[veato]

For about 20 years now, I've made brief photo visits to locations that had beautiful scenery (e.g. Grand Canyon, Antelope Canyon, famous lighthouses, Moraine Lake in Canada, Monument Valley Arizona, Oak Alley Louisianna, Autumn colors in Vermont/New Hampshire, Cherry blossoms in Washington DC, Sea Stacks at Bandon Oregon, etc. etc.). I took mostly the same photographs that thousands of others before me had taken.

I fooled myself into believing that somehow, my photos were unique and better than those taken by others of these same subjects. But, my dismal lack of print sales of these images has made me realize that I was wrong - my images (while technically good) were not any more special than the thousands of images that preceded mine.

How could I have ever have thought that in a few days in Hawaii (for example), I could capture better images than the many photographers who actually live in Hawaii and shoot images there 24/7, 365 days a year there? I couldn't hope to capture images in a few short days that rival the images these local photographers (many of whom have photo equipment at least as good, or better, than mine) take.

While I'm not going to be giving up photography, from now on, I will be focusing all of my photography closer to home (Northern Wisconsin, USA). I've canceled my upcoming trip to Iceland...

I'm surprised it took me so long to reach this conclusion. I could have saved lots of time and money by just studying the famous artists and photographers of yesteryear and seen that most of them focused their creative energies in their own "backyards" (i.e. local areas).

Do you host any of these images online so we can have a look?

[victormeldrew]

It depends a little on your goals. If you want to sell stock to a company that produces framed prints for sale at home decor places, or for those that produce postcards, landscapes of scenic locations still sell well, but they need to be technically outstanding. The market is so saturated that it takes something phenomenal to stand out and, even then, it needs to be done repeatedly to earn a living or even a name for yourself.

If you want to be known artistically, no amount of landscapes will cut the mustard. Art photography is all about humanity, emotions, the human condition, social commentary. It needs to say something and no matter how pretty they are, or how technically perfect the image, a canyon or a lighthouse or butterfly just doesn't.

For travel photography, assuming you might want to be known as a travel photographer, even then the views are not worth paying a tog. If you're selling New York, you can pick from a million stock images of the skyline for your brochure. The images that people want are about the life, the people, the culture, the vibrancy. Not a static view of some trees and water.

Pretty landscapes have their place. But to be published or recognised for their quality, they need to be out of this world.

[leekil]

I fooled myself into believing that somehow, my photos were unique and better than those taken by others of these same subjects. But, my dismal lack of print sales of these images has made me realize that I was wrong - my images (while technically good) were not any more special than the thousands of images that preceded mine.

Well, in theory your photos *are* unique because they are your own point of view, not the same as other people. Ultimately, the uniqueness comes not from what you take a photograph of, but how you photograph that subject. Similar to what others have said, don't give up, and you don't have to stop traveling. I generally photograph "in my backyard", but a change of scenery is always nice for some variation in the photographic environment.

If you think your photos look the same as everyone else's, maybe go back and take another look through your photos for the ones that you like but which don't fit all the rules that you might be following for a good photograph. Maybe you just need to find your own style, that fits you, and is unique to you.

[Driline]

While I'm not going to be giving up photography, from now on, I will be focusing all of my photography closer to home (Northern Wisconsin, USA). I've canceled my upcoming trip to Iceland...

I'm surprised it took me so long to reach this conclusion. I could have saved lots of time and money by just studying the famous artists and photographers of yesteryear and seen that most of them focused their creative energies in their own "backyards" (i.e. local areas).

Makes sense. I agree with you. You're lucky Northern Wisconsin is beautiful. Imagine if you lived in the middle of the Sahara desert

[Alex645]

Makes sense. I agree with you. You're lucky Northern Wisconsin is beautiful. Imagine if you lived in the middle of the Sahara desert

Middle of the Sahara? I would LOVE to see a photographerʻs view of the nomadic life of people who live there. No I wouldnʻt want to live there, but I would love to visit and photograph it. Imagine That 70ʻs Show set in the Sahara with Muslim families and teenagers!

[starbase218]

For about 20 years now, I've made brief photo visits to locations that had beautiful scenery (e.g. Grand Canyon, Antelope Canyon, famous lighthouses, Moraine Lake in Canada, Monument Valley Arizona, Oak Alley Louisianna, Autumn colors in Vermont/New Hampshire, Cherry blossoms in Washington DC, Sea Stacks at Bandon Oregon, etc. etc.). I took mostly the same photographs that thousands of others before me had taken.

