Well, it’s hard and it’s not hard. We’re lucky enough that we live in a world that it’s relatively easy to eat – in america anyway I can find a job and earn money and feed myself. I don’t need to hunt, I don’t need to fight others over scraps. So it’s not that hard, really. And I try to appreciate how amazing and plentiful life is…

but to be creatively satisfied? To be living my fullest, yes that is hard.. I’m probably going to find it through teaching, in the long run, and not just my visual work. There may have to be a balance for most people.

The commercial world always felt more like fighting over scraps to me, so I’m just not heading in that direction anymore.

but also, since working more and more in photography, my desire to go purely photography has been brought to the surface. because i am going through the process on a daily basis thinking “what can i start to take pictures of to get noticed? what can i collect photos of to try to get them published?” but i realize the photos i love are the ones i take of friends and family, and just daily life things that happen or i see. and i don’t know how to clump them together to make something that someone else would see as worthwhile. and i start to think that maybe photography is just a hobby, an emotional thing that i am attached to, but can never really make a living of it? at least not happily.

it’s hard, and i’d like to know how i can use it to my advantage. :)

I think it’s obvious that any photographer worth his salt has some kind of idea flow going through his head while before, after, and during shooting, but it’s certainly different when working in one mode than an other. Basically, there’s a distinction between thinking “I’m working to get a shot that means this” or “I’m getting this shot that is doing something for me, what does it mean?”

I’ll elaborate on this further, and on why I think doing ideational projects (verses gut curatorial) is important in another post soon.

I would argue that all photographic work, even that of the “non-project-based” variety is, in fact, project-based. What seems to separate this style of photography is the timeline and what some might call an ambiguity of intent (this can be resolved in the editing process). Whether you’re intuitively responding to life or creating a witty satire, you’re still working on a preconceived idea, whether you want to or not.

Many who take on the “photography-as-lifestyle” approach feel discriminated against, but to me the reason is obvious. As it was mentioned both here and on Conscientious, it’s often used as an excuse for poor editing. Problems arise when the photographer is unable to effectively edit the body and explain the motivations behind the work. I tend to agree with J.M. Colberg on this one in that this methodology isn’t all that problematic within the context of the aforementioned commercial ambition (Mikael Kennedy is a contemporary example). If it’s good, people will consume it. If not, it will be ignored.