Telling a Photographer's Personality from the Photos They Post

Anouilh

After such a long time on the boards, I feel I have come to know many of the posters and can anticipate the sort of photos they are likely to post.

A thread for sharing favourite themes might make a change.

Trees, flowers and buildings seem to have become my stock in trade.

baby and crumble

Well I've only been taking photos with an eye to the 'aesthetic' (god i sounds so poncey!!!) for about a month (only 3 days out with the camera- BOO real life!!!), but I like shooting anything to do with water, sunsets, and I had a real blast the other night in London messing around after dark...

other than that, I do enjoy taking the photos on nights out, trying to get something more interesting than the usual 'look, we all look so happy and drunk and are all smiling!' thing... although they're fun too!!!

Danbo!

Aviation and Architecture for me, the latter usually only for work. Never liked shooting landscapes/flowers/nature, but thats just personal preference.

Avaition can be a toughy, planes don't usually stick around for ya. Architecture though, can be interesting because even though its semi-permanent and you can come back when the lighting is right, it makes it more of a challenge getting unique shots, so its mostly about the composition.

Calina

Anouilh wrote: »

After such a long time on the boards, I feel I have come to know many of the posters and can anticipate the sort of photos they are likely to post.

A thread for sharing favourite themes might make a change.

Trees, flowers and buildings seem to have become my stock in trade.

Anouilh,

I am really sorry BUT...nothing in this post even remotely relates to the title of "telling a photographer's personality from the photos they post".

So in the interests of what I understand from such a title:

1) I post mainly pictures of kitesurfers and slow lowlight exposures. Occasionally some landscape and the odd flower from the Botanic garden.

If you were minded to try and analyse this, you could assume any of the following

1) I like goodlooking sportsmen who also happen to be quite cool and a little left of centre. Hence no interest in the bogstandard sports of GAA, soccor and rugby. Plus, the guys aren't goodlooking.

2) I like the challenge of freezing highspeed sports. Hence the occasional foray into motor-racing.

3) there are times I need rest and relaxation. Hence the need to pile on the filters and wait out 30 seconds for an exposure to finish.

4) I spent money on a macro lens and need to justify it

5) I want saleable landscapes for iStock and Shutterstock.

How accurate is this? I shoot kitesurfers because they are a challenge, not because they are goodlooking and cool. A lot of people will tell you it's harder than it looks and frankly I'm dead from looking at bad photographs of kitesurfers taken by people who adhere to the back of the head principle. I love freezing water and have been looking at more very high speed photography lately. I like a challenge.

But more than anything, I like laying out an image I want to create and then going and creating it. Sometimes I succeed (see some of the Clontarf and Killiney shots on my pixie stream) and sometimes I fail (horrific mess in Achill two weeks ago). With the kitesurfing, even with full cooperation from a kitesurfer it can take years to get the shot you want.

Do the photographs tell you anything much about me at all? I'd venture to say they say comparatively little about me, only the way I look at the things I photograph. BUt there is so much more to me than a few flowers taken with a 100mm macro that I bought as compensation for murdering a 40D last year. Some of the photographs I have taken with that lens are absolutely stunning and I love them.

AnCatDubh

I don't think you can read personality from the images but i think you can spot style.

Often I view the random thread in reverse thus I see the image before the poster. For some, but not all, I can tell the poster before I see the user name.

Animalrights shots posted today/yesterday in the random thread for instance.

Hugh_C

AnCatDubh wrote: »

Often I view the random thread in reverse

reverse sorting for mods or are you just starting at the end and working backwards?

smelltheglove

I suppose it neither here nor there, mainly I shoot people which means I am a people person, I like associating with others and enjoying happy moments in peoples lives therefor I like weddings.

I love rock music so you will see some rockbands in my portfolio.

I hate the cold so you will not see many shots from outdoors in cold weather.

I like to at least attempt everything so you will see some very few macro, some landscape and even lately hdr as I want to try it all and understand it all.

Most of all, I like things to be a little different, I like something edgy and this can be seen through the special effects photos I supply to some of my clients.

However when looking at any photographer you will not necessarily come to these conclusions, I have told you how my personality relates to my work but you may not have guessed it if you did not know me personally?

