP, what you going to do?
> ...


Well don't go to any type of class. Everyone paints the same thing you are. You'd be cliche by just attending a cliche class teaching cliche.


----------



## pgriz (May 1, 2013)

Creativity comes in many forms.  Sometimes, a shot presents itself to us, a moment of serendipity when everything comes together and all we have to do is to capture it.  Not too often, but it happens.  Then there are the almost-there shots where knowing the skills will pull a great shot out of a pretty good shot.  And since the sun rose and set many times before our ancestors even crawled out of the slime, there is probably very little in nature (and I include the human world within that) that hasn't been seen at least a couple of million times already.

We also have to couple that with our propensity to repeat the same phraseology (whether visual or oral) to express an idea.  "been there, done that", "did it, got the t-shirt", "checked off on the bucket list"...  and so on.  So clichés in visual expression are as ubiquitous as in oral expression.  Yet to say the same thing using different words, without using phrases that we already heard many times before...  is not so straightforward.  Yet - is it even necessary?  I've said "I love you" to my family thousands of times, and it does not lessen the sweetness of the feeling to say it once again.  Perhaps that is the real issue - what is the feeling behind the cliché?  If it is there, if it comes naturally, then it has as much right to exist as any other expression.  By contrast, the contrived novelty is something that may initially excite, but if it is not backed up by substance (of insight, of new perspective), then it becomes another cheap attempt to pander to our superficial hunger for newness.


----------



## IByte (May 1, 2013)

Everybody needs to start somewhere.  Most of those cliches IMO, is a good foundation for people to find their own style regardless of the genre they want to specialize in. 

 Those "stencils" - for a lack of a better term- are classic examples to follow before branching out.

Once people become more proficient in finding their style,  they can reapproach the shoot what they began with an apply their style.  So no I don't beleve in cliche, just a different perspective.


----------



## cynicaster (May 1, 2013)

bentcountershaft said:


> Can't believe some people not digging Zeppelin anymore.  For shame.  I get that they have some songs that are way overplayed.  That's just the ways of the corporate world.
> 
> Ignore these twelve songs:
> 
> ...



You forgot Out on the Tiles in the second list.  

Seriously though, for me, some bands are just best left in the past.  There is no denying that Led Zeppelin was a monumentally talented and historically significant band--and it could be argued that Jimmy Page is responsible for just about every great rock guitar riff ever--but even great songs wear thin after a while, and with no new Led Zep material coming out, that means their shelf life is inherently limited.  There was a time that I used to listen to _nothing but_ Zeppelin, and not just the cheesy bandwagon radio hits either.  These days, I think I'd rather listen to my parents do the nasty than listen to Zeppelin, because I'm _that_ burned out on the stuff.  There is so much other music out there to listen to, yet some people just get to a point/age where their brain just shuts down in its ability to process any new music, so they listen to the same 10--maybe 20--albums for the rest of their life, and justify it with lazy sweeping generalizations like "all music started to suck after <insert arbitrary year here>!".   Most of the time, they're referring to the stuff that gets radio play, like Nickelback and other such deplorable chud, and if that were the only music available they'd be right.  But it's not.  Not by a long shot.


----------