I fooled myself into believing that somehow, my photos were unique and better than those taken by others of these same subjects. But, my dismal lack of print sales of these images has made me realize that I was wrong - my images (while technically good) were not any more special than the thousands of images that preceded mine.

How could I have ever have thought that in a few days in Hawaii (for example), I could capture better images than the many photographers who actually live in Hawaii and shoot images there 24/7, 365 days a year there? I couldn't hope to capture images in a few short days that rival the images these local photographers (many of whom have photo equipment at least as good, or better, than mine) take.

While I'm not going to be giving up photography, from now on, I will be focusing all of my photography closer to home (Northern Wisconsin, USA). I've canceled my upcoming trip to Iceland...

I'm surprised it took me so long to reach this conclusion. I could have saved lots of time and money by just studying the famous artists and photographers of yesteryear and seen that most of them focused their creative energies in their own "backyards" (i.e. local areas).

I'm also surprised, because I don't think your conclusion is right. Take this as an example: I live in Groningen, The Netherlands. I've lived there most of my life. As a consequence, I take my environment for granted. I don't notice so much here anymore. And you can't capture what you don't notice. Yet I sometimes hear other people say that it's a really nice city. And it is, but to me it's normal. They notice things I don't. Actually, that's part of the reason I want to move abroad, but that's another story.

I do think travel photography can be really hard. Speaking from my own experience, over 95% of my travel photos are just not good enough. But if there's one photo a day that tells the story for me, I'm still happy. I don't care if the photos I take are the same as those taken by thousands of other people. But then I have never tried to sell my photos. My photography, so far, has been just for me.

Preparation can help too. Knowing a bit about the culture, customs, what to expect, etc. can all help you get shots that tell that story.

I think what matters is to develop your own vision. That's the most important tool to get good photos. Don't get your camera out immediately. Give yourself plenty of time to let your surroundings inspire you. This is especially true of landscape photography, e.g. in Iceland (I've also been there). You can take 1000 shots, or you can wait and see what you want to take a photo of, and only then get your camera out.

Also, you can't expect yourself to immediately take the best photos in a place you've never been to before. But maybe, just start taking good photos, and go from there. Have fun, and in the end you may surprise yourself.

Maybe I'm not saying anything new here, but this is just my humble 2 cents.

Btw, that trip to Iceland I made? It was an organized photo trip, and I was with maybe 10 other photographers. Each evening, we would discuss our photos with each other. I can assure you, we did not all have the same photos. I noticed things others didn't, and vice versa.

[Kozlok]

One thing you CAN do is to travel during "off" season. If a location has significant summer appeal, try it in the winter. Maybe on a gloomy day to capture a different mood?

[gofour3]

I've been photographing my travels since the early 1970's and only do it for fun. If I tried to make money from either hobby then it would be too much pressure and seem like work, so I would not enjoy it anymore.

Sure I take the stock photos of famous sights, but I also take lots of street shots and so on to mix things up. Interesting landscapes can be a challenge, so I'll try a different type of film/angle/lens than most people would.

When I went to Antarctica the first time I shot both colour and b&w slide film and also brought my fish-eye lens. My favourite shots of the whole trip were the b&w shots using either the fish-eye or aerial b&w shots from a helicopter. While I liked the colour shots they looked more like what everyone else was taking, the b&w shots looked more unique.

Phil.

[ramseybuckeye]

Give yourself plenty of time to let your surroundings inspire you. .

So true, about a year ago I went to a place with a photography group that was really inspiring, but the first time through you may not see everything. I got some pretty good photos that first time but mostly it left me wanting more.I had hoped to make a trip there with snow on the ground but that never happened last winter. Finally I got to go back yesterday with a plan. An hour and forty minute drive and a hike of a couple hundred feet elevation change to get there before sunrise was worth it to me. I took a little over a hundred photos there in about three hours. Afterwards I took an unplanned drive on the back roads for a couple of hours, roads I've never been on. I stopped four times to take photos of interesting things. And the most interesting one I drove by, and had to turn around and go back, it took a little for inspiration to soak in.

[Fenwoodian]

It depends a little on your goals. If you want to sell stock to a company that produces framed prints for sale at home decor places, or for those that produce postcards, landscapes of scenic locations still sell well, but they need to be technically outstanding. The market is so saturated that it takes something phenomenal to stand out and, even then, it needs to be done repeatedly to earn a living or even a name for yourself.

