Are Australians very good photographers on a whole?

[Lance B]

What particular photos are you talking about, Jim?

Being a birder, I look at the birding images from overseas and see many more great images, but they also have a more abundant bird population with many more diverse birds than we have here. Not only that, most of these birds are "exotic" to us/me and I find many of them more pleasing than most of our birds simply because they are "exotic". Technically, the overseas bird photos aren't any better, just that theyu may seem more pleasing because they are "exotic" and different to ours.

The same goes for landscape/architecture photos from overseas, where there are many more "exotic" locations compared to us and this has the effect of us thinking that they are better shots when in fact technically they no better then what I see from Australians as a whole, just that many of the photos are of exotic and exciting locations.

I remember having a young German guy stay with us for a few months on a 12 month working holiday going around Australia, he was the son of one of my suppliers. I asked him why he visited Australia for his 12 month holiday as he had Europe right on his doorstep with all that fantastic scenery, castles, churches, cathedrals and history in general. He replied that it is not that interesting to him because he lives with it every day, they basically hibernate for 6 months a year in winter and to him what is exciting is the wide open spaces, not crowded, beaches, sunshine all year round etc. He thinks my photos of Australia were exciting, much better than my Europe photos!

It's depends on your persepctive, so to speak!

[fillum]

I don't know what sites you are referring to Jim, but from what I've seen most of those overseas 'better quality photo' sites (for lack of a better expression) have member photographers from all around the world, which would include Australians. I had a quick look at 1x.com from Steve's link and spotted a couple of Aussies fairly quickly, one of whom is an AP member (although I think inactive).

fashion = behind
commercial = behind
wedding = far behind

If you have time it would be interesting to see some (links to) examples of what you see as the current leading edge.



Cheers.

[Lance B]

Compared to the creative stuff I constantly see from Asia from colleagues and strangers, and on other continents. We are currently emulating and not innovating.

Well, to be fair, there is not a lot that hasn't already been done with regards to wedding photography, so it is almost impossbile to "re-inent the wheel", as it were. I think you are doing many Australian wedding photogs a disservice saying that they are "emulating and not evolving", quite a broad brush statement. I think you will find there are many world class wedding photogs here that can be held up in high esteem. Trouble is, I would not be putting wedding photogs up as the bastion of great photography, it's production line photography mostly and done to a format to suit the client, not the photographers whim or artistc flare.

[JM Tran]

Well, to be fair, there is not a lot that hasn't already been done with regards to wedding photography, so it is almost impossbile to "re-inent the wheel", as it were. I think you are doing many Australian wedding photogs a disservice saying that they are "emulating and not evolving", quite a broad brush statement. I think you will find there are many world class wedding photogs here that can be held up in high esteem. Trouble is, I would not be putting wedding photogs up as the bastion of great photography, it's production line photography mostly and done to a format to suit the client, not the photographers whim or artistc flare.

Not sure how one would call most wedding photography production line photography, unless of course you are a budget wedding guy who constantly takes clients to the same locations, does the same style of editing and filters - that is production line, which is no difference to newspaper photographers who require the same style by the editors or sports photographers then?

If you look at my wedding work, or those of the 'world class wedding photogs' you mentioned Lance, you will see that no 2 weddings are the same, because they shouldnt be, if clients are paying top dollars then they expect their wedding to be individualized and not a production line, why should they when they are paying me or other good photographers the amount that someone receives for a years wage in SE Asia, in 1 day.

I do mine to my own whim and my artistic flare, same as any good one who puts in the effort to stand out from the rest.

Theres about 2500 ppl on my FB, not inc other networking links, and a high percentage of them are wedding photographers or have dabbled in it, and being able to see their work posted on a regular basis I have been 'privileged' enough to see the trends and styles that has been in and out in the last 5 years since I started working full time.

I can say factual things like - Lucisart ED filter is now being used quite regularly and aggressively for wedding photography in last 12 months, as more ppl know about it - when back then it was more for commercial/editorial photography. Its great to be able to see trends and changes, and those that are able to use it to their advantage will always progress further. I dont copy or follow editing styles, as I have my own and past, current and future clients are able to know my style from the rest.