Maybe a little game may be more interesting, people could post links to their flickr and see if anyone wants a go at seeing what they are about...

e.g. Dodgy, (sorry Fergus) looking at his flickr I would assume he had a passion for sports, like his food a bit and was a family man. Using this as an example because I do know him and know these are tru but if I had not known him I would have guessed this anyay from his flickr, again sorry Fergus!

Danbo!

Hugh_C wrote: »

reverse sorting for mods or are you just starting at the end and working backwards?

I think he means if you scroll up the page from the bottom you will see the picture before the username, but you will also see sigs first unless you have them turned off.

Alternatively, a single top flap from a large corn flakes box sellotaped vertically to your monitor's left side will hide the usernames. (the colour wheels printed on these flaps may also be used for calibration purposes )

AnimalRights

AnCatDubh wrote: »

I don't think you can read personality from the images but i think you can spot style.

Often I view the random thread in reverse thus I see the image before the poster. For some, but not all, I can tell the poster before I see the user name.

Animalrights shots posted today/yesterday in the random thread for instance.

I like that idea of looking at the random thread in reverse.

About styles, some poster seen this picture and said he knew it was me by my style...odd as I'm not a hash smoker but I knew where he was coming from.



Oh and for a fair while I didn't spot Calina's sarcasm and my jaw was on the ground... :eek:

Covey

I would like to think that my photography does express my personality and would consider it a direct expression of my personality.

Calina

AnimalRights wrote: »

Oh and for a fair while I didn't spot Calina's sarcasm and my jaw was on the ground... :eek:

too much radio news has left me horrifically cynical. YOu can't see this from my flower photos though, I think.



Happy Monday.

Placebo

well if one is consistent with their photos. I dont shoot flowers and bees.

potlatch

I take boring photos. That's how you'll know mine.

AnCatDubh

Hugh_C wrote: »

reverse sorting for mods or are you just starting at the end and working backwards?

just starting from the end.

Simplicius

You can tell ones personality from their photo's!

I don't believe a word of it I am a 3 foot tall Philipino Transvestite with a fetish for embroidery and smarties. I like nothing more than quiet spaces like libraries, in fact I am currently writing this from the bottom shelf of the Catholic History section of Trinity's Library, I've lived here for last 6 months and no one has disturbed me. I also only drink cranberry juice and believe in NAMA and Fianna Fail.

(probably blew the story's credibility with last sentence!) :pac:

humberklog

Simplicius wrote: »

You can tell ones personality from their photo's!



(probably blew the story's credibility with last sentence!) :pac:

Nah, it was the cranberry juice you weren't getting away with.


Cunfused too at the OP, but then read it as the personality of the photographs. If that makes any more sense.
As for some posters here, yeah you can tell some a mile away, but don't think that tells anything about the photographer's personality make-up.

LeoB

Calina wrote: »

If you were minded to try and analyse this, you could assume any of the following

1) I like goodlooking sportsmen who also happen to be quite cool and a little left of centre. Hence no interest in the bogstandard sports of GAA, soccor and rugby. Plus, the guys aren't goodlooking.
.

Maybe not for you Calina but there were some very pretty ladies chasing a ball around Croke Pk yesterday:)
Dont know if they are cool but they make for some excellent photographs I.M.O. This was taken a few weeks ago at Dublin junior Championship final. The player kicking the ball is a stunning athlete, Great charachter and makes for a "Nice" image

[EMAIL="%3Ca%20href="][/EMAIL]">

Hugh_C

Anouilh wrote: »

After such a long time on the boards, I feel I have come to know many of the posters

maryam's clavicle

.

I don't know what I portray, but in reality I'm a husband/dad/son/brother kinda guy who has developed a penchant for photographing stuff like this on a semi-commercial basis. I don't think I'm necessarily a people person even though I'm mostly taking images of people (or bits of them).

bullpost

The one thing I've always been told is that I have very "Catholic" tastes and views. My photography reflects that though I would like to specialise , just haven't been able to find my mojo. Put bluntly I'm a jack of all trades , master of none.

Anouilh

I think that other people are often the best judge of another's photography, when it comes to spotting a personal aesthetic.

http://wwww.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=62225466

I tend to be relatively unconventional, seeking angles and perspective points that are not obvious. However, I produce incredibly ordinary portraits and group shots. By discussing in more depth, perhaps everybody will become more aware of their strengths?

democrates

Anouilh wrote: »

By discussing in more depth, perhaps everybody will become more aware of their strengths?

