Please yourself only?

Christopher Walrath · Jan 4, 2008

You know, upon thinking things through and read and posting to a thread begun by our new brother, Jamusu, it occurs to oneself that I do not make photographs to please myself. I truly think I make them to discover and to experience myself. Let me explain. I sometimes get shoved down in the daily hustle, not only in my surroundings but also in my own existance. I lose myself to some extent. I become something that I am not. I conform. Emotionally, ideally, to some extent I try to fit in. But when I am creating, photographing et al., I am searching for an emotional self-connection that I have forgotten even exists, let alone how it feels. But when I see that one subject and know, and KNOW beyond knowing that I have truly witnessed something that is beyond me, exhiliration. Plain and pure, unadulterated ecsatasy. The emotion that I feel both thrills my core and slams a hole through my soul in the knowledge that my rapture will be but a fleeting moment that I may never regain for as long as I live. And I remember the emotion, though the circumstances of that emotion may fade, I remember how I felt. Not just the feeling I had but how it felt to be truly me.

Pete Millson · Feb 18, 2008

Alden said:
I no longer have aspirations for recognition, yet I wonder if I am being remiss if I do not adjust my imagery, somewhat at least, to the march of time. If my work is slated to hang on my walls only, you would think, please yourself only.
Yet I have my doubts. Postmodern works have progressed, whether we like them another matter, and I have to feel that I have fallen into a stodgy corner. I work easily and naturally and have relied on the belief that a deepening would occure in and of itself. But now I'm not so sure that it will. Where's the question here... I suppose it's this, Do we owe it to ourselves to stay up to date and take contempory ideas seriously? Or do we accept the challenge of mining our own territory, albeit influenced by others work of the past? Another good topic would be, how to make something really our own.

Hello.

For me, your job as a photographer is to record the world as you see it in the time you're here. That's all you can do. Learning how to work the controls takes years but once you've learned, your job is to look and see. Contemporary ideas usually arise when people have forgotten their simple task. Whenever I get in a creative rut it's always because I've been sidetracked by advertising (cameras) or fashions (techniques).

PETE.

arigram · Feb 18, 2008

When I create art, I please myself.
I only think of pleasing others during sex.

Black Dog · Feb 18, 2008

Go and read Art and Fear by David Bayles and Ted Orland-a fantastic book about these and many related photographic issues. Then have a look at Beauty In Photography and Why People Photograph by Robert Adams. And enjoy what you have rather than worrying about what you don't have.

MurrayMinchin · Feb 18, 2008

arigram said:
When I create art, I please myself.
I only think of pleasing others during sex.

It's so good to have you back, oh Prince of Pleasure

Murray

arigram · Feb 19, 2008

To expand on my point, creating art is like a weird case of masturbation where you actually get pregnant and have a baby yourself. How you are pleasing yourself and how the baby looks like, is all up to you.
So, others need not apply.

(I imagine now some people will immediately cease to create art after this metaphor)

Tomasz Segiet · Mar 9, 2008

To relate to two of the issues from those above.

1. Is the maker excluded from the pleasure and the meaning of his own creations?

I think that, in many aspects, yes he is excluded. First thing is, that even a success, same as a failure, should probably be a motive to move on. If you celebrate your successes or moan about failures, you lose time. It is one of the reasons why some of my photos I considered "good" some time ago do not make me satisfied/happy/proud anymore; not that I progressed so much that now I see what whas lacking, but I got my share of joy - and they are sort of exploited. Second, as the existence of the whole critical industry shows, there is always infinitely more in an "artwork" than an artist could have thought about - especially if enough critics, for one or another reason, get interested in him.
And there is the Romantic myth of an artist as divinely inspired superhuman individual, messiah of sorts, etc. etc. If you want to flatter yourself, you may think along these lines.