Some of the advancements in wedding photography lies not in the way it is shot or processed, but the way business is conducted, theres a lot more to just selling prints after the wedding, technology evolution has given us the ability to increase our work effiency and effectiveness and deliver a much better end product than 10 or 20 or 30 years ago. This can be said for photography as a whole too in many cases.

[ricktas]

I can say factual things like - Lucisart ED filter is now being used quite regularly and aggressively for wedding photography in last 12 months, as more ppl know about it - when back then it was more for commercial/editorial photography. Its great to be able to see trends and changes, and those that are able to use it to their advantage will always progress further. I dont copy or follow editing styles, as I have my own and past, current and future clients are able to know my style from the rest.

That is where I see it. Photographers are relying in pre-existing processing methods to create a 'look', particularly in the wedding sector. You state 'Its great to be able to see trends and changes, and those that are able to use it to their advantage will always progress further', which is what I have been conveying, we follow the trends, not set them, and therein lies the reason that most Australian photographers are not seen as being in the best of the best. We are not developing 'breakthrough' ideas, rather we are following along with what Europe, Asia and the US are doing. I agree that you have your own style JM, but I can see the influences of the trends from overseas in your work. Yes you probably need to do that as part of your business, as business is about getting work and creating an income. You need to go where the work is, both creatively and financially.

But I see Jim's original question being about why we (Aussies) are not creating (or at least trying to) the trends, rather than following them.

[JM Tran]

That is where I see it. Photographers are relying in pre-existing processing methods to create a 'look', particularly in the wedding sector. You state 'Its great to be able to see trends and changes, and those that are able to use it to their advantage will always progress further', which is what I have been conveying, we follow the trends, not set them, and therein lies the reason that most Australian photographers are not seen as being in the best of the best. We are not developing 'breakthrough' ideas, rather we are following along with what Europe, Asia and the US are doing. I agree that you have your own style JM, but I can see the influences of the trends from overseas in your work. Yes you probably need to do that as part of your business, as business is about getting work and creating an income. You need to go where the work is, both creatively and financially.

But I see Jim's original question being about why we (Aussies) are not creating (or at least trying to) the trends, rather than following them.

Yup I agree with you, hence my reasons about Australians/Australia not being as innovative as those overseas. Singapore and HK is close to us yet from what Ive seen from colleagues and whatnot, push the boundary more often - as there is more competition, and competition is healthy sometimes for that very reason.

[arthurking83]

......

It's depends on your persepctive, so to speak!

I find myself in the strange situation of having to agree with Lance here.

By what exact standard do we regard non Aussie photos as not being up to current world standards.

Photography is more than just about one or two genres.

if over processed over saturated images are the standard baseline for what constitutes great images .. then why even both to take the camera out to capture them at all.

Why not just generate them in their entirety within photoshop! 99.9% of the interest, artistry and content of those types of images is not generated by the photography equipment.
The use of a camera for those types of images appears to be redundant.


Of course this is only a matter of perspective.

I don't think it has anything to do with the geographics of the artists.

[Bear Dale]

I've been flat chat since I posted this thread, I've been able to have a glance at it now and again on my iPhone whilst out.

I've really enjoyed reading everyone's viewpoints on this topic and there has been some great cerebral discussion proffered by some knowledgeable folks.

[Lance B]

Not sure how one would call most wedding photography production line photography, unless of course you are a budget wedding guy who constantly takes clients to the same locations, does the same style of editing and filters - that is production line, which is no difference to newspaper photographers who require the same style by the editors or sports photographers then?

If you look at my wedding work, or those of the 'world class wedding photogs' you mentioned Lance, you will see that no 2 weddings are the same, because they shouldnt be, if clients are paying top dollars then they expect their wedding to be individualized and not a production line, why should they when they are paying me or other good photographers the amount that someone receives for a years wage in SE Asia, in 1 day.

]

Changing locations but still doing the same basic themes at those locations is not what I call being innovative. Like I said, there is just so many different things you can do to get the wedding shots and even with the so called best of the overseas wedding photogs, it seems to be the same stuff, just possibly different "exotic" locations. That doesn't take much imagination, just money.

I do mine to my own whim and my artistic flare, same as any good one who puts in the effort to stand out from the rest.

