The Nude Photographer’s Ego

The novelist Samuel Butler said that “Every man’s work is always a portrait of himself”. If this is true, then an ego must be an extremely useful creative tool for any photographer.

A photograph says something about the photographer’s style. It defines who he is. It is his signature, his personality, a reflection of his ego.
A photographer’s portfolio is a map of his experience, and of his thought processes. The lighting, posing, grain and colour of a nude photograph says more about the photographer’s psyche than it ever does about the model’s.

The growth of the internet and digital cameras have resulted in an explosion of wannabe photographers, very few of whom ever make the transition from GWC (Guy with camera) into true artist. The element of quintessential talent eludes them. They may have bloated or deluded egos, and think their own work is absolutely fantastic, but very few can call themselves “photographer” in the true sense of the word – very few have that that unique style, that elusive “spark” which defines a highly successful and recognised photographer. (Saying that, I do however appreciate that to become a truly great photographer takes considerable time. This qualification is entirely necessary, or Rich will sulk!)

There are many photographers who do have this “certain something”, but I will pick one to illustrate my point. Iris was commenting recently that she could spot one of Chip Willis’s photographs out of a hundred others. I could too. Chip has a unique style, a flavour, a mood to his images, which reflects the way he thinks about women and shows the true essence of his personality. This is the true reflection of a photographer’s “ego” in the real sense of the word. A photograph is the heart and soul of the photographer.

Of course, when you meet a photographer face to face, he might be considerably different from how you have imagined him. There are so many emotional layers on top of the real person inside, you could never recognise the real ego at his core, just the false ego which he presents to the world. You can only see the real person by studying his art.

Photographers are largely contradictory and complicated by nature. Many photographers are obsessive, consumed, arrogant, self-indulgent, self-opinionated, and derisive of others’ work in private, yet polite and full of praise for their contemporaries when face-to-face. Hypocrites to the end. Yet this is why we find them so irresistible. Because underneath they are the most insecure and genuine bunch of people you could ever hope to meet. Photographers constantly fluctuate between ego and insecurity. A combination of arrogance and humility, which is incredibly sexy.

Yes of course we are all insecure in part - it makes us who we are. But a good photographer nurtures this chip (!) on his shoulder and reflects it in his art. He takes his bruised and battered ego, all his self-doubts, his views about the world, and uses the tool of the camera to portray this in a single image.
This is how real art is created, rather than just a photo.
This is what separates a real photographer from a GWC. The models may come and go, but the signature and core essence of the photography remains the same.

The powerful need to create art, to feed the ego, is an all consuming passion, a driving hunger that must be fed. The photographer becomes lost within his art, a slave to the ego. In being true to his inner ego, he finally finds himself.

And what happens beyond ego ? When a photographer realises the influence that his psyche makes on his work, and then consciously puts his ego aside, and looks into the void beyond? The photographic chasm where there are no emotions, no limits?

Well, as Indiana Jones once said: “Fortune and glory, kid. Fortune and glory.”




Lynx again, in one of my favourite ever shots.