Photographing Icons — Pluses and Minuses (Morning Musings 8/29/14)

Autumn Leaves, Reflection of a Monolith
Autumn Leaves, Reflection of a Monolith

When it comes to photographing “icons” (the famous things that everyone photographs when they visit certain locations) the disagreements can become impassioned and the points of view range from “Don’t do it!” to “That’s why I go!” After replying to a question about photographing a particular icon (Zabriskie Point in Death Valley) recently I thought a bit about how the answer to the “should I photograph them?” question is a bit trickier than either “yes” or “no.” So, here’s an off-the-cuff listing of some things to consider.

Pluses – Reasons to go ahead and photograph them:

  • If you are new to a location, you have to start somewhere. Even if your goal is to eventually develop a deeper and more thorough understanding of a place you will likely need to discover even the most obvious things about the location first, and your knowledge should include these elements as well.
  • There is usually a good reason that an icon has achieved iconic status. If you haven’t seen them before, they are not the “same old same old” to you, so go ahead and enjoy their newness. (I was reminded of this a few years back when I visited Arches National Park for the first time. I had not studied the place at all before going, and my response to the place was a very strong one — even though I didn’t know that I was, at least in some cases, responding to elements that are well-known.)
  • While you are very unlikely to create a wholly new and original photograph of a subject that has been photographed perhaps millions for times (Tunnel View at Yosemite, anyone?), at a certain point in your photographic development there is something to be said for trying to understand the ways in which others have photographed icons and the means (technical and aesthetic) by which they created their images. Consider it a form of distant apprenticeship.
  • Sometimes it is possible to photograph an icon in ways that are new and fresh. This often depends on being able to see past the obvious and on being sensitive to the times when something really special happens with them. It is extremely challenging to create a new way of seeing very familiar things, but it is sometimes possible.
  • If you are very serious about this photography thing, it isn’t a bad idea at all to have  some images of iconic subjects in your catalog for practical reasons.
  • In the right situation, in the right place, at the right icon, on the right day, there can be social value in being in such places. I once photographed Horsetail Fall on a beautiful winter evening in Yosemite Valley, and soon realized that the outcome wasn’t so much going to be photographic as it was realizing the miracle of joining hundreds of people from around the globe who gathered in mid-winter in snowy meadows to gaze upwards toward a high rock face in the hope of glimpsing a transitory and rare effect of water and light and rock.

Minuses – Reasons to be cautious about “icon fever,” and a few thoughts about alternatives

  • It is extremely unlikely that you are going to produce a photograph that is new or special beyond its potential to recall your personal experience of being there. The best photographs of such subjects are rarely made in typical conditions, but instead in truly exceptional light and atmosphere at just the right moment on just the right day in just the right season.
  • There is a risk of falling into the trap of “capturing” trophies — traveling from place to place with the goal being primarily or exclusively to bag shots of those icons. I would argue that this, in and of itself, ultimately is not going to be very rewarding.
  • Too much focus on icons that distract you from other wonderful and beautiful things in the vicinity of the icons.
  • I’ve seen people disappointed that the prospective iconic shot did not work in the light and other conditions that they had to work with — while that very light and those conditions were making other nearby subjects beautifully photographable.
  • Focusing too much on the goal of reproducing the view you already know from other photographs can blind you to other ways of seeing that very thing. What else is in the scene? What smaller element of the scene might make a photograph?
  • By focusing on the things that are iconic, it is possible to miss the fact that great photographs are often less about the objective existence and form of those things, and more about how we see.

Photographing icons has its place. Almost all of us have done it and almost all of us will continue to do so. But if you are at a point where that is your primary goal, I urge you to grow your photography by thinking outside of that box.

Your thoughts? Leave a comment below.

G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer and visual opportunist whose subjects include the Pacific coast, redwood forests, central California oak/grasslands, the Sierra Nevada, California deserts, urban landscapes, night photography, and more.
Blog | About | Flickr | Twitter | FacebookGoogle+ | 500px.com | LinkedIn | Email

Text, photographs, and other media are © Copyright G Dan Mitchell (or others when indicated) and are not in the public domain and may not be used on websites, blogs, or in other media without advance permission from G Dan Mitchell.

3 thoughts on “Photographing Icons — Pluses and Minuses (Morning Musings 8/29/14)”

  1. Dan,

    Thanks for your reply.

    I agree about the difficulty in shooting a familiar subject. When I approach one…even just knowing I will someday approach one has me second-guessing myself. My memory is tainted by all the images I’ve already seen and can’t unsee of familiar subjects. I wish I could forget them, but it’s those original photographs which inspired me to go there myself.

    In a perfect world we’d all be discovering Yosemite on our own…by accident. Wouldn’t that be nice.

    When I’m there, I get the obligatory shot…because, well it’s my turn, I suppose. Then, I spend as much time as possible just looking around. I wouldn’t say it’s a goal of mine, but I do enjoy finding something I suspect everyone else is ignoring.

    It’s weird. No matter how many photographs I see of sunsets, waves crashing on rocks, close-ups of bee on flower, etc. I still feel motivated to take those same types of images.

    Thanks so much for sharing your adventures here.

    -Dusty

  2. I realy enjoy your website, but this subject bugs me a bit. To me, this is a non-issue. Let everyone on Earth take the same photo of the same object time and again. Photography is a personal pursuit. I am not in competition with anyone else for “most original image” of a popular subject.

    The point is moot: Since everyone has already photographed virtually everything iconic already, then we have only the joy of capturing it for ourselves to gain. There’s a certain satisfaction in having MY version of the image on the wall, rather than having purchased it from someone else.

    It’s the same as in music, isn’t it? Why ever play a familiar chord progression when undoubtedly it has been done countless times before?

    It seems silly to me to make a pros and cons list of whether a photo should be taken or not.

    -Dusty

    1. Hi Dusty: I was actually trying to strike a sort of middle ground between folks who love shooting those icons and the folks who think no icon is worth a photograph. I also wanted to acknowledge that the answer is going to be different for every photographer — as I mentioned, a person who is seeing such a thing for the very first time is going to feel one way about it, while a person who has photographed the “icon” quite a few times will feel differently.

      Your musical analogy is a good one and it mirrors a point that I’ve made lots of times. (I think I may have forgotten to say it explicitly in this post through.) It is actually, in many ways, harder to make an interesting and original photograph of a familiar icon than to do so with something that is less well known. And — another idea I’ve written about before but didn’t mention this time — a good photograph is as much about the person making it, and his or her way of seeing, as it is about the supposed subject of the photograph. That is where your music analogy works quite well — a musical performance isn’t just about the specific notes, but very much about how they are performed.

      Take care,

      Dan

Join the discussion — leave a comment or question. (Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately.)

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.