After a baffling debs disaster yesterday I'm now more interested in my weaknesses (The pinnacle of stupidity was just assuming I'd get great shots, forgetting that it took a lot of learning through failure for the types of shot I now feel competent to take)

But back on topic, my family and friends shots don't go online and no doubt many others filter too so the collections here aren't balanced representations, but what we post still says something about us.

An interesting aspect of this thread is how defensive we can get at the mere prospect that anyone other than a very close person with some shared history could claim to know who we are. Some place a very high value on the fact that no one else has walked in our shoes.

You also see personality differences in the body language of subjects, from the "my life is an open book" merchants to those lacking confidence, battling inner fear as if the lens might see them as they really are and result in adverse judgement.

Anouilh

Stee wrote: »

Aviation and Architecture for me, the latter usually only for work. Never liked shooting landscapes/flowers/nature, but thats just personal preference.

Avaition can be a toughy, planes don't usually stick around for ya. Architecture though, can be interesting because even though its semi-permanent and you can come back when the lighting is right, it makes it more of a challenge getting unique shots, so its mostly about the composition.

Ever so often photos of buildings are uploaded here and they are a fine document of our towns and cities. Perhaps it's time to start another thread.

I'm often struck by the nostalgic trends in photography in Ireland... rural dwellings, idealized landscapes, soft-focused portraits.

This is not how I see the world and I found this interesting:

http://www.re-title.com/exhibitions/archive_CohenAmadorGallery334.asp

superflyninja

hmmm I dont know that I have a style as such yet....i have a fair idea of the direction I want to go in but i need to do a lot of reading to help me decipher what makes a good photograph...though the only subject I have yet to tackle is people...

elven

Since when is your choice of subject the be all and end all of your photography?

ffs.

It's just not as simple as "I take pictures of people therefore I like people". Sorry. Fail.

KarmaGarda

I'd dare anyone to try guess my personality from my photostream! I'd reckon you'd be miles off the mark. But I could be wrong. So go for it. Pix or Flickr, whichever you prefer:

http://pix.ie/karmagarda
http://www.flickr.com/photos/karmagarda/

Fajitas!

KarmaGarda wrote: »

I'd dare anyone to try guess my personality from my photostream! I'd reckon you'd be miles off the mark. But I could be wrong. So go for it. Pix or Flickr, whichever you prefer:

http://pix.ie/karmagarda
http://www.flickr.com/photos/karmagarda/

I bet you work in IT.

KarmaGarda

Fajitas! wrote: »

I bet you work in IT.

:eek: you got all that just from my photos!

dakar

Fixed your post

elven wrote: »

It's just not as simple as "I take pictures of trees and stuff therefore I'm a lovely well balanced person who doesn't get upset at simplistic generalisations off the internets"

elven

ah you're on fine form today

Masada

Im not exactly qualified to "have a personality" in my photos yet i think,

But you would be more likely to find warm landscape/ colorful night shots/ long exposures and in recent months, playing with off camera flash to get effects like this.



Im not crazy about this one, I think its too ummm, clear or something. Time to invest in some gells me thinks.

Solarina

Im not sure... some people are a lot more personal in their images, but then again you dont have to take self portraits or write diary entries for titles to give away the way you look at the world.

I think I could tell a lot by peoples street photography, theres a lot to be said for the different things different photographers try to catch even in spontaneous moments - some look for a sneeze, or a scowl, others look for eye contact, or moments between people ...

flower macro photography on the other hand. eh... not so much.

humberklog

You can tell precisely zero about a photographers personality by the pics they take. Nada, zilch.


This thread popped into my head when that Dave Lachpelle (or something like that) was over here doing his schtick. Now I'm not too keen on his photos but...yeah sure he's doing something interesting looking some of the time. Then you see a pic of him...he wears a baseball cap sideways on his head. That tells me a lot more about his personality than any of his photos. I was glad of my dubiousness about the squirt.

