The Online Photographer

My father, who worked in education, says that it's easy for a teacher to tell students what they're doing wrong, but much harder to identify what they are doing right, so that they can consolidate it and build on it.
Same concept.

I think I may of said something similiar i my comment on that previous post, totally agree.

It isn't so much about attacking weaknesses as it is about filling gaps. Play to your strengths by all means; but attack the weaknesses that prevent you from doing so as effectively as you might.

And then, life isn't all career. I often find it salutary to do things precisely because I'm not particularly good at them.

I respectly disagree. You were right the first time.

Dear Mike,

Heh, I'm averse to getting new glasses. An even less rational dislike than yours-- doesn't even hurt and costs a lot less. But I always put it off waaaaaaay beyond all sanity.

I'm about a year overdue right now.

I'd make a New Years resolution to get new glasses,'cept I generally ignore'em. Last year's were a bust-- I ain't even gonna try.

pax / Ctein

I have to disagree on this one Mike.

I suck at portraiture, to the extent that I wouldn't do it even for my family. Since having my children, I realized that if I don't do something about it, I'll never see photos of my children, except through the eyes of another. My portraits are still lame, but I do get a few keepers now and again and I have a happier family now. The more time I put into it, the better I get. I still don't enjoy the work, and far prefer to shoot other subjects, I at least can get the job done and feel okay about it.

If one is weak in a particular area of life, taking time to assess the weakness and strengthening it, like exercising a weak muscle, will make it stronger and more effective. This effects the strong areas as well despite the emphasis on the weakness. If the issue is about focus, not correction, then pretending the weakness is not there, or ignoring it all together simply shows you are either overconfident or myopic. This is not to say that the majority of ones life exercising should be concentrated on weaknesses, but some time and effort should be made to address them. Doing so improves the whole, not just the parts.

In my life, I can say with much conviction, I have never been let down by giving my weaknesses some TLC. Not the most fun way to pass the time, but it always generates a reward in the end.

Mike,

Whilst the craft side of photography might benefit from pursuing such performance management goals as maximisation, repeatability and the elimination of variation, it don't sound like a route to Art to me. I strongly suspect you can't turn creativity into a process. Therefore, I wish you a Happy and Serendipitous New Year.

I completely agree too. The focus on someone's weaknesses is actually part of our education system.

Sir Ken Robinson has some interesting thoughts about that: http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_changing_education_paradigms.html

Damn, I just sold the Xbox to concentrate on "life"... please make up your mind.

Working with a number of young photographers over the past couple years, I’ve had plenty of time to think about this subject. Yes, ultimately of course you want people to build upon their natural talents. But until and unless they’ve gotten serious about photography, many people simply don’t know their own real strengths and weaknesses. What they do know are their own interests and passions, and I think that should always be the starting point.

Many, for example, would love to do street photography but feel that they are by nature too shy to photograph strangers. Once you help them get over that, some take to it just wonderfully. I’ve worked with others who wanted to get into professional travel photography but lacked the confidence that they had what it took. Help them develop the skills and, very often, they do fine.

Beyond that, I’ve always encouraged young photographers to try a bit of everything, just because it gives them a chance to discover areas that they might otherwise have overlooked because they seemed too difficult or different. So, speaking from a creative point of view rather than a corporate one, I’m all for attacking one’s weaknesses. Shake things up, push your limits. It tends to lead to discoveries, certainly for beginners and maybe even the rest of us too.

I strongly agree with this sentence: "What we're good at comes easily to us, so it can seem less important, less 'earned'—as if 'anybody can do that.'" I think this is extremely important to people working in creative fields. It's going to be challenging anyway, so honour what the gods have given you and be ferocious precisely where the work comes easily for you. Taking the difficult path can be the dumbest thing you ever do. It takes some experience to sort this out, but once you recognize a true strength, honour it.

Mike, I found that a morbid, illogical fear of dentists can be cured by having your jaw broken, preferably by a bottle-wielding moron at a party. What they do to you then will make any future mouth treatment seem like the proverbial perambulation in the civic open space.

I think some of both is called for.

My sense of rhythm is terrible. This would not be a grave disadvantage, except that I'm a singer. And I'm a cyclist. Metronome drills help a little, but it takes a lot of rigorous work and a lot of maintenance. Dance class seems to help a lot more, for less effort.

