JZA B1

I see some people only posting landscapes. Or only birds. Some only post street photography.
Is it normal for a photographer to gravitate towards just one type of photography over time as one gets more experience?

Also, about styles. Some people seem to prefer natural-looking pictures. Even when light modifiers are used. As long as the final result is as if no additional equipment was involved. But others seem to like producing pics that have strobes with "wrong" color temperature. Or overpowering the ambient. Or reflectors that almost completely eliminate shadows.

I'm not talking about HDR or post-processing. More about different styles. Realistic vs. artistic. Do photographers generally stick to one style? Or should a good photographer be able to adopt any style they need?

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

It all boils down to personal tastes and interest.
Characteristically, I don't do birds or flowers. Occasionally four footed animals though.
Primarily scenics.

Bill_de Loc: US

What's your take on it?

---

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Style <> interests.
Style is the way (method) one interprets/captures their subject of interest.

One can have varied interests and one style.
Or, I suppose one can have different styles for different subjects (interests).

terryMc Loc: Arizona's White Mountains

First of all, I am (mostly) an amateur and I can speak only for myself, not for "photographers."

Since beginning this later in life than many people do, (I was in my early 40s), I have tried just about everything from portraiture to landscape to architecture to macro to tabletop. Flowers, clouds, the moon, cars, buildings old and new, interiors, people, birds, wildlife and zoo life; you name it, I probably tried it at one time.

I still shoot what I like, whether it's a nice cloud formation or a classic car; a desert landscape, or a hawk in a tree. I don't do astrophotography or anything that requires specialized equipment or software, but I do a lot of post-processing and I am currently working on ways, methods, and tools to get colors as precise as I can.

In my view this goes hand-in-hand with the style you reference. In the past, we pretty much relied on the color palette of the film we were using to get the mood we wanted, but now we can manipulate and color grade at will with digital tools. Whether to make the photo look more realistic or more stylized is an artistic choice, and post-processing is a major part of that in digital photography.

An exciting time to be a photographer, for sure.

jamesl Loc: Pennsylvania

-------------
It varies from photographer to photographer.

kpmac Loc: Ragley, La

Why would you chain yourself to a specific genre? Try to master them all.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Even if I have absolutely no interest in a subject?
That'll work out real well for quality images.......

terryMc Loc: Arizona's White Mountains

Heaththiel Loc: Wisconsin

I have certain stronger interests that I like to take pictures of, but at the end of the day, I simply enjoy taking pictures and I'll take pictures of anything that catches my interest. If the subject matter or the surrounding conditions and environment make the endeavor more difficult, all the better. This helps to broaden my experience base and I feel helps me to become a better photographer.

RetCapt Loc: NorCal mountains

My interest, and thus my preference, is landscape/scenic. But that genre can take in a wide scope of territory. For example, both my bride and I love trains, riding them and (for me) photographing them. Since rolling trains are outside, that becomes a part of scenic. But, historic trains are often found in museums. Two of my favorites are the Calif State Railroad Museum in Sacramento, and the Nevada State Railroad Museum in Carson City. Successful indoor photography requires the ability to use the available light.

Train museums, aircraft museums, and car museums are addictive to me. So I need to have the skill set to achieve the same quality from inside that I get from outside.

Before large cities became too enlightened for safe night photography I used to enjoy that, especially when I could achieve a film noir effect (that being one our our favorite film genres). Urban is not wilderness (and wilderness is where we choose to live) but it is still part of scenic.

I shoot for realism, but with some flexibility. I actively use the +/- control to control/protect highlights, especially on sunsets. When I reduce EV that increases the level of saturation. If that results in a more dramatic ('artistic') print, I am fine with that.

Anything I print I first edit in PSE. But that is minor. The camera, and how I have set it, is the determining factor on the final appearance of my prints (my sole photographic product).

I have no interest in other areas of photography. I prefer to devote my photography time to the pursuit
of the closest I can come to mastery of my chosen genre.

User ID

" .......... master of none."

Possibly competent in many, but master ?!?
Mastery demands being emotionally and mentally focused, NOT diffused. Very broad advanced skill level is not mastery.

A true master of any given genre will have honed all the commanding skills for *their* genre, but other skills for other genres they care nothing about would be merely their generalized competence at photography.

User ID

I would never try mastering the cooking of foods I dont care to eat. No incentive.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

(I also thought of master of none. )

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States