Imagine that a person not familiar with photography is given a mixed pile of ten Ansel Adams, ten Yousuf Karsh and ten Gerry Uelsmann photographs. He or she will have little trouble in sorting them correctly into three correct piles. That is because of the greatly different styles of these three photographers. Think of your own favorite top photographers. The results will generally be the same.

A photographer's style is a consistent, distinctive and recognizable combination of characteristic picture elements in a body of work that define a photographer's particular vision. In that sense it is a restriction of options sometimes even a repetition of motifs from image to image. A style can be thought of as the work an artist creates over and over again. Think Edward Weston, Julia Margaret Cameron, Salvador Dali, Arthur Conan Doyle, Bach, Stravinsky, Bob Dylan.

Style is the "what" of the image itself, not how it was made, the tools you used, or your social style. It is how you see and reproduce an image through self-expression--the recurring underlying themes and patterns. It binds a group of pictures into a whole. It could be called your personal taste. It is something that nobody else has--as unique as handwriting. It separates your images from those of others. There is something about your work that makes it identifiable. It gives your image a distinctive or characteristic mode of expression or presentation. Remember that it is the body of your work, not an individual picture that represents your style.

Elements of Photographic Style

If a photographer uses only subdued color, never uses a border, uses only a vertical format. Does only landscapes, employs certain compositional devices, uses texture, grain and focus in certain ways, we have the beginnings of a style. Within that style, an infinite variety of images can be created.

One characteristic of a typical Ansel Adams photograph is the use of a relatively small number of tones in clearly different zones encompassing white to black. This leaves little room for subtle separation of the halftones in the light areas in the picture. On the other hand, William Mortensen believed in enhancing the separation of these light halftones, at the expense of shadow details. Both were addressing the problem of representing the real-world tonal scale on a sheet of paper with a greatly reduced tonal reproduction capability. Their photographic styles were radically different. Of course, each photographer employed a multitude of elements in his style, not just one. Neither felt restrained by his style--more likely energized.

The elements that make up a given photographic style are infinite in number. However they can be grouped into a few broad categories, such as Subject, Structure Esthetics, and, sometimes, Genre. Subject includes the object being pictured and its broader category, such as landscape, nature or news. Structure includes such elements as composition, order, color, contrast, graphic qualities and tonal distribution. Esthetics includes emotional, symbolic, psychological and abstraction elements. Genre is a broad group style or school, like Group f/64 or "pictorialism."

Some photographers have employed more than one style, perhaps one for landscapes and another for portraits. This does not happen often, and usually not at the same time. Multiple styles make a photographer and his work unrecognizable and unmarketable. Fortunately, even a photographer who does both personal and commercial work will often show a common feeling that runs through all of it.

More than one person can have similar styles, especially if they are members of a special group. Individual members may argue that they personally have no identifiable style. It would be more accurate to say that each individual's style has been submersed to some extent by the constraints or genre imposed by the group itself. Group f/64 was perhaps the most famous example of such a genre.

What Good is Style?

Michael Freeman once wrote that a style becomes a mark of quality or territorial signpost-- a trademark, if you wish. It also provides a framework or focus for your work, even if you do not seek recognition. A cohesive body of work has more lasting power than a random group of photographs.

I have noticed that painters frequently deny that they have a repetitive style, since they view that as a lack of creativity, even though most viewers are somehow able to recognize their work. The truth is that even creativity requires a focus. Your style provides that focus. A style allows viewers to recognize our images as the work of a particular photographer. This doesn't mean that style need be formulaic.

Abandoning the use of a style will let you make many pictures of all kinds. This is not creativity, more likely just randomness. You will be seen as a technician, with all that implies. Without a recognizable style, people may see your prints as no more than derivative of other photographer's work. For some, a personal style is an ego essential. Generally, as viewed by critics and audiences, a photographer who does not have a style is not very good!

At the same time, style alone does not signify excellence. It is just one part of the ongoing search for perfection.

Discover and Strengthen Your Personal Photographic Style

A recognizable style is rare among photographers--snapshooters in particular. But it is a desired attribute among many serious photographers. There are many ways you can discover and strengthen your personal style.

Years ago it was easy to have a unique personal style. Not only was there little competition, but many photographers had few opportunities to regularly view the work of others. In the earliest days, every picture was a first. Today the photographer is inundated with images in magazines, on television and the internet, as well as in galleries. Everywhere there are overexposed traditions.

Your personal photographic style reflects the way you see. Your personality, previous experiences, environment, training, interests, exposure to arts in all media, and your aptitude influence it. These are the source of your personal sense of photographic esthetics. It is this that helps you determine how you will depict the subject and how close you came to that ideal. Your style is the personal criteria you use to decide whether your image is acceptable. It's you.

It will likely take you many images and years to discover your own voice. Over time you will begin to do certain things over and over again--those things that you come to believe make the best pictures. For some time you may not recognize that your own style is developing, or that you have a style at all. Listen closely to your friends when they look at your pictures--they will tell you.

Your style provides you with a set of guidelines or photographic approaches that you have developed through countless hours of trial and error. These guidelines provide you with a filter for more easily creating new and creative images. If you like, think of this filter as nothing more than your growing personal taste.

