An artists journey

Category: Artist

  • Innocence of Eye

    Innocence of Eye

    The phrase innocence of eye is from Minor White. He uses it to describe the child-like wonder we should hold on to. That’s hard.

    Minor White

    Minor White (July 9, 1908 – June 24, 1976) was an American photographer. He was contemporary with and friends with Stieglitz, Ansel Adams, Paul Strand, Imogen Cunningham, Dorothea Lange, and many others.

    He became a disciple of Stieglitz’s theory of “Equivalence” and taught and wrote about it extensively. In actuality, he was more of a poet and writer and editor than a photographer. He assisted Ansel Adams in starting the photography department of the California School of Fine Arts, There were also teaching positions at the Rochester Institute of Technology and at MIT. In 1952 he, along with Ansel Adams, Dorothea Lange, Beaumont and Nancy Newhall and others, formed Aperture Magazine. White became the first and long time editor of it.

    None of this is really important, except to establish that White was very knowledgeable about the theory and practice of fine art photography and a voice to be listened to.

    The quote

    A more complete version of the quote about innocence is:

    … innocence of eye has a quality of its own. It means to see as a child sees, with freshness and acknowledgment of the wonder; it also means to see as an adult sees who has gone full circle and once again sees as a child — with freshness and an even deeper sense of wonder.

    Minor White

    One reason this is impactful for me is that he describes not only the normal child-like innocence but the possibility of rediscovering this innocence as an adult. This is a problem I have acknowledged.

    Tunnel of storm sewer pipes©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Child-like

    Think of a child, with their spirit of wonder. Everything is fresh and new. Nothing is silly. It’s a world of possibilities. Why can’t the sky be green if they want it to be? Why can’t a giraffe be purple? And that flower they just saw – it’s the prettiest flower in all the world.

    How do we hang on to or restore that spirit when we are old? I think it can be done, but it requires conscious work.

    Problems of maturity

    As adults, we become tough, cynical, jaded, and skeptical. We’ve seen it all, maybe too much. Nothing seems as exciting anymore.Very few images seem fresh and new to us. It is all just variations of what we have already seen and done.

    Whatever your interest is, you’ve probably shot it thousands of times. Is there anything new that can be said about it? Why just repeat the same things?

    This is where many people give up and conclude they are not an artist anymore, because they can’t do fresh, creative work. I recently wrote about doing a major culling exercise in my. library. It took a long time. One of my take-aways was that my images are getting too predictable. I’m following the same paths and thought patterns. Part of that is that I’m too mature. I “know” what works and seldom stray from it. I need to shake it up some.

    Rusty old Morris perched on a roof©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Rediscovering innocence

    How do we recapture that child-like view of the world? I think part of it is replacing cynicism with curiosity. Easy to say; hard to do. But when we are cynical, we automatically eliminate choices. We say to ourselves “that won’t work.” So we never try it.

    Curiosity is a positive force. It leads us to learn new things and try new things. Curiosity expands our thinking and our ability to see things.

    Ask questions

    Do you remember being a child and asking questions constantly? Why does that happen? How does that work? What if I did this? Most of us have that squeezed out of us by the time we’re in HIgh School. That is one of the major faults of our education system.

    To regain that, we must become sincerely curious. It almost doesn’t matter what about. I’m old enough to remember a set of books called an “Encyclopedia”. They have disappeared now, but what a marvelous experience when I was in school. I would head into one to look up something for school,and get sidetracked by all sorts of interesting concepts I stumbled across on the way. Looking up a simple fact that should take a few minutes could take an hour or more because of the interesting things I discovered along the way.

    Of course, the Encyclopedia has gone the way of the Dodo now. That’s sad. But we have a tremendous amount of the world’s knowledge immediately available to us. We have Google search (I strongly recommend Duck Duck Go instead), AI chatbots, and Wikipedia, for instance. I recommend looking up 3 random things everyday. When you see or hear a reference to something that sounds interesting on the news or an article, go look it up. It does not matter at all if it is “useful” to you. Curiosity and knowledge builds on lots of random facts that you start tying together over time.