2. About being an artist, or being gifted.

Obviously we are not all gifted, although the very idea of "gift" is a bit suspicious. And it is very easy to understand, and could be hard to live with, in the modern world, where you can instanteously compare yourself to a practically infinite number of other "artists", by browsing the apug for example. What I would consider a gift (being aware of all the traps and cliches of the Romantism as above) is almost always a mania, connected with some kind of suffering (for example, an inability to convey one's fears, thoughts, ideas to others); and always a mixed blessing. Of course, if it is not a gift for producing postcards. But, nevermind how gifted or not one is, in his particular life artistic development (if it is driven by a real passion(?)) does have a place. It is not very important from what level does it start or where it would finally end, as long as it is a part of a project that could be called "personality", one of consciously shaping a person, not a nobody.

My 2c.

DanielOB · Mar 15, 2008

Alden
" no longer have aspirations for recognition, yet I wonder if I am being remiss if I do not adjust my imagery, somewhat at least, to the march of time. If my work is slated to hang on my walls only, you would think, please yourself only.
Yet I have my doubts. Postmodern works have progressed, whether we like them another matter, and I have to feel that I have fallen into a stodgy corner. I work easily and naturally and have relied on the belief that a deepening would occure in and of itself. But now I'm not so sure that it will. Where's the question here... I suppose it's this, Do we owe it to ourselves to stay up to date and take contempory ideas seriously? Or do we accept the challenge of mining our own territory, albeit influenced by others work of the past? Another good topic would be, how to make something really our own."
----------
So this is my story:
Jack was chief of music band. He came one morning and said to the rest of his band: Willy left us, he want to work for himself only.
After a while, one member said: Mr. Jack I visited yesterday Willy. He compose himself, he is his own boss, he record all his songs himself, and he is the only one that listen it.

www.Leica-R.com

clay · Mar 16, 2008

It is tempting to use the 'pleasing yourself' metric as the only necessary yardstick. But then you think about other aspects of life that involve pleasing yourself, and you realize that the satisfaction is fleeting and the fulfillment lacking.

JosephineIsJosephine · Mar 17, 2008

I'd like to tell a story here, but it might be a little off topic (bear with me), and ... I'm lazy and my English's not that good ... besides, I don't know if it is of any help. so I'll try to make it short:

From the age of 15 onwards I've been writing. Every day. It was fun, it made me happy, it was my life. I was totally ignorant of the fact, that there were other people who wrote, and that they were people who wrote and whose work was published and people who wrote just to have it published.

But some (sad) day, I realized. And that was where it all started to go wrong ... I think ever since my creativity has been struggling with my lack of confidence.

You may know these thoughts: Why should I write when I don't ever show it to anyone? Why should I take a picture as long as I'm not the next Ansel Adams?

These quesions sound really silly, but when it comes to writing, there's still that thing in my head telling me I shouldn't dare to write anything as long as it isn't eligible for the Nobel prize for literature or something.

For some years, every book I read made me feel bad. Either because I thought it was good I was sure I would never manage to write smth like this or because it was so bad that I was sure I could have done it better but I didn't.

I promised myself this won't happen with photography too ... (thanks for reminding me).

Every self-help book I've read says you shouldn't compare yourself or what you do with others und judge it in terms of some kind of "quality". It's difficult, but I know people who do it.

By the way, my "solution" was to switch to photography . It's a relief to be able to say: "I'm only a beginner".

But ... I guess you're problem is not very similar to mine. (ok ... so why did I post it? I don't know.)

Oh and, about being gifted: I don't think that something like that exists.

Is it possible that a deepening of your work has in fact occurred and you're too close to see it?

How about picking the best and the worst photo of every year you shot and posting them?

keithwms · Mar 17, 2008

Nobody works in a vacuum. People are influenced and they do also influence others. So I just don't see how the ideal of working only to please onesself is even possible...? Indeed one can try, but... it's just not possible to isolate our own work in that way, in my opinion. Even if it were possible, would it be healthy?! Doesn't pleasing yourself too much make you go blind?

