What Photography will be Iconic in 50 years? Who will be the new Ansel Adams? How well will your photography fair?
To me these are interesting questions. One reason is the enormous number of digital cameras resulting in billions of images of inventory. How will history sort all this out and what will be the criteria for "iconic" given the body of photographs available that document our time? Obviously I don't know but history does tell us a couple of facts: for starters, photojournalist will be recognized for capturing images that represent this time period. These images will be published, studied, and recognized within the time period as the best of the best. The remaining photography which is not published regularly in newspapers, or generally seen in magazines, has a tougher road for recognition. Much of this will be on the web, in websites, forums, more visible than the past, yet also a bit lost in the mass of images available. This is the era of commodity photographs, photos of everything, everybody, available to everyone.
Who will be the Ansel Adams of our time? Again, if we use history, it will be someone with a unique style embodied over a large portfolio of images, that represents something special as compared to the rest of us. For example, Galen Rowell, Frans Lanting, these are people who have developed unique reputations, or will it be someone like Miss Aniela, whose self portraits and creativity forebode great things to come. Anne Leibowitz comes to mind with her distinctive mark on portrait photography, but again, I'm speculating; however, there is a common thread. The attributes that are in my mind are: distinctive, different, visually unique, uncommon, all causing the casual observer to stare . The truly great ones will also create emotion. Now you could say some of those adjectives are the same, you would be right but I'm trying to create an image. These are my words, so you may have a different set but you get the jest. In grappling with this question, one thing is certain, to be remembered, you must be different.
So now, think about you own photography, will it be remembered, if not, do you know why? To date, I don't think my photography makes the grade. I have shot some interesting images, some I'm very proud of, but compared to all other photography, nothing special'. So what would I need to do, to be remembered(don't think about talent at this point).The trick is creating a style that's memorable. Maybe only the truly gifted can do that, but it doesn't mean we should not try with every snap of the camera to capture something special. To use a sports metaphor, becoming a home run king takes a lot of swings at the ball and strike outs. In photography terms, you have to get out and really exploit your photographic eye, make it grow, allow yourself to learn, make mistakes, be diligent. And the fuel that drives this level of activity is honest, straight forward, passion. Not the kind that chases a money stream although nothing wrong with an income, no this is the kind of passion that comes from within, outside of material gain. The thing that makes a photojournalist risk life and limb to record history, or an environmental photographer living a meager life to record change. You don't necessarily have to be poor, many prominent photographers are not, but money is not the motivation, but the byproduct of the passion. Passion is a special emotion, drives behavior to extremes, pushes the limits of creativity, and and rarely produces much more than chaos. But you need that "juice" to make headway, get better, and maximize your talent potential. Now comes the cold hard facts about "special", it takes talent. If you don't have the talent, you may maximize your potential, but still swim with the masses without distinction. I said "may" because, history tells us recognition often comes long after the event, sadly, after the artist is long gone. So you may never know, but that should inspire you to push ahead, not be discouraged, follow your compass, for the love of what you do. If your see yourself getting better, isn't that all that really matters.
Let's bring some closure to who will be "Iconic", we don't know who will wear that badge in 50 years. I suspect they will be different, viewed similar to what I described before, maybe different words but in the ballpark. That's my speculation and I admit, it could be all wrong. In don't have a name or pretend to be aware of many of the great photographers of today. I go to galleries and see names I have never heard of, images that sell for reasons of color and serenity with a decorator. Magazines are full of images created to sell product, by talented photographers who are skilled at catching our attention. All of this has to be sifted like panning for gold to get the big nuggets. But, what if there are no more Ansel Adams, not that this level doesn't exist but there are so many, no individual gets this kind of recognition in the future. Sorta like saying what's the sense in designating the best dressed person leaving Grand Central Station during the morning commute. Everybody is dressed, some look much better than others, some catch your eye, but many are missed. The clown gets more attention than most in a business suit, and the streaker with the briefcase makes the news. And at the end of the day, I think that's the way it will be. Ansel with a red nose and no