Theres about 2500 ppl on my FB, not inc other networking links, and a high percentage of them are wedding photographers or have dabbled in it, and being able to see their work posted on a regular basis I have been 'privileged' enough to see the trends and styles that has been in and out in the last 5 years since I started working full time.

I can say factual things like - Lucisart ED filter is now being used quite regularly and aggressively for wedding photography in last 12 months, as more ppl know about it - when back then it was more for commercial/editorial photography. Its great to be able to see trends and changes, and those that are able to use it to their advantage will always progress further. I dont copy or follow editing styles, as I have my own and past, current and future clients are able to know my style from the rest.

I would still say that even though you think you have a different style that it has more than likely been done before, just that you may not have seen it. Don't get me wrong, this doesn't mean that your wedding photography isn't good, it could be fantastic, just that I seriously doubt that it can always be innovative as there are so many wedding photogs around that there really isn't anything new in this world, even like the "Lucisart ED filter" you allude to, now that it is out there, it's not new any more and everybody is now getting on that badnwagon. Like you, I have looked at many wedding photographs from all over the world and all I see is the same themes but the locations are different in an effort to be "different".

Some of the advancements in wedding photography lies not in the way it is shot or processed, but the way business is conducted, theres a lot more to just selling prints after the wedding, technology evolution has given us the ability to increase our work effiency and effectiveness and deliver a much better end product than 10 or 20 or 30 years ago. This can be said for photography as a whole too in many cases.

But that doesn't mean it is always being done better overseas. This certainly smells of the Australian cringe factor that has pervaded our society in the past and which I thought had largely disappeared. Apparently it has not in the wedding photography world. What might be the case is that being overseas it gets more recognition due to the fact it is a much larger market and therefore gets more "airplay" if you like.

- - - Updated - - -

I find myself in the strange situation of having to agree with Lance here.

By what exact standard do we regard non Aussie photos as not being up to current world standards.

Nice to see we agree on something, Arthur!

The problem is that Australia is always going to behind the eight ball, so to speak, as it is not a "powerhouse" of change due to the fact it is a small market and doesn't have the sway with the rest of the world. Example: Let's say I took the same image as Henri Cartier Bresson's of the "man jumping over a puddle" or to be correct "Derriere la Gare Saint-Lazare" and which was voted the photo of the century, but he had never taken it. Do you think I would get the same recognition? Not on your nelly!

[old dog]

quote from Rick...................`I suppose the other question that needs to be asked, if we are way behind the rest of the world, do we care?

As long as we, our clients, the people that view our photos, look a them, critique them, find what we are doing as good, then who cares if the rest of the world thinks it is better, more advanced than Australian photographers.


I could not agree more with this comment. I`m quite happy living in my little circle of very talented friends here on this site. The biggest wish I have is to meet as many of you as possible as the years go by, not to just glean more skills from you but to enhance the overall enjoyment of life. Cheers from the Emerald isle (on hols in UK and Ireland ATM).

[MissionMan]

It's a difficult question and it's one I find challenging to answer.

I, on the one hand am pretty damn great and an amazing photographer, some would argue amongst the world greats, but is my greatness enough to counter the mediocre photography range of the vast majority of other australian photographers? I think not.

[arthurking83]

.......

I, on the one hand am pretty damn great and an amazing photographer, some would argue amongst the world greats, but is my greatness enough to counter the mediocre photography range of the vast majority of other australian photographers? I think not.

I don't think that the level of your greatness actually has any impact on tipping the balance of world photography domination back in our favour there MM.

I think what will counter the effect of our mediocrity is the volume of your great works!

Produce more of it and you will then have the power to tip the scales back into our favour ..... at which point we can safely say "All your base are belong to us"

[Steve Axford]

What particular photos are you talking about, Jim?

Being a birder, I look at the birding images from overseas and see many more great images, but they also have a more abundant bird population with many more diverse birds than we have here. Not only that, most of these birds are "exotic" to us/me and I find many of them more pleasing than most of our birds simply because they are "exotic". Technically, the overseas bird photos aren't any better, just that theyu may seem more pleasing because they are "exotic" and different to ours.

