A few years back I was asked the questions of, “what is your photo DNA?”
This questions has stuck with me since then because I think back on it often and the challenge of trying to determine what my own photo DNA is. When I was first asked this question I couldn’t answer it. You might also be wondering what type of photographer are you or which photos you are drawn to. Maybe you’re just scratching your head, wondering what is I’m referring to, so let me try to explain.
When you’re given your first camera or when you buy your first camera…you become entranced with this magical tool that captures what ever you point it at. It stops time and captures a fleeting moment. With this new found tool you begin to explore and take pictures of anything and everything that you point the lens at. You begin imagining your pictures being seen by others and the possibilities of what life your pictures will create for you. But the questions is…what pictures will those be? What type of photographer are you?
There is a plethora of images we regularly experience daily, but not all of them stand out to us. Years ago when asked the question of, “what is your photo DNA?” I started collecting images for a straight month and then set them aside to be revisited after 30 days. When I went back to look at what stood out to me, it was apparent I was drawn to specific types of photos. Photos with a strong conceptual narrative. Specific types of portraits. Landscapes, which had a particular light and time of day when they were taken. Details became prevalent such as color, character development, activities, environments, and perspectives.
This exercise in discovering what I was drawn to visually showed me what my Photo DNA make up is. Knowing which images I’m drawn to and what I’m not. Having a better understanding of myself, allowed me to remove the distractions of taking pictures that would probably sit unseen, using up memory on my computer. Unless you’re into flowers, why take pictures of flowers. If you don’t think still life photography is interesting, don’t take pictures of products. If you’re into studio photography on seamless backgrounds, you know that being on-location is not the type of photographer you are or want to be.
I remember when I was reviewing my collected images with another photographer and he said….”you like concepts”. This might not seem like much of a comment but it was inspiring to me. I had never had someone say which type of photographer I was so clearly to me before. Another photography friend mentioned that if an image didn’t have a certain level of production in my photos, it didn’t seem to fit within my portfolio. All of this helped to shape and give me direction.
As a professional photographer I’ve been given the advice of “only show the images you want to get work from,” but that’s tough to live by especially when there are so many opportunities to use your camera………… Knowing what images attracted my attention helped me move forward in my career with direction, knowing where I should be putting my energy into creating the photos that I wanted to create and avoiding the distraction of other.
It might have been a long 60 day span of time to complete this process, but I know that I’m a stronger photographer for it and I would encourage any one to try this exercise and see if it helps you with your focus on the photographer you want to be.
This exercise helped me see repetition and connect with specific photographers that have and continue to influence my own work.
Images shown in this post have not been taken by Weston Fuller Photography, but are examples of photos I found while searching and looking into my own Photo DNA. The photographers, which pictures have been shown above are; Erik Almas, Erik Johansson, Chris Gordaneer, Annie Lebowitz, Kremer and Johnson, Gregory Crewdson. I apologize for not knowing all the photographers who took these pictures as they were found while doing general google searches for photography.