Anouilh

I found this site interesting:

http://www.mypersonality.info/personality-types/infj/

INFJ - The "Confidant"
Jungian Personality Types (Free Test)

"INFJs, making up an estimated 1% of all people, are the most rare type (males even more so). They are introspective, caring, sensitive, gentle and complex people that strive for peace and derive satisfaction from helping others. INFJs are highly intuitive, empathetic and dedicated listeners. These traits tend to act as a "tell me what's wrong" sign on their forehead, hence the nicknames Confidant, Counselor or Empath. INFJs are intensely private and deeply committed to their beliefs. "

I'm beginning to wonder why I have been spending the past 18 months of so working with duotones.

Frankly, I think it may reveal quite a lot:

http://widgetinghour.blogspot.com/

The most interesting posters here are the ones who claim that a photographer's work tells absolutely nothing about the person behind the lens.

Some evidence would be useful...

DaireQuinlan

Anouilh wrote: »

INFJs, making up an estimated 1% of all people, are the most rare type (males even more so). They are introspective, caring, sensitive, gentle and complex people that strive for peace and derive satisfaction from helping others. INFJs are highly intuitive, empathetic and dedicated listeners.

It's me to a tee all right. I'll tell you though, it's difficult sometimes. so very difficult ...


Those sites are just such nonsense. All they do is reinforce peoples perceived notions of themselves. If you dig into the questions and the resultant types a bit more all they do is re-phrase things a little. So you answer a question designed to work out whether or not you think that you are intuitive, and then the personality type tacks on a " you are so intuitive and blah de blah de blah" and you gasp in excited surprise as it confirms all your long standing notions that you're just misunderstood by everyone, really.

-edit-

and what on EARTH has that blog link got to do with anything AT ALL that we're discussing ???

Valentia

The number of people I never met that came up to me on Saturday at the book launch and said "Hello Valentia (Danny)", just through having seen my photos? Zero.

Aren't we lucky life isn't that simple?

KarmaGarda

Valentia wrote: »

The number of people I never met that came up to me on Saturday at the book launch and said "Hello Valentia (Danny)", just through having seen my photos? Zero.

Aren't we lucky life isn't that simple?

In fairness, there's a difference between recognising someones face because of the photos they take, and recognising someones personality because of the photos they take.

I'm beginning to feel sorry for you Anouilh! Everyone seems to be having a pop at you since you raised this post.

Valentia

KarmaGarda wrote: »

In fairness, there's a difference between recognising someones face because of the photos they take, and recognising someones personality because of the photos they take.

I'm beginning to feel sorry for you Anouilh! Everyone seems to be having a pop at you since you raised this post.

I wasn't having a pop. It's a very interesting question. A lot of the posts (including the OP) have doodly squat to do with the thread title though.

DaireQuinlan

KarmaGarda wrote: »

In fairness, there's a difference between recognising someones face because of the photos they take, and recognising someones personality because of the photos they take.

That's 'cos that needs SCIENCE.

Although, if it DOES turn out to be true, I don't think I ever want to meet Masada ...

KarmaGarda

Valentia wrote: »

It's a very interesting question. A lot of the posts (including the OP) have doodly squat to do with the thread title though.

In fairness, I agree with that. There's quite an inconsistency between the title and then the subject matter that followed.

KarmaGarda

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

That's 'cos that needs SCIENCE.

Although, if it DOES turn out to be true, I don't think I ever want to meet Masada ...

I think your caps lock key is broken

humberklog

Once his cap's not on slantyways all is dandy.

DaireQuinlan

KarmaGarda wrote: »

I think your caps lock key is broken

I levered the caps lock key off my keyboard a long while back. Though funnily enough the 'Scroll lock' and 'SysRq' keys managed to escape the cull ...

KarmaGarda

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

I levered the caps lock key off my keyboard a long while back. Though funnily enough the 'Scroll lock' and 'SysRq' keys managed to escape the cull ...

Jez, snap! It's one of the first things I do when I get a new keyboard. Most useless key ever...

Anouilh

KarmaGarda wrote: »

In fairness, I agree with that. There's quite an inconsistency between the title and then the subject matter that followed.

I have no control over how a thread progresses.

It's worth thinking about the public profile one's work generates, I think, without getting too worked up about the subject.

It's just a dicussion. If the thread peters out it's probably because it is a boring subject.

However, I'm forever finding links where a photographer's personality or personal "eye" is being discussed and thought that some posters here might have ideas to share.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/photoblog/2009/11/mixing_personal_and_professional.html

Apparently, one of the most difficult tasks for any photographer is to become truly individual. I was just twisting the subject round a bit.