    When you find something you think you might be a little bit interested in, dig into it more. A couple of hours spent going deeper into something that tweaked your curiosity is not wasted. You might discover a real interest. I have read that if you spend 10-20 hours studying a subject, you will know more about it than most people in the world.

    Fast action at a County Fair©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Distractions

    We have an insane level of distractions in our world now. Besides the “normal” things like jobs and family, we have whole industries spending billions of dollars to capture our attention every second possible. Social media, TV, news, and our phones constantly are screaming “ME! ME!”. Each wants us to believe it is critically important to stay glued to their channel.

    Amongst all that noise, it is very hard to think independent thoughts. Or think at all. Psychology research shows that we can’t learn effectively unless we have quiet time to allow our brain to assimilate the new information we take in.

    The constant noise and information drowns out thought, and thought is necessary for curiosity. Sometimes disconnecting is the best thing to do. Letting our minds wander, especially when we are out in nature, is extremely healthy for us.

    Giant flamingos, in Colorado.©Ed Schlotzhauer

    A better photographer

    Will asking questions and researching things and giving ourselves quiet space to think make us a better photographer? Well, I believe it will make us a better person, which is part of the equation. These things by themselves will not automatically give us back the child-like innocence and curiosity we miss. But they will help.

    Maybe it could bring us the balance of the having the innocence of eye with the vision of an adult that White described. Perhaps we can be one who has gone full circle and once again sees as a child.

    Try it when you are out shooting. Disconnect. Let your mind wander. Give in to your curiosity. Make shots that your adult mind says are silly, but that seem fun and, who knows, they might lead to something. Even if they don’t make some great new image, you tried something new and had fun.

    I will try, too.

  • The Weakness of Photography

    The Weakness of Photography

    I love photography. It is my chosen art form. But photography has a weakness that weakens and cheapens it, in some people’s eye. Can it really be art?

    Literal

    We point our camera at a scene, press the shutter release, and it is recorded. Everything in the field of view is captured. We didn’t have to arrange it or decide what should be there. It is all scooped up.

    Therefore, most photographs are straight views of literal scenes. Little thought and consideration went into it. There is trash and power lines we are expected to overlook. And that telephone pole growing out of the subject’s head: yeah, ignore that.

    If we want to document a place or time, that can work. But we wouldn’t call that art.

    Green surreal image©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Too easy

    Along with that is just the fact that taking a photograph is too easy. Anyone with a phone can take a pretty good picture with no thought or effort. An amazing amount of computational science is applied in your phone to make it look good. And just like everyone else’s.

    This is clearly seen in the trillions of photographs uploaded to social media and photo sites each year. And by the billions of hours of video uploaded to YouTube and TikTok. Everyone can do it, and they do.

    If everyone can do it, it must not be special.

    Too mechanical

    And photography is criticized for being too mechanical. It seems more technology than art. People don’t need training to do it. Just Point and Shoot.

    We capture a photograph in an instant. It can be sent anywhere in the world in milliseconds. We can paste it on social media for the world to see and comment on.

    How many people shooting pictures on their phone are spending much time considering the artistic elements of the work? No, there is little to consider. Click the button. If you don’t like it, use the AI editing controls to make it good, or just shoot it again.

    It’s just an automatically produced thing. It is no longer a picture; it is a commodity.

    Abstract. Could be a volcano?©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Is photography worthless?

    To me, who likes photography as art, that sounds very bleak. So, has photography become worthless?

    I like to think not.

    Photography is an extremely challenging art form that requires intense effort and years of practice. At least for me. And at that, I’m just getting somewhat competent at it. I don’t think I will ever consider that I have mastered it.

    That sounds contradictory. Thoughtless image capture that anyone can do or difficult and thoughtful art. Obviously 2 different things. That’s where we go off track in the argument. It is not photography that is art or not, it is our intended purpose and expectation. Are we capturing an image for a utilitarian purpose or creating a piece of art?

    The same tools and processes are used for both. That confuses things.

