Nature and Wildlife photography, Is is Boring?
While lurking through some old posts on other forums I came across that subject line and it turned into a very very long discussion.
If it isn’t boring then why do we not see any being sold at art shows and is it actually art? What makes a photo interesting enough to others to make it worth even over $100 let alone the hundreds we sometimes have invested into that special trip to get that special shot?
I know over time I have gotten bored from just getting another photo of a bird on a limb Or another deer staring at you, Or another butterfly on a flower. to a bird in flight to a bird doing something like catching dinner. Is it just me that thinks much of what I shoot on a given day is boring even if technically superior to the average guy that can afford the same gear as mine regardless if he knows how to use it or not?
And do the photographers that show at art shows ever sell enough to make it worth while even for their ego? Or perhaps there are some that make enough to cover the cost of travel and equipment. I contend that the photographers that actually make a living or a substantial part of it do so by a totally different venue, that being private galleries and direct mail to valid clients and collector of nature photography.
I do not personally find the act of taking a photo boring but in many cases the task of culling and post processing boring. Conversely I knew a photographer that spent more time in photoshop than in the field.
So, there you have it. Is our subject boring to 99% of the viewers or is is boring to us unless we strive for the technically difficult? Many of us take photos for a vast array of reasons. What are those reasons? to get out in the wild even if no photo is taken? to challenge oneself technically or against nature (wait it out to get the shot or in some uncomfortable position)? To sell and make a living? Self gratification? therapy even? I am sure there are many others.