I enjoyed this post from Ming Thein – particularly the last paragraph:

The most fundamental counterargument is that uniqueness doesn’t automatically imply instant recognizability: two things can be subtly different, but unless you’re looking for it, they will probably appear the same. And most people are bombarded with such a visual overload that they’re almost certainly not looking for those differences. We therefore have to work harder to create that difference; but not so hard that nobody understands what they’re looking at. There has to be just enough of a trace of recognition for a photograph to be successful as a new idea: draw on the collective cultural consciousness and back catalog of influences. In effect: evolution is still the way to go. But I firmly believe that the direction and pace of change are within the control of the photographer: I keep saying this, but if I showed you my first work and my current work, you wouldn’t recognize it as being from the same person. Even now, when I insert an older image into a post to illustrate a point, most of my regular readers can tell something is off. As an artist, I want to be different, and recognized for that difference. But I’m also fully aware that I’ll have to lead a little to get there.

This is something I grapple with a lot. With all of the photographs now available on the internet is it still possible to create something truly original or has everything already been done? Ming Thein’s post maintains that it is, but that we need to work harder to do so. Maybe the truly creative have ways of looking and seeing that allow them to take something that you’ve seen thousands of times and make it appear new. I don’t have that kind of creativity, but I continue to hope that if I keep plugging away I’ll be able to improve.

via Originality is dead: or is it? – Ming Thein | Photographer.