    Freshly filled wine bottles©Ed Schlotzhauer

    The difference

    On the surface, it is hard to tell the difference between photography being done for art vs for utilitarian reasons. The subjects could be the same, the equipment could be the same, the locations could be the same.

    If you watched the photographers work you would probably spot some differences, but not always. That is not a reliable indicator.

    It may be overly simplistic, but I think the difference is what is going on in the photographer’s head. Their intent and purpose, the feeling and insight they bring to the scene, and their experience. It becomes art because there was an artist present, involved, responding, feeling, creating. This can transform a simple scene into art.

    The subject

    If we are creating for art, the depth of our involvement must become far more intense than a simple snapshot. One of the traps many people fall into is the consideration of the subject itself. Did you just capture the obvious shallow view of the subject, or does the image say something about our feeling or perception of the subject? Did we delve deeper and try to bring our something that is not obvious on the surface?

    A representation of the subject is just that. What you see is what you get. But if we can bring our something different or new or insightful to challenge the viewer, the image could have staying power.

    Fence seeming to submerge into the sky©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Composition

    Most people walk up to a scene and snap it. An artist thinks about composition. About how the parts relate and are perceived. And about what to include and what to leave out.

    Often the artist has no ability to re-arrange the scene, but they have freedom to change their position or to zoom in to parts of the whole. Small changes of location or framing can make huge changes in the visual effect.

    If we are serious about photography, we know the basic principles of composition: placement on thirds, leading lines, visual weight, etc. How we use them while making an image depends on our personality and experience. I don’t have a checklist of composition rules with me. For me, it is more subconscious recognition of them. As in “there’s a potential leading line; can I exploit it; will it make the composition stronger?”

    A well composed image will be seen as designed, intentional, crafted, and more whole.

    Rusty old Ford in garage©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Form

    An artist will look at the same scene as anyone else and see interesting shapes and patterns. They are aware of textures and reflections and how the light is playing across the subject.

    Sometimes form is the whole purpose of an image. This is especially common in black & white. One of the reasons for producing an image in black & white is to remove extraneous elements like color and immediate subject recognition, leaving the forms and tones as the focus.

    Subtleties like this are not usually obvious to the snapshot shooter.

    Gesture

    This is a favorite of mine. Gesture is not just a certain movement. It is what shows the innate character of something. The great Jay Maisel is a huge proponent of the concept. He goes so far as to say:

    It’s light, gesture, and color. It really doesn’t matter what you photograph.

    Jay Maisel

    That is, the subject is less important than capturing that thing or moment that shows its essence. Discovering the gesture can be hard, but it is worthwhile. We could take a picture of a thing, or we can look for something that shows what the thing does or feels or how it behaves. That gives it life.

    Finding and capturing the gesture usually requires intense concentration and attention. You must approach it with the will to find it. But it is a process of the artist looking deeper and with more intent than the snapshot shooter.

    Through a Screen©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Are photography’s problems solvable?

    Yes, because it doesn’t actually have a problem. Photography is a wonderful practice and every bit as artistic as any of the other established art forms.

    The fact that the vast majority of pictures are taken as snapshots/throwaway/selfies/travel memories does not invalidate that the medium can be used for artistic purposes. That would be like saying most people can’t write well, so writing is not valuable.

    I use my phone to grab quick shots all the time: a sign with a name or telephone number I need, a part I need to find at the hardware store, something that amuses me, or my grandson. These serve exactly the purpose I want. Either a throwaway or a memory. Every day I also take my “real” camera with me and occasionally see something to shoot from an artistic viewpoint.

    These are 2 different activities with completely different purposes. Neither invalidates the other. Both exist together and do not compete. The same technology is being used for different goals. It’s not the subject or the equipment or the location that separates them. It is the intent and skill of the photographer. And it is the desire of the artist to create.

    Denver International at night.©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Is photography as an art going away?

    As far as photography as art going away, I would claim the opposite. Since most pictures taken are mediocre, at best, when we come along with an image created with skill and an artistic style, it will get noticed. It will be obvious to most people that this is different and special.