Michael A. Smith · Apr 10, 2008

There have been many wonderful responses here and I won't, in my own words, repeat them. I will try to deal with what I gather is the main problem you seem to have, which is that though you keep photographing you do not feel your emotional self in your photographs.

I will venture a guess herea guess from reading between the lines onlybecause I have not seen your photographs, except for the one that accompanies your posts. My guess is that you are trying to make "good pictures." Even though you are photographing to please yourself, I will guess that your unconscious understanding is that good pictures will do that. But no growth is taking place. You are just making "good pictures." And you know what a "good picture" is and are photographing what you already knowsomething that does not lead to personal growth.

The point of making photographs, or making any art, is to grow. And in photography, one grows by photographing what one does not know. Ideally, every photograph you make should present a challengeone that says, "I don't know if this will be any good." One's photographs, especially when looked at over the years, are a marker of one's personal growth, or lack thereof.

How to break out of the rut of photographing only what you already know, which is what most photographers do, even many of the great ones? (John Szarkowski wrote in Looking at Photographs that "the genuinely creative period of most photographers has rarely exceeded ten or fifteen years.") The answer is to use the camera as a tool for discovery rather than for confirmation. Easier said than done, perhaps, but I hope you understand what I mean.

Ed Sukach · Apr 10, 2008

JC

Tomasz Segiet said:
Obviously we are not all gifted,...

I disagree. I think we are ALL gifted and capable of unimaginably GREAT art!

Unfortunately, there are massive forces around us that try, and for the most part, succeed, in keeping those "gifts" locked within us. Think of all the voices we have heard along this way: "What? These aren't any good!", "You don't know what is good!!", "You NEED to be excoriated and HUMILIATED by sharp (read: sadistic) critique..." "Horses are not blue ...", all with the effect of keeping us down.

Julia Cameron in "The Artists Way":
Do not worry about the work being good. The real danger is that it will not BE.

Ed Sukach · Apr 10, 2008

I produce work to satisfy my own idea/ls in photography.

That does NOT, nor is it mant to, infer any amount of exclusivity. I *love* to share my work with others, and if I find someone who shares, and is moved by a like "vision" I consider that a great discovery.

It should be noted that my MOTIVATION is not primarily ... or even secondarily ... or even ... in satisfying others. Let them produce their own images.

This, really has come about because of necessity. It is the only motivation I've found that allows me to produce my "best" work.

Ed Sukach · Apr 11, 2008

JosephineIsJosephine said:
I'd like to tell a story here, but it might be a little off topic (bear with me), and ... I'm lazy and my English's not that good ... besides, I don't know if it is of any help. so I'll try to make it short:
From the age of 15 onwards I've been writing. Every day. It was fun, it made me happy, it was my life. I was totally ignorant of the fact, that there were other people who wrote, and that they were people who wrote and whose work was published and people who wrote just to have it published.

Not "off topic".

But some (sad) day, I realized. And that was where it all started to go wrong ... I think ever since my creativity has been struggling with my lack of confidence.

You may know these thoughts: Why should I write when I don't ever show it to anyone? Why should I take a picture as long as I'm not the next Ansel Adams?

These questions sound really silly, ...

They are NOT "silly. This is, for the most part, the Black Beast we all face.

but when it comes to writing, there's still that thing in my head telling me I shouldn't dare to write anything as long as it isn't eligible for the Nobel prize for literature or something.

The time involved in the above statement: "You don't because when you do..." - but you cannot know that until AFTER you have written the work...

I'll ask you one question... Why are you so certain you KNOW that any of your work is a "failure"?

I. for one, would LOVE to read your "imperfect" work. Where can I get a copy?

eddym · Apr 11, 2008

Michael A. Smith said:
There have been many wonderful responses here and I won't, in my own words, repeat them. I will try to deal with what I gather is the main problem you seem to have, which is that though you keep photographing you do not feel your emotional self in your photographs.