Exercise Your Individuality

Look at what you like to photograph, and how you represent those subjects. Ask yourself how you decide which photographs are good, which are bad. What criteria do you use? Would you put it on your wall? Do your pictures have an individuality that distinguishes them from those of others? Does it represent a new way of seeing or rendering the subject? Does it convey something the viewer has not seen, known or thought of before? Would people say, "That is a great picture?"

Take lots of pictures. Try out different styles and style components you have never used before. Experiment with new pictorial approaches and picture ideas. Break some rules--do your critical selecting later. Work with a group of other photographers in a competitive learning situation. The Society's American and Canadian Portfolios are wonderful tools for this.

Look at your favorite photographs, posters and paintings by others. Try to determine what characteristics make them unique. Compare them to your work and decide what you like and dislike about each. Your public or university library is a great resource for pictures. The internet is not so good, due to low image resolution and size. In addition, most pictures on the internet have not gone through any kind of independent evaluation process, so the average quality is low.

Try emulating some well-known photographers' styles for practice as you develop your voice. Consider Margaret Bourke-White's monumental images, Ralph Gibson's tension-filled masterpieces, Uelsmann's fantasies, or Feininger's telephotos. And don't forget Weegee. I regularly explore 100-year-old photographs and books for inspiration. Perhaps some of their style elements can be combined differently, or will energize you in other ways. If you are lucky enough, take advantage of an opportunity to teach. It's a great way to learn.

Ask yourself what is it that makes you like the work of these other photographers--how you decide whether another photographer's prints are good or not. Ask why you became serious about photography in the first place. Ask what kind of pictures you really like to make. Ask yourself why you choose to make that kind of image. You will likely find that the very scenes and subjects that inspire you to photograph contain elements of your developing style. Use those photographs to motivate you to photograph different subjects similarly. The subject is not as important a style characteristic as you might think. A Van Gogh self-portrait and a Van Gogh landscape are immediately recognizable as two pictures done in the same style and by the same artist.

Your personal style can be revealed to you through others. Listen carefully to what others say about your photographs. They will see things that you don't. Sometimes my son will say to me "Ah, that's one of your best kind," or "I saw a picture the other day that looked like one of yours." He is identifying some stylistic features of my work that I haven't recognized. As I build on these, a more focused body of work will emerge. So ask your friends what your pictures look like.

As you examine your pictures and seek to become aware of your style potential, look for common threads. Then decide whether or not to move in that direction. It is important to include your failures as well as you successes, since your failures may indicate a direction you are attempting to go as you develop. Look for happy accidents. Think of your style as a pilgrimage, rather than an end. And do photograph what you like, rather than what you think you should.

Make a few mistakes on purpose. They may surprise you. In fact these may be a precursor to your future direction. Try something really different while on every outing. Give yourself an occasional "assignment." A few years ago, during a barren winter, I gave myself the assignment of taking pictures of doors. The result was more than a dozen final pictures that I would have otherwise never made.

From time to time, every photographer is subject to editorial genre pressure, especially from critics, magazines, books, museums, universities, galleries and juries. Pictorialist Mortensen was pushed almost into oblivion by Group f/64, who felt that he was out of touch. Similarly there may be certain rules or taboos that cause your pictures to be rejected by your peers. While there may be no reason to modify your style, it is wise to be aware of current fashions. Whatever you do, ask yourself whether you are taking pictures for yourself or others.

Artistic Growth

Over time, you will begin to develop a consistent way of seeing, reacting and photographing every subject. It will go slowly. It may only become apparent when you view a large group of your photographs taken over a period of years. You will discover that certain elements or characteristic traits in your earlier images are being repeated in present work perhaps almost automatically. From there, you can continually refine your basic style. This is artistic growth. Rarely, your style may not get "better" but instead jump into something new. Keep asking yourself why you have included certain elements into your style. If you can't answer that question, neither can your viewer.

The fact that we usually equate personal style with the masters suggest that it requires both inborn talent and intensity--Garry Winogrand took hundreds of thousands of pictures. Perhaps we cannot achieve greatness ourselves. But we can achieve a level of excellence that is recognized by our peers

You might decide to never concern yourself with your style, and just make the best pictures you can. That's all right--it's your choice. Stylistically, however, your pictures may still be a lot more identical than you realize.

In any case, those who develop their own recognizable style that communicates powerfully are the photographers we will remember.

PHOTO (BLACK & WHITE): David. In the idealized pictorial style of William Mortensen. The simple composition is based on a dominant mass. It has flat lighting and no shadows. Graduation in the highlights was enhanced using Mortensen's abrasion tone process, with powdered graphite and pumice.

PHOTO (BLACK & WHITE): The Three Nuns of New Orleans. Interest here is in the compositional structure and human interest with the three "nuns" and two tiny people walking past the contrast between new and old.

PHOTO (BLACK & WHITE): Any mention of products or services in this article or anywhere else in the PSA Journal does not constitute an endorsement or approval of those items.

PHOTO (BLACK & WHITE): Stargazer. I call this contemporary pictorialism The focus is on texture and tonality rather than the subject itself.

PHOTO (BLACK & WHITE): Dream. Composition, color, mystery and wonder are the overriding elements.

~~~~~~~~