    The introduction of photography caused many painters to fear it would replace them. Instead, it freed them from a lot of routine and repetitive work, like basic portrait commissions, and allowed them to create. Impressionism and other artistic directions emerged. I believe we will see some of the same.

    As photographers who are trying to lift our work above the base level, we should not be apologetic about photography or feel inferior. Our intent is to produce art. We should not price our work at giveaway prices because many people expect that. Look for a market that appreciates the difference.

    You are an artist. You are creating things that are unique and special – aren’t you? If not, you will be swallowed up in the giant flood of ordinary and AI generated images.

  • Outside the Frame

    Outside the Frame

    I have written about using the frame to our advantage. But it is important to also be aware of what is happening outside the frame.

    The frame

    The frame is one of the most powerful drivers in photography. We need to learn to use it, to compose within it, and, as I said, to dance with it.

    An image can only be what is in the frame. That is all our viewers can see.

    But I don’t want to leave the impression that nothing else is important. As artists and people, we also must be aware of what is happening outside the frame. We often can use it to our advantage. The image is finalized within the frame, but it often depends on a larger area.

    Stylish airport lighting©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Context

    Every image has context. We may isolate an image to reduce the specific context and make it more universal. But context is there, and it is important.

    The scene we photographed was part of a context. The context gave locale and meaning to the scene. We must be aware of that and decide how to use it.

    Sometimes we use part of a scene to represent something more universal. A shot of half dome in Yosemite is a shot of half dome. It is so unique and recognizable that that is all it will be. But a picture of a mountain cascade can represent the idea of mountain cascades almost anywhere in the world. Depends on your intent.

    Do you want to represent this specific scene or are you making a statement about things like this in general? Part of that is managing the context.

    Menu on the mirror©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Action path

    Sometimes action is happening out of the frame that is significant to the composition we are trying to make. If we are shooting sports, we could set up the desired shot with the background or lighting we want and wait for the runner (or bicyclist or race car or football player or whatever) to move into the position we anticipate. For this to succeed, we must be very aware of the action that is happening. And we must be familiar enough with the activity to expect to be able to predict the path of the action.

    I have heard many street photographers talk about setting up the shot they want then wait until someone moves into the perfect position. That takes anticipation and awareness of the movement of others around us. And an understanding of the paths people are likely to take within a scene.

    And patience.

    An unexpected travel shot. It came from taking the time to stop and watch and wait.©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Danger

    Let’s not overlook that there are potential dangers outside the frame that we need to be aware of.

    Say I am concentrating on setting up a landscape scene. I am completely focused on the viewfinder as I perfect the composition and decide on exposure. But if a mountain lion is stalking me, I need to know about that. The reality is that it is unlikely, but it is part of the awareness I need to maintain.

    A more realistic example is a street photographer. Is the location safe? Am I annoying people and starting to attract unwanted and potentially dangerous attention?

    Or take a sports photographer. They must stay aware of the action happening on the field or the track. There is a normal flow to sports action that allows us to anticipate situations. But there are those rare and exciting moments where something unexpected breaks and we must be ready. Maybe a pass interception in a football game, maybe a runner missing a hurdle and falling, maybe race cars crashing. The breaking action could lead to the signature picture of the event, or it could be dangerous to the photographer. Or both.

    This is generally called situational awareness. It is important for keeping us safe and it is useful for making better pictures.

    Mysterious road, Where is it? Where does it go?©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Interacting outside the frame

    I said that a viewer can only see what is withing the frame. That’s literally true, but not the end of the story. Some creative photographers have subjects deliberately looking out of the frame. As viewers, we know from experience that they are interested in or interacting with something unseen. That can bring a heightened engagement. It arouses our curiosity about what is going on.

    Our subject could be staring intently at something out of the frame. A quarterback could be passing the ball to an unseen receiver. An archer could be at full draw, ready to release the arrow. But at what?

    These are examples of action outside the frame influencing what is going on within the frame. It makes the viewer guess what is happening.

