译文／原文：摄影的风格／Photographic Style（1）by Charles Reynolds
原文：Photographic Style （2 ）by Charles Reynolds
这篇文章抄完在此，感觉有些虎头蛇尾，因为摄影风格的确不像绘画那么明显。这次帖子比较长，年下大家忙，请有兴趣的同学随意。几个帖子会有相互的链接。谢谢大家！
Culture Influences Style
There are many outside factors which act upon the photographer to influence how he makes his basic stylistic decisions.
On of these is the style required by the audience for which the pictures are intended. Ideally, this perhaps should not matter, but no photographer exists in a vacuum and the influence is undeniable there. If a professional photographer wants to sell his pictures to a particular magazine he will, within limits, modify his personal style to fit the requirements of that publication. Even the amateur preparing pictures for the contest at his photo club will tend o conform to the style that is popular in that club. On every level the photographer takes not only the kind of picture that he likes but also those which gain him the recognition he desires.
There are other far subtler, cultural influences on the style of a photographer. Every country and area of the world has a predominant photographic style. When viewing quantities of pictures, one soon learns that there is a difference between northern or southern European styles of photo graph or between the pictures taken in Japan or the United States. These differentiations obviously do not apply to each and every picture but the general trends are obvious. Cecil Beaton commented on this in a discussion of the camera in his book The Face of the World: "The extent to which this passive mechanical instrument can be the media for the subjective else,went is no where so apparent as in national styles of photography .English and American photographers produce very different work. In England, we are inclined to be softer and more sentimental in our approach to a subject; American photographers are more direct, more realistic, and at times brutal. Yet there is an infectious vitality in American work. The photographs taken of the late King George VI and his Queen, during their American visit before the Second World War, were so very American that they looked like part of the American scene itself. When in Rome, even the camera does as the Roman do. "
A further stylistic influence is the general cultural climate of the times in which the photograph was taken. There is almost nothing else as contemporary as a photograph. If on doubts this , he has only to look at the pictures published 10, 20, or 30 years ago. The times have changed and the photographic styles like the passions in dress have changed with them.
Photography and Painting
one of the most interesting influences on general photographic style is the constantly shifting relationship of the medium to painting and the other graphic arts. I the early days of photography, its principle appeal lay in the fact that the camera could reproduce literally and objectively what was before. it. Up to that time, this recording function was filled none too successfully by panting and the other graphic arts. After a preliminary moment of panic, when some of the more pessimistic artists thought the new invention marked the end of traditional art, the situation began to balance out. Photography began taking over the areas of literal representation which it could handle best and modern art began moving in the direction of the abstraction which characterizes it today. Some representation fields of art, such as portraiture, were almost completely absorbed by the new medium of photography. Edward Steichen wrote: " Certainly modern art has dumped the business of literal representation, dumped it lock, stock and barrel, for better or for worse, into the lap of the photographer, giving the painter a freedom he is now beginning to use. " As photography grew a little older, it began to compete with the traditional arts for recognition as a legitimate means of expression. Creative photographers, while protesting loudly that they should be recognized in their won right, began producing pictures that were practically indistinguishable from the late 19th century paintings which preceded them. At the same time, some major painters such as Dagas were being strongly influenced in their work by photography. Over the years, photography has continued its evolution toward a style which is purely photographic, while the old pictorials tradition of photographs which look like paintings have persisted feebly in the stagnant backwaters of some of the salons. Even today, the interaction between the painting and the photography continues ad the influence of nonobjective modern art is visible in many of the abstract images being produced by contemporary photography.