The same goes for landscape/architecture photos from overseas, where there are many more "exotic" locations compared to us and this has the effect of us thinking that they are better shots when in fact technically they no better then what I see from Australians as a whole, just that many of the photos are of exotic and exciting locations.

I remember having a young German guy stay with us for a few months on a 12 month working holiday going around Australia, he was the son of one of my suppliers. I asked him why he visited Australia for his 12 month holiday as he had Europe right on his doorstep with all that fantastic scenery, castles, churches, cathedrals and history in general. He replied that it is not that interesting to him because he lives with it every day, they basically hibernate for 6 months a year in winter and to him what is exciting is the wide open spaces, not crowded, beaches, sunshine all year round etc. He thinks my photos of Australia were exciting, much better than my Europe photos!

It's depends on your persepctive, so to speak!

It's strange but I totally disagree with this. I think Australian flora and fauna is as good as it gets. And that's not to say that I don't travel because I do, a lot. I have just learnt to love the native Australian stuff. We have probably the most diverse collection of birds in the world and what's more, you can see them all over the place. Most parts of the world you see few birds and those you do see are Sparrows and Pigeons. We see Rainbow Lorikeets and Kookaburras. We really are very lucky here. We just need to look around.

[Lance B]

It's strange but I totally disagree with this. I think Australian flora and fauna is as good as it gets. And that's not to say that I don't travel because I do, a lot. I have just learnt to love the native Australian stuff. We have probably the most diverse collection of birds in the world and what's more, you can see them all over the place. Most parts of the world you see few birds and those you do see are Sparrows and Pigeons. We see Rainbow Lorikeets and Kookaburras. We really are very lucky here. We just need to look around.

Don't get me wrong, I do look around and I shoot plenty of birds and see lots of this wonderful country (have you seen my birds and animal galleries?). However, if you look at the bird forums from overseas, I think you will find that they have quite a bit more variety than most of the easily accessable places in Australia. Also, there are aspects of Australia that I am not overly fussed on, like the eucalypt forests here are not what I would call as nice as many of the forests in Europe and North America. That's juts a personal opinion. But, hey, I wouldn't live anywhere else!

The point I am making is that people get bored with the things they see and live with every day and this is why so many of us love to travel and why so many of us love photos from other places that seem "exotic" and exciting. We also like to see different animals, look at why so many want to go to Africa and see their exotic animals and why many hold them up in high esteem, yet we have some of the most unique here in Australia.

Europe to me is very interesting as it has all that history that we don't have, all those castles, churches and cathedrals etc are amazing to me. Stand on the steps of Notre Dame that was built 1,000 years ago and think of all the famous people that have crossed its threshold. It may not interest you, but it certainly makes it interesting to me. Howver, I do not think I would want to live in Europe permanently, maybe for an extended stay, but never permanently.

Like I said, the young German fellow that stayed with us was totally intigued with Australia and thought it was exotic here. It just depends where you are standing and therefore where you live.

As I said, I wouldn't live anywhere elses, even with the many drawbacks this country has.

[Steve Axford]

Yep, I have seen your bird photos, Lance. That's one of the reasons I was surprised that you said what you did. I think Oz bird photos are as good as any and yours are well up there.. Can't say I agree about the forests here compared to Europe. Almost all the native forests in Europe are gone and there are still a few left here, though they do keep trying to cut those down. I love the rainforests the best, but the wet sclerophyll forests are almost as good. Bit messy by European standards, but maybe the original forests (Little Red Riding Hood type forests) were also a bit messy. Everything is nicely manicured now, but that is due to human intervention. I lived in England for about 6 years and it was great, lots of history, but we have history too, we just pretend it only started with Captain Cook. Our limits are self imposed.
Anyway, back to the subject. I think we are a bit of a backwater when it comes to professional photography, but that is inevitable as there are few paying customers here. Given the numbers, I think we manage pretty well overall. As for the total world of photography, pro and amateur, I think we stand up pretty well really. Of course there will be many more great photographers from the rest of the world, but then we only have about 0.4% of the worlds population. I suspect we have more than 0.4% of the best photographers, though I couldn't name them.

[Bear Dale]

It’s been great reading all the responses.

