Back in the ’30s Ansel Adams, Edward Weston, and a few others formed a group to break away from the painterly pictorialist photography prevalent at the time. Group f64. You’ve heard of it. Bold and innovative at the time. Adams subsequently lapsed into formula and became a print factory, largely due to Bill Turnage, the business manager he hired. Weston stayed true to his vision for the rest of his life. Others weren’t as well known.
The Group f64 aesthetic became the standard for much of the photography that followed. For decades the sharp edge to edge focus, the rules of composition and exposure became set in stone and became the conventional criteria for what was considered good photography, and many photographers still slavishly follow them. Especially in nature and landscape photography. Technical proficiency and the willingness to follow accepted rules has become paramount. The result? Millions of pictures made every day that basically look the same, that fit the accepted definition of good. That have no individuality or soul. There are of course exceptions.
I started taking pictures seriously in the mid-70s. I’ve pretty much run the gamut of equipment – 4×5 which I abandoned almost as soon as I tried it, 120 TLR which I used quite a bit, and a lot of 35mm. These days, since coming out to the desert I use my phone. It suits me.
I made a crippling decision back then – I thought photography would be a great way to make a living. I followed all the standard advice. Study the markets, give the buyers what they want and need. Study the best then do it your own way – but still follow the rules. I had minimal success. I wasn’t anywhere near as good as the best, and I certainly didn’t have anything remotely unique or original. I wasted many years doing this and then quit taking photos for most of the ’90s. Looking back I consider most of that as not a waste. Just practice.
Since coming out here to the desert I’ve started to find my own voice, my own way of working. That can be good, but it can also be a trap. Stay on the same path and it can become a rut. My style (as much as I detest that word) isn’t likely to change much, but I think it’s good to try a different path now and then to see where it goes. More often than not it’s a dead end, but you can discover something new and interesting on it. I’ll try different approaches – double exposures, maybe a touch of grunge now and then, things like that, and if they work I’ll use them. If they don’t I’ll cheerfully shitcan them.
Above all, if I can send the pedantic ones, the conventional ones, the rule followers, if I can send them into convulsions I’ll be on the right track. I’ve got a long way to go, but I’m working on it. Cheers.
desert topographics 
F64 is where I feel photography lost it’s connection to other art forms. How many photographers study baroque painting or classical sculpture? Most study other photographers and only photographers. Most of whom are tied to the legacy of F64. The edge to edge sharpness thing I think also has lens manufacturers to blame. Why by another lens, if you are happy with what you have? Well, it isn’t as ‘technically perfect’ as this new one!
The thing that bothers me the most about the “rule followers” is that they has zero interest in understanding the rules. They want to follow them, without realizing that they are learning how to spell, not how to write. The “rules” are the building blocks of a visual language and everyone is telling the same story and writing the same rhyming couplets in iambic pentameter.
Good points. Learning the ‘rules’ is like learning your scales on any instrument. Eventually you have to go in your own direction and make your own music. Otherwise you’re just practicing scales. Thanks for stopping by Wynn. I appreciate your thoughts.