In an attempt to supplement my own ideas about photographic style, I took an informal survey of the editors of Popular photography. The first question I posed was:" How can a valid style be developed?" Mike Kinder commented, "Real style can be good only if organic, unlearned. Style resides in the EYE which never stops looking at the image, from the viewfinder to the mounted print. " Bruce Downes felt that "a conscious striving to achieve style can do nothing but achieve mannerism.." Jim Zannutto agreed that style can evolve naturally only through shooting many pictures. "Sometimes, when shooting pictures, I unconsciously imitate. By imitating enough people, it's possible to get a style of your own. You also learn by imitation," he said. John Durniak commented:" Style takes years to develop and thousands of pictures. I don't think anyone who shoots as casually as I do can have a style. TO have a style and be versatile within this style------that is the crowning achievement. "
Its Commercial Value
Most of the editors recognized the commercial value of style. Lee Drukker felt that "a definite, recognizable style can be an economic advantage to the working photographer, a trademark. By consistently turning out work that is just a little different, always in the same direction, the photographer builds a reputation. " Jim Zanutto's terse comment was "Sytle sells. Do you want to sell?"
Several editors commented upon the problems of working within a particular style. John Durniack observed that " there are a few men )Penn, Aedon, Shaw, Stern) who have developed a definite style and are bought for it in the commercial area. I feel, however, that they are always fighting themselves, trying their hardest to be versatile within their styles. The fear of turning out something that look like yesterday's assignment is constantly over them. "To have this fight within a style is healthy. " Lee Barry warned that " a photographer who recognizes that he has a stye and grease ti stat within it is doing himself a terrible disservice, As the history of any successful painter proves, style must undergo change in order ti remain dynamic. " At about the same time, Ken Heyman came into the office and I decided to ask a working photojournalist for his comment on style. Hyman said, "I have consciously tried to steer away from developing a style. When I see myself taking a certain kind of photograph over and over I make a conscious effort to stop it. I think that for a young photographer it is a mistake to have a personal style too early. The danger that a photographer will consciously try to develop a style that is merely a gimmick was commented upon by almost everyone.
Whatever the commercial value of a style and its danger as a limit to creativity, all the editors agreed that as a photographer shoots name picture and becomes complete master of his tools, a consistent visual approach often emerges. Ideally, this remains flexible and allows him to develop. All of the editors felt that certain photographers could usually be recognized by their distinctive style, although Bruce Downes emphasized that the degree to which a style is recognizable is directly related to the control the photographer is able to exercise over what he is shooting. "The closer a photographer comes to canned spontaneous work, the less likely he is to develop a recognizable style, " he said.
Experience Produces Style
The fact that only by shooting name pictures and becoming completely experienced in his medium can a photographer evolve a style has been illustrated to me name times in my job. When you see, as I do, a considerable umber of photographers' portfolios in the course of a day's work, it becomes possible to predict, with considerable success, how long a photographer has been shooting by the consistency of his stylistic point of view. The beginning photographer may show you 20 photographs, some of them good pictures, but each of the 20 might have been shot by a different person. With an experienced photographer this is almost never the case.
IN photography, style seems to become most apparent when you view many pictures by on photographer. In painting, where the image is shaped more completely by the personality of the artist, it is comparatively simple to look at on painting by Van Gogh or one painting by Cezanne and identify who made it. In photography it is practically impossible, even for an expert, to positively identify the work of a photographer from one picture. The only really fair way to distinguish between the work of a photographer with a personal organic style and the work of one of his imitation is to look at several pictures by each.
No one, if shown an unfamiliar example of the work of Henri Cartier-Bresson and a successful photograph by one of his many imitators, would be able positively to distinguish between them. In terms of large number of photographs by each photographers, however, the qualitative difference between Cartier-Bresson's work and the work of the imitator who has adopted a style not really his own, would soon become apparent. Ralph Evans in his book, Eye, Film, and Camera in Color Photography, makes a similar observation when he writes:"Because styles are, by definition, idiomatic, it is necessary for the observer to see more than one picture to interpret the results. The answer could be in the production of groups of pictures of similar subject matter and the same style. There is much evidence that in photography the group plays the part of the single picture by an artist whose style is known. "
It is this implied versatility within an honest and organically developed style which gives the work of a good photographer both its vitality and its personal touch. Without it style becomes a rigidly imposed limitation to creativity and must ultimately degenerate into commercial gimmick of merely empty mannerism.
谢谢感兴趣的朋友！恭贺新禧！羊年吉祥！
选择“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”
选择“don't run on pages on this domain”