One thing that does interest me is that it’s been said a few times here that photography is a lot of duplicating other peoples work now, that there really isn’t anything new and it’s all been done before.

Could that be a bit of a catchcry to advocate that it’s easier in the run of the mill and well trodden paths of previous and current photographers and it’s just more comfortable and easier than trying to be a true visionary and develop something that is so radical that it’s genuinely new?

Wedding photography has come up a bit in this thread and it’s hard to not (and no offence intended to the wedding photographers) think of wedding photos as clichéd. There might be different background scenery and some different processing etc…..but honestly how many times can a bride and groom and a wedding party be photographed in a truly uniquely manner and for a photographer to honestly own a style that’s just their own?

I don’t want to list the websites that I have been visiting as anyone that’s into photography most likely has them bookmarked already and posting up URL’s to other sites in threads just drives members from AusPh to those sites. The odd link’s ok to post, but not a whole heap of them.

Another thing that I do see on the more internationally populated forums is that famous photographers such as Weston, Adams, Bresson, DeCarava etc etc are quoted and referred to sometimes nauseatingly so. Maybe Australians don’t because of our more egalitarianism outlook? Some people are so intent on emulating these people, that I don’t see a lot of innovation there.

One ‘famous’ Aussie that has made it in photography Peter Lik is dissected to pieces by not only the international photography arena….but also by the domestic one as well at times. He’s considered to be nothing more than a joke by many, but he’s one of the wealthiest living photographers on the planet.

Maybe the planet has become so small through the manner that we see it now with the overabundance of photographic images that we’re all a little visually exhausted by it all and it takes a real photo for us to feel jazzed?

One other question I will leave you with. Do you think in Australia we have the street photography opportunities that exist in Europe or cities like NY or gritty cities like Chicago?

I’m a little too self-conscious to do street photography, but it’s a genre that I really enjoy looking at because I think a lot of good street photography tells such a story to the viewer. So being a little into viewing it and seeing shots from around the world, this is one area that I feel that we (as in Australian photographers) really don’t shine. Is it because there just isn’t the same opportunities that exist in other parts of the world? We’re all a little bit more demurer when it comes to street photography? Or I just haven’t seen good Aussie street photography and it does exist?

[JM Tran]

Wedding photography has come up a bit in this thread and it’s hard to not (and no offence intended to the wedding photographers) think of wedding photos as clichéd. There might be different background scenery and some different processing etc…..but honestly how many times can a bride and groom and a wedding party be photographed in a truly uniquely manner and for a photographer to honestly own a style that’s just their own?

same for landscape photography really, if not more so.

[MissionMan]

[QUOTE=JM Tran;1138553]

Wedding photography has come up a bit in this thread and it’s hard to not (and no offence intended to the wedding photographers) think of wedding photos as clichéd. There might be different background scenery and some different processing etc…..but honestly how many times can a bride and groom and a wedding party be photographed in a truly uniquely manner and for a photographer to honestly own a style that’s just their own?/QUOTE]

same for landscape photography really, if not more so.

Brenizer technique is an example of wedding photographer innovation. Yes, it's not possible for everyone to do this, but it shows how one person can create a unique technique to make a name for themselves and differentiate themselves from the rest.

The problem with photography is there aren't that many unique options, or at least not to the degree that videographers have.

[Bear Dale]

[QUOTE=MissionMan;1138554]

Brenizer technique is an example of wedding photographer innovation.

That's spread like a grass fire in January.

[MissionMan]

[QUOTE=JimD;1138556]

That's spread like a grass fire in January.

Yup, but how many photographers out there are focussing on doing the same. I.e. creating a unique method of taking photos rather than just taking good photos. The problem with the Brenizer technique is that it's an emulation of someone else's idea and the only person who really gets recognition is Ryan Brenizer. By using the technique, you're not unique. Yes, you create good photos and keep your customers happy but that's about as much as you'll ever achieve.

To really be innovative, you have to be prepared to fail and lose it all and I think there are very few photographers who are prepared to risk it all. It's a little like creating a new business vs working for an existing business. If you start your own business, you risk losing everything but the reward can be higher.

How many photographers are prepared to go out there are try something really unique rather than just emulating a photo idea they saw online.