I will venture a guess herea guess from reading between the lines onlybecause I have not seen your photographs, except for the one that accompanies your posts. My guess is that you are trying to make "good pictures." Even though you are photographing to please yourself, I will guess that your unconscious understanding is that good pictures will do that. But no growth is taking place. You are just making "good pictures." And you know what a "good picture" is and are photographing what you already knowsomething that does not lead to personal growth.

The point of making photographs, or making any art, is to grow. And in photography, one grows by photographing what one does not know. Ideally, every photograph you make should present a challengeone that says, "I don't know if this will be any good." One's photographs, especially when looked at over the years, are a marker of one's personal growth, or lack thereof.

How to break out of the rut of photographing only what you already know, which is what most photographers do, even many of the great ones? (John Szarkowski wrote in Looking at Photographs that "the genuinely creative period of most photographers has rarely exceeded ten or fifteen years.") The answer is to use the camera as a tool for discovery rather than for confirmation. Easier said than done, perhaps, but I hope you understand what I mean.

Michael, may I quote you? I'd like to put your inspiring words in our art guild's monthly newsletter.

Ed Sukach · Apr 11, 2008

Once, a student of photography came to me with what she considered to be a daunting assignment: "Go ye forth. and make a photograph of something never sen before."

I immediately thought of exposing a piece of paper to ambient light and processing it to complete "black." She/ we could claim that it was a photograph of a "black hole" - never "seen before" and not seen now ... but being seen now was not a part of the assignment.

However ...
In reflecting, every image we make is "one never seen before". It is impossible to duplicate, perfectly, any image. Even if we use the same tripod holes, the cloud configuration, leaf patterns, lighting quantity and direction - infinite characteristics - will not be exactly the same.

Additionally, and even more significantly, WE change. To me, there is no question that our visions are influenced, to some degree, by our experiences. We see things differently today than we did yesterday ... and I'm having real difficulty in recalling any instance when that change was a "bad" thing.

I call that "growth". It is inevitable. Whether or not that growth satisfies someone else's timetable for advancement - or even if it should - or COULD - are additional cans of worms.

"Shoot, shoot, and shoot some more. It will come. IT WILL!" - Stillman Clarke.

Michael A. Smith · Apr 11, 2008

Eddym: Permission granted. I feel honored.

I could write much more about these things, and have on posts several years ago in the APUG forums.

A well-known curator asked me and my wife, Paula Chamlee, to write a book about photographic vision and how to keep one's genuinely creative period ongoing, but alas, we haven't the time. One of these days . . .

Michael

JosephineIsJosephine · Apr 12, 2008

Thanks, Ed.

Well, this is really offtopic, but in writing, writing something down isn't enough, you need to reread it and rewrite it and "develop" it ... which is difficult if you don't even dare to have a second look after you've written it down. so, to answer your question, I think what I wrote is not as good as it could be, basically because I'm too afraid to revise it.

for me, the lucky thing about (analog) photography is that there is a pause between shooting and actually seeing what you shot. in the days between you've time to scale down your expectations .

Ed Sukach said:
Julia Cameron in "The Artists Way":
Do not worry about the work being good. The real danger is that it will not BE.

A highly recommendable book, by the way.
I think I should work with it again - and everybody who thinks "we're not all gifted" and "I'm not worth being an artist" should get a copy.

abstraxion · Jul 19, 2009

Because it's fun and it's something to do? Why does anyone do anything?

moouers · Oct 7, 2010

If my work pleases me, then I have captured the emotion or feeling or idea I felt when I took the image, which basically means someone else out there will feel what I felt as well.

So yes, I please myself only. Keep in mind I do not run a photography business based upon customer satisfaction.

hugopoon · Oct 9, 2010

Have never been bothered about other people not liking my photos. I'm happy if I can please myself, and if I like it, I upload it.

Please yourself only?

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency