It is far easier for me to write an essay or poem or simple sentence than to attempt to make a photograph say something, primarily because I have been a professional writer far, far longer than a professional photographer.

Sometimes I write a piece before I go looking for an image that “fits” and other times I do the opposite. No matter what technique you use, our expressions, our hopes, our dreams and our feelings are shared, and that encourages and uplifts others.

Steve

So, with that said keep doing what you do and continue to turn to your passion for inspiration.

It seems to me photography attracts a wider range of personality types than some of the other artistic media: some of us are more towards the emotional end of the spectrum (where artists generally gather) while others are more towards the geeky end (no, that term’s not found in the MBTI). I think it’s the nature of the beast. A camera is a mechanical device, designed around some fundamental laws of physics, and (these days) it relies on digital processing of the images. So, it’s just going to attract the mechanical, physicist, computer literate, geeky kind of guy/gal. Your “typical” artist — the painter, the sculptor, the writer — isn’t mechanically inclined. Talk to a painter about f-stops and CPU processor speed and his/her eyes will soon glaze over. So it takes a certain geekiness to be able to understand the photographer’s medium. Conversely, everyone knows what paint and a paint brush are. But all is not lost for the photographic artist…

Michael Freeman and Freeman Patterson — two photographers David wrote about a few weeks back — write about the emotional aspect of photography. A friend of mine recommended a good book on this same topic, The Zen of Creativity by John Daido Loori, a photographer and Zen master. So they’re out there, but they don’t get the play that those who promote the geeky side of photography seem to attract. And of course the geeky side comes complete with corporate sponsors; the emotional side does not. Then there’s this…

We live in a society where speed is of the essence (at least here in the US)… I attended a photo workshop recently led by a well known, well-respected photographer. During one class on post-processing, he gave a demonstration of his typical work flow and when he was finished made the comment, “Bam, I’m in and out in 15 seconds, and on to the next photo.” Getting in touch with the emotional side of any craft takes a little longer. We’re in too much of a rush, and as Loori points out, to get in touch with the emotional aspect of your subject you need to learn how to be still.

I wonder if your question can be answered by Myers Briggs. (I’ve been obsessed by MBTI lately.) I think your question is not, perhaps, why are photographers so cerebral, because I think other artists are very cerebral, but why are they so concrete in their thinking? I think writers and other artists are probably iNtuitives; abstract thinkers, they see the big picture, the connections between seemingly unrelated things. But lately I’ve started to wonder if a lot of photographers are Sensing: concrete thinkers, they’re all about the here and now, with information they can take in via their five senses. I suspect this especially of photojournalists and travel photographers because they seek out the risks of travelling – a definite trait of a group of types called artisans who are concrete thinkers and prefer to take in more information rather than making decisions. And of course, none of this probably makes any sense unless you’re already familiar with MBTI, so I’ll just stop rambling now.

And you didn’t ask but I think you might be more of an idealist type, an abstract thinker rather than a concrete thinker – which is why you think about your vision a lot, maybe more than other photographers you know? – maybe ENFP? If you know your type (or find it out) I’d love to hear if I’m anywhere near the mark.