I like to think about why people choose the subjects they do...

elven

Two things to consider here though:

1. People are complicated beings. There's a lot of things you can learn about a person, from what their occupation is to what their favourite colour is to what day of the week they were born. I think, given the kind of photography some people do, you can learn something about them from it, but it might not be everyone's idea about what 'their personality' is summed up as. But some people do reveal certain things about what they think, and how they see the world, through their photography.

2. Your photography is about more than which subjects you choose to point the camera at - it's about how you actually portray any given subject. Someone can show you a picture of a brick wall, and then a picture of a tree, and the pictures might have something in common, because it's what they put into the photo rather than what they point the camera at.

Why is everyone determined to compartmentalise photography by the thing in front of the lens? Can't we try look a bit beyond that?

Anouilh, I think you might get a better response if you used slightly more conversational language rather than writing as if you're submitting an essay for college. That may be why so many people take these posts the wrong way.

democrates

"Man released on foot of positive psychological evaluation kills again".

Years of intensive one on one psycoanalysis can get the core reality wrong, it would be great if looking at photos someone took were a more reliable technique. To reliably determine personality is frustrated by the fact that the subject may be hiding the truth as they see it and may not know the truth - can't see the wood for the trees as it were.

The photos we take cannot represent the full vista of what's going on inside, and we change over time so findings have a shelf life. Even where photos make an intended point others may not get it, or alternatively someone viewing a photo with a relatively shallow theme may see more meaning in it than was intended - eg that finger painting the art critics raved over that turned out to have been made by a chimpanzee. What you see in a photo can say more about yourself, a bit like the Rorschach ink blotch test but diluted by the subjective, and may reflect your knowledge of the photographer.

Photography can change you. I remember a guy who was an obnoxious putz in school, met him at a reunion two decades later and heard at length how he'd travelled the world, but after some conversation he still seemed to be as thick as pigsh1te having learned little relative to the opportunity, he'd learned to be civil though which is a big win. Others there didn't have such colourful adventures to tell of, but could make very interesting observations about this circus we call 'normal life'.

A lot of photos capture snippets of the show and we can start to look at the world and ourselves differently, that's the best use of art imho, to rescue us from cognitive stagnation so we can make the future better. If trying to determine the photographers personality from a photo is dubious at least the exercise of trying to see the world through someone else's eyes can be worthwhile.

Hugh_C

I don't think you can tell a personality from pictures. you may be able to deduce how a photog relates to other people by the style of their pics, but as regards the bigger picture: no.

As it happens, I'm an INTP which, according to various metrics, is common amongst photogs.

I think you can tell more about a person by their writing style to be honest.

H

ThOnda

I hope that nobody will ever try to analyse pictures produced by my camera, that would be quite scary.
If you are good, you could project what you want into the picture and to make it understandable for common viewer. Even without using tags or captions

sineadw

One word - Hitler.

So do I win the thread prize for mentioning Nazis?? :pac:

Honest to god though, I'd hate to think we were all pigeon-holed into what we can produce. People's stuff changes as they learn and (hopefully) try new things.

artyeva

Anouilh wrote: »

The structure of photographic analysis was laid down years ago and the "compartments" or genres do not seem to overlap much even today.

i would be genuinely interested if you expanded on what you understand to be ''the structure of photographic analysis'', and who is it that you claim laid it down?

Anouilh wrote: »

Also this might explain a lot:

http://typelogic.com/intj.html

I come to the Photography Forum for information and photo sharing.
For a chat, I would probably go elsewhere...

that link explained nothing to me in relation to this thread, tbh.:o it does illustrate to me however that you subscribe to the idea that all personalities and therefore all people can [and i'm thinking to your mind SHOULD] be compartmentalised into a finite predetermined number [16] of catagories.

elven

You can talk about this stuff in a conversational tone. Same subject, different language.

Again, you're talking about the subject - 'landscapes with figures in them' - that tells me feckall about what the picture actually portrays beyond what's physically in front of the lens. I know there's a landscape, and i know there's a person. That means very little. HOW is the landscape portrayed? Is it dark, light, soft, harsh...? Is that too difficult to talk about?