    You are directed out of the frame to complete the story.©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Better images

    Many images happen in a context. Understanding the context and working with it instead of against it often leads to better pictures. We create the image within the frame, but events or context outside the frame can strongly influence what we do.

    Action happens and moves into our frame. Often that is what we desire. We must anticipate and plan for that action and be aware of it happening.

    We must also maintain situational awareness of what. is happening outside the frame. This helps to keep us safe. If we get run over by a truck, we will probably stop making creative new pictures.

    These ideas only discuss the physical situation when we are shooting. Many, many other things outside the frame influence us. Our attitude, how we feel, our knowledge, our curiosity, and our life experiences all impact us.

    It is hard to overstate the importance of the frame, but the frame is not the universe of everything significant to a photographer. There is a world outside the frame that impacts the world inside the frame. We must balance them.

  • Culling

    Culling

    I recently finished a major part of a large project to cull my “best” images. It was much harder than I thought. Culling is hard.

    Why

    More than once, I asked myself “why?”. I thought this would take me 2-3 weeks. It ended up taking 4 months.

    Why in the world would I take on something like this voluntarily? I felt it was necessary to be honest with myself. This is a follow-up and expansion of a previous article on critiquing your own work.

    I use a multi-layer “grading” system to promote my best work up the ladder. It has been in place for several years and it seemed time to do a reality check to see if I believed my system. It is too easy to rate a picture higher just because I like it without it being truly worthwhile.

    And to be honest, there were a couple of concerns I wanted to check on. These are hard to express or admit, but I wanted to see if my recent work was as good as my earlier work and if my work, overall, was up to the standard I want for myself.

    abstract intentional camera movement view of a tree.©Ed Schlotzhauer

    How

    My methodology was just to plow through it from beginning to end. I did not attempt to organize images by subject or style or anything. It is just a huge, roughly chronological list of my top-rated pictures.

    My criterion is that any image in this top group meets my standards. I should be able to randomly select any one and I will be glad to hang it on my wall or enter it to a show. Of course, I don’t like each one equally. I have favorites. But any of this top group should be a very good representation of my work.

    All the images are in a collection in my Lightroom Classic catalog. In general, the goal is to examine each image and keep or demote it. These are ones that have made it to the top of my list. In no case did I delete any pictures, except for a couple of cases of duplicates. Rejecting an image from my top category means demoting it a level, not removing it.

    If things were actually that easy, it would have gone faster. The reality is that it is hard for me to keep from “improving” some of them. So, I occasionally take side trips into editing. I enjoy that, but it is a time sink.

    Abstract. Could be a volcano?©Ed Schlotzhauer

    What did I learn

    I went back through nearly 20 years of images in my Lightroom catalog. I have used Lightroom since its beta release. It’s first production release was in 2007. That is quite a trip down memory lane.

    I have not had time to do an intense analysis, buy here are some observations.

    20 years ago, I was more active, willing to do more vigorous physical activity in any weather. I have slowed down (or gotten smarter). I still get out in a lot of weather, but fewer long back country treks.

    Way back, I seem to have been a little more willing to shoot anything that was mildly interesting. Now I am older and more cynical and judgmental. I have lost some of the child-like wonder of the world. I am less likely to shoot if I don’t feel it will be a good picture. This is something I need to work on. Staying in a state of wonder is important to me.

    Many of my oldest pictures are travel related. I still shoot a lot when traveling, and I like it, but I have improved my mindfulness and attention in everyday shooting near home. This is good.

    My old pictures tend toward technical perfection and formal compositions. I have moved quite a way beyond that. For one thing, I’ve developed more taste for movement, both intentional camera movement and subject blurring. “Perfection” has a whole different meaning for me now. Abstraction is more common.

    I’ve always had a “good eye” and the ability to isolate interesting events and creative compositions. It has gotten more refined with time. That is encouraging.

    Many of the themes I used to shoot are still well represented in my newer work. I haven’t run off in wildly new directions. One thing I do note is that I seldom photograph people anymore. This is a shame, because I like a lot of what I did in the past. But times seem to have shifted, and I don’t want the potential hassles that can come with it anymore.