If you want to be known artistically, no amount of landscapes will cut the mustard. Art photography is all about humanity, emotions, the human condition, social commentary. It needs to say something and no matter how pretty they are, or how technically perfect the image, a canyon or a lighthouse or butterfly just doesn't.

For travel photography, assuming you might want to be known as a travel photographer, even then the views are not worth paying a tog. If you're selling New York, you can pick from a million stock images of the skyline for your brochure. The images that people want are about the life, the people, the culture, the vibrancy. Not a static view of some trees and water.

Pretty landscapes have their place. But to be published or recognised for their quality, they need to be out of this world.

Victor, I think you've done a great job of describing the state of photography today! Well done!

I've displayed and sold landscapes at regional art fairs. Those photographers who seemed to sell the most landscape prints were the ones who used the latest and highest resolution camera equipment and could produce extremely high quality prints. I don't want to compete in that area, as I'd need to continuously be upgrading to the latest cameras and printers.

Instead, I intend to focus on close-ups (not macros) of a specific subject (or person). Sort of an Aaron Siskind approach (check out this glove photo of Aaron's).

[johnmflores]

Thought provoking post, OP. Thanks for sharing. I admire your goal of creating unique and lasting work. That is my goal as well and boy is it hard! I suspect that my only hope is that I am discovered long after I've become fertilizer, but heck it's worth trying. What else am I going to do?

i think your original post was being pretty judgemental, especially to people who like to take pictures on vacation. you're suggesting that doing that somehow cheapens you as a photographer because you take pictures that others already have.

and you shared it i'm sure to start a conversation about your new attitude, not all comments are going to be praise.

I don't think the OP's original post was judgmental to anyone but himself and his own standards and goals.

[Madaboutpix]

Appreciate your original post for its openness and boldness, and for it being about photography as a creative process (as opposed to mere gear talk, which also has its merit, don't get me wrong). That said, I do think you're being unnecessarily harsh on yourself and radical in your conclusions.

To me, as a humble amateur, the chief hallmark of a professional photographer is their ability to consistently deliver pro-quality work under anything but the most adverse conditions, or sometimes even then. Having that ability to get the shot, not just any shot but an engaging shot, in fact several of these, that lesser and less experienced photographers likely wouldn't get. IMHO that is more important than lusting for the one-million-dollar shot that will boost your sales to unprecedented heights and sear your name once and for all into humankind's photographic memory.

Besides, travel photography is too much fun to just completely abandon it. Both the familiar and the exotic have their rightful place in photography. Being a stranger in a place can be limiting and make you susceptible to settling with cliched views, no doubt about it. However, it can also make you less prejudiced, less stuck in photographic routines, and more perceptive of what you actually encounter.

There's a German saying - have no idea whether there's an English equivalent - which runs about thus: Doing one thing, without neglecting the other. Of course, there's much to be said for using one's home advantage, but away games can be won, too. It may take a little more luck, but eventually fortune favours the bold (to abuse another German expression). From my experience, travelling can unlock one's creativity just as much as returning and rediscovering one's home surroundings. Just my two euro cents.

[noelpolar]

For me.... too late to start thinking I'm something special! (at anything really)....... my advice is to go where you find fulfilment..... sounds like your on ya way! Good luck.

(lots of nice thoughts'n views in this thread)

[alamo5000]

My opinion is that if your goal is 'artistic' then we share a big goal. I personally want to create a fine art element into my shots. My tagline kind of sums up my style or rather my goal. To me it's not just an image but a story. If it becomes strictly about 'the image' someone else is always going to be there when the light was just that much better, or when that rainbow magically appeared or whatever.

Personally I love travel and I love being around people who are somewhat different than me. They might be a different color or speak a different language but I like telling their story. When I am doing that the material is endless. I am interested in inspiring people to think, to look beyond the obvious, to educate themselves, to see things, or see people in a different light. The whole thing fascinates me more than anyone. I pretty much march to the beat of my own drum. Hopefully along the way someone will recognize my genius and see the world how I tried to capture it.

It's one thing to run around trying to catalog a place, its quite another to try and capture the mood or feeling of a moment in time.

[SpecialK]

Sometimes the journey is more important than the destination. Souvenirs along the way are nice.