You can view working on my sense of rhythm as playing to a weakness (because well duh, I'm bad at it). You can also view it as playing to a strength, since I am a very good singer for an amateur... and a singer who just lets expressiveness dictate her interpretation is not using all the tools she's got. I'm also not bad at using my bike, and having a better sense of rhythm will let me keep cadence better.

Mostly, I tend to focus on the latter view. (and while dance is not something I'm naturally gifted at, it's a fun way to work on a lot of my weaknesses at once)

Good to hear that (that is, your new position)!
I was nodding while reading your "resolution"; I could do that, and that, and so on. I stopped at the fighting against weakness part. I could hardly do that. My weakness is shooting strangers and now I feel better as I don't have to shoot them anymore ;)

The big mistake is thinking that this is an either-or decision.

I think if anything this demostrates the problem inherent in buzzwords, jingos and platitudes. PLAY TO YOUR STRENGTHS and ATTACK YOUR WEAKNESSES all sound great and they have a ring of familiarity and self-affirmation to them, but it's too easy to take them at face value. As the comments have demonstrated, these statements only have real value when they are deconstructed and examined in the context of the individual's weaknesses, strengths, and most importantly, desires.

A weakness that is of no importance is an irrelevant weakness, and therefore should not even be thought of as a weakness. As such, there's no point in in attacking it.

Maek Lohnes said "I suck at portraiture." So do I. In his case he has a valid reason to not suck at it; so he can have great portraits of his growning family. I don't have kids and I have very little interest in portraiture. Maek should attack his "suck at portraiture" weakness, but I can safely ignore mine.

So what it comes down to is first thinking about what you want, and then deciding on what gets played to and what gets attacked according to how your abilities line up with your desires.

But then that's the trickiest thing of all, isn't it? Deciding what you want.

This article raises the interesting question of whether ones strengths and weaknesses are innate and unchangeable, or whether they are something that can be changed.

For instance, in the case of Dan Budge he could clearly improve his backhand, and indeed it actually became better than his forehand. Is this true in all cases? or are there cases where a skill simply can't be improved, or can't be improved past a certain point?

It is hard to tell - I would like to believe that it always possible to become good at something, given enough time. However, I am forced to conclude that this may not be the case. Of course the practical question, whether the amount of skill you will gain is worth the time you will need to put in, or could you better spend your time doing something else? is simpler, and a matter of judgement in each situation.

Nico

Variation missing so far (is that possible?) ...

Knowing one's weaknesses and strengths presupposes that one already knows what one is going to be making (thus the sports and business models referenced). But such preconceptions -- in creative endeavors at least -- may be the worst kind of weakness.

I have a slightly different take on this, borrowed from “The War of Art,” by Steven Pressfield. Instead of attacking weakness I'm attacking Resistance: that within myself that says “oh, you don't have to go create right now, you can do that later, wouldn't a chocolate gelato be just the thing right now?” That tendency to not put off till tomorrow what can be put off until the day after.

This is not a New Year's resolution. Those never work. It's a decision that I came to a few weeks ago, near the solstice purely by coincidence.

Different play require different skill. To find a good field and game your skill that is useful is sometimes more important. Finding the game first. If you are good or want to good at 100m you should try NOT to think in terms of your strength or weakness in marathon.

In some game, your strength might be your weakness and vice visa.

As one poster said reworded are limited and other than you want to be you and select your own path, I think what we invest has no rule.

For this year, I wish to finish my 9 boxes of 8x10 velvia. 1 down. 8 to go. Anyway kodak 5l e6 kit no more and the game has been changed for me I have to move to another pond to swim. Have to re-think my portfolio.

Mike, when you said weaknesses did you mean skills or personal traits? I understood the former and I think you were right.

I have worked in the IT business for 30 years and it's tough trying to make people project managers when they much prefer being technical gurus. It never works too well, although it's good to have some cross training. But whatever your leanings, to be a good manager or guru means earning your stripes and learning a lot and, more importantly, staying abreast of developments. That's what professional development is all about.

I already chose photography but to me it's a skill set. To improve I need to learn the skills I currently lack, even if I stick to my preferred genre.

This is exactly what I would describe as playing to my strengths. If Dan Budge was playing to his weaknesses he would be at night school studying accountancy.

You do what your well thought thoughts (gut)... lead you to; and if it is fix your weakness - do it with gusto. Take pride in your accomplishment from having done so too.