    It is probably fair to say my older work showed more youthful enthusiasm while my newer work is more mature and investigative. I’m sure there are deeper insights that will come with more thought.

    Rusty abstract©Ed Schlotzhauer

    What’s next

    If I was really going to do this rigorously, I guess I would create sub-collections of these surviving top images by topic: all landscapes, all architecture, all travel, etc. That way I could more closely compare the changes that have happened in the treatment of similar subjects over time. I probably won’t.

    E.B. White said that “analyzing humor is like dissecting a frog. Few people are interested and the frog dies of it.” I think it would be like that for me if I did such a detailed analysis.

    I’m not really that interested in the fine points of how I have changed. I will just note that it happened. The reality is that I wanted to sneak up on that question I was afraid to consider too openly: is my current work as good as my old work? With some reservations, I will say that the new is good.

    What I do observe and mentioned before is that I have lost some of the child-like wonder and innocence that used to be there. I need to do more stupid, crazy, improbably things just to see what happens. Even if I’m pretty sure it won’t be a keeper. Just to see it.

    Misty morning in rural France©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Was it worth it

    It is harder to definitively say it was worth it. This took a lot of time. But yes, critically reviewing what I considered my best work over the last 20 years was worth it. Just renewing the memories was worth it.

    I tried to be brutal in my screening, but I am surprised that I only “demoted” about 20% of my collection. The changes in the quality of my sensors and lenses over time is obvious. A surprise is that did not necessarily affect my perception of the quality of the images. When a jpg image taken with an old 6 MPix sensor and only a fair lens can hold its own next to one taken with a great lens on a 47 MPix sensor shooting RAW, that says it is something other than just technical perfection.

    Expressing this indefinable quality still eludes me. I got some insight on the effect, but I cannot clearly put it in words. But I guess some insight is more than I had before.

    I called this exercise culling. It turned out to be much more. I encourage you to do something like this as a self-check.

    A parting observation

    I just went through my entire collection of “good” images. I had to edit quite a few of them while I was at it. They just needed it. I couldn’t pass over them without it.

    While going back through the collection to review them for this article, I had to edit some of them again. Even though I had just been through them.

    This brings up something I have learned about myself over the years: an image is an opinion that changes with time. Even over the course of a few weeks, I can change my opinion. This is one reason prints are important. They freeze an opinion at a point in time.

  • No I in Team

    No I in Team

    It’s a well-worn motivational expression: There’s no I in “team”. Whenever I hear it, I automatically turn it around to reverse the meaning. My art is not a team sport.

    Teamwork

    Teamwork can be a powerful force. Getting a group together and focused on a common problem can have amazing results. The comradery built can be very strong. In extreme cases, like a military group, members will sacrifice their lives for each other.

    This is a phenomenon that we seldom find in our everyday lives. Perhaps you have the good fortune to have been a member of a great team. It is probably something you remember as a powerful experience.

    French Circus poster©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Some things need a team

    There are obvious cases where a team is required. Most sports require a team. No single player, no matter how skilled, can play all the positions simultaneously. All must work together to defeat the opposing team.

    A team can be a force multiplier. The group can perform more physical work than an individual. Think of a bucket brigade.

    Today’s workforce emphasizes teamwork and collaboration. It is taken as a truth that good teamwork improves productivity. I can sort of agree. Having seen both sides, I can say that working in a well-functioning team is much more productive and fun than being in a situation where there is conflict and tension.

    I say “sort of” because I also do not believe that teams are the best structure for everything.

    Cloth window©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Introvert

    Here’s one of my problems with the team concept: I’m an introvert. Group activities drain me rather than energizing me. An introvert can be a good team contributor, but it takes a savvy leader to make it happen. It is all too easy for a quiet introvert to be dominated by loud extroverts.

    “As an introvert, photography has always appealed to me in great part because it’s not a team sport—it’s something I can do by myself, in places and times of my choosing, and for no other reason than to satisfy my own sensibilities.”

