Editor’s have to think beyond themselves. Their primary motivation has to be to help others grow, to tell stories and make systems work – outside of their egos. Editors have to be able to conceive of and communicate ideas that are about things outside themselves. Photographers, on the other hand, for the most part have to be so self involved that they can envelop what they photograph from a completely personal perspective. The more dimensional a person who makes pictures is, the more dimensional her photographs will be, the more they will connect with a subject. We are the photographs we make, they are us.

via APAD blog.

Recommended Posts

Dawoud Bey | 2017 MacArthur Fellow
Portfolio Events May Not Be Worth It For Established Photographers

4 Comments

  2. I agree that Photo Editors might at first glance have more people to answer to, but isn’t the photographer hired as part of that team? Seems like contradictory arguments being made here. You could easily replace Editor with Photographer… or should I say successful photographer. As a photographer, I could never not think beyond myself. Maybe you can afford to be self-involved if you’re Leibovitz or Seliger but if you can’t communicate ideas and create “dimiensional” images then good luck too you.

    Photographers needs to strike a perfect balance. They should be both true to there creative vision but also be able to connect with their subject/client.

    So if we’re making broad generalizations, which is it? Are photographers self-involved or dimensional?

  3. I don’t know if I would agree with that. It sounds — and feels — to me like he’s setting up a false dichotomy.

Comments are closed for this article!