    Guy Tal

    I have too often seen group efforts steered by the loudest or most opinionated members. The results were not always excellent.

    As an introvert, I have a built-in suspicion of group activities. It is not an environment I naturally thrive in. It can happen, but it is rare.

    Here is an example of it working: I worked with a fairly consistent group of excellent engineers for several decades. It was extremely productive and congenial. We got along well, we respected each other, we could disagree and resolve issues, and we supported each other. Managers and projects would come and go, but our core group stayed mostly intact. That is not to say we were best friends. We didn’t socialize much, although now that we are retired, several of us still get together weekly for lunch. The team bond was that strong.

    That is a situation I don’t expect to see repeated much these days. But is my example of what a good team can be.

    Color spill©Ed Schlotzhauer

    Artist

    However, I am an artist now. I think that changes everything. The rules, the expectations, the responsibilities are all different now. It is a different world than the corporate environment.

    Corporations are anonymous groups of people working to make a profit. The individuals doing the work, no matter how creative, are seldom known. Apple back in the Steve Jobs and Jonny Ivy days might be the exception.

    But for an artist it is the opposite. My work is judged to be my own. My name is on it. It is very personal. It should be the best work I am capable of doing in any given situation. Good or bad, I’m the one held responsible.

    As an artist and an introvert, I work in my head. Quietly. Other people’s voices and opinions are distracting noise. What I create is based on my own vision and decisions. After I have created a piece, I am very willing to listen to your opinion of how I could have made it better, but I don’t want you there talking to me while I am in the field working. If I were to listen to you there, the resulting work would be our piece, not mine.

    Collaboration

    This strikes to the heart of one of the great beliefs of the corporate world, that collaboration is the key to everything. I disagree.

    Some proponents of collaboration say that results achieved by collaboration are always superior to results of any individual. Again, I disagree. I have seen good and bad results from collaboration.

    I will claim that the results are about the average of the capability of the group. But in a lot of groups, some of the individuals are below average. Therefore, the group result seems better. This is the actual benefit to the corporation: collaboration usually produces acceptable results.

    Whether or not collaboration is superior in corporate settings, I believe that it is always a mistake for me in my art, mainly fine art photography, which is my subject. My reasoning is that a work of art is an expression of the artist’s creativity and vision and feelings and skill. If I collaborate with someone, I cannot put my name on it and claim it as my creation. You would not see me; you would see a group effort.

    Besides, I am not interested in making acceptable images. I strive to create excellent ones. If I fail, I want it to be completely my fault.

    Gold mannekin©Ed Schlotzhauer

    No Team

    I believe an artist is required to succeed or fail on his own. The kind of art I do is not a team sport. What I create is solely my responsibility. It will stand or fall on my ability. No excuses. No one else is directly contributing to it.

    I would love to have a mentoring or support group of fellow artists, but I have not found one around me and there is a rather small population of local artists I share a vision with. It seems like it would be rewarding to be able to try out ideas with other artists and have a close enough group that they could tell me when I am veering off in the weeds. Shared ideas, education, and encouragement would be great.

    But even if I had such a group, I would not collaborate with them on any of my works. Suggestions might be given and received, but it would be totally my decision what to do with the advice. The result would be mine and my responsibility. All praise or blame falls on me.

    A strange side effect of this is that being an artist is a kind of arrogance. It is my work, my creativity, my vision. No one can tell me what I should do.

    I did it my way

    This is an extreme position, but it is the way that seems necessary for me. I can’t create in a noisy environment with other people trying to give me inputs. It’s part of my introversion. An atelier would not work for me, although I can see that it would be a good fit for some.

    I will have to be content being a lone wolf, working independently, taking full responsibility for my own creation. And at this point in my life, I would not want it to be any other way. My purpose is to exercise my creativity and create art that pleases me, not to become commercially successful in group projects that I contribute to.

    There’s no I in team. I am not in a team. A team is not where I work. That would feel lonely and isolated to some, but it energizes me.