In this interview, commercial photographer Michael Matsil shares insights from his 25+ year career. With a background in architecture, Matsil blends structure and artistry in his work. He discusses how technology has transformed photography and the balance between creative vision and client demands. Adaptability, he emphasizes, is key to thriving in the evolving industry.
In your bio you say that for over 25 years, you have been a commercial photographer who is concerned with where you are. You also say that the 'where' in life interests you profoundly. How did your interest in the concept of 'where' develop, and how does it influence your approach to capturing portraits and environments?
Most of your questions about my photographic approach can be answered with the words, “education”, “experience” and “awareness”. I always refer back to my education as an architect as the place where I first learned how to observe and interpret the world around me. More specifically it encouraged a keen ability to understand where I am and what I am looking at. That’s an essential skill if one is to be an architectural designer or, in my estimation, a photographer. That skill was hard earned through traveling, drawing, and analysing the built environments I moved through… not to mention endless days and nights in the architectural studio trying to distill all that I had seen into original and specific building and environment design.
To review: observation helped form the “questions,” and drawing and involving myself provided the “answers,” which slowly but surely built a knowledge base. It took a few years before the camera became the instrument rather than the pencil. As an aside, the thing about drawing is that it is a very delicate meditation between the eye, the hand and the receptive sites within the brain. There is really no substitute for it when it comes to learning. It’s also very selective, which the camera isn’t. So, the camera needs to be harnessed to be an extension of the eye/brain axis in selective ways. Also, the “hand” has now been removed from the equation. It’s like having to relearn how to ride your bicycle, except you’re using your arms to pedal instead of legs! Try to picture that. But having drawing and critical analysis under your belt as a precursor to using the camera, helps avoid the downsides of the insatiable appetite of the camera.
When I did finally have the impulse to use the camera, “understanding where I am” became the driving force of my work and the camera and every ounce of my technique works toward that understanding. In this case “understanding” involves both questions and answers. I think every photographer should have a driving force that goes beyond the things they see in front of them. The actual “things” out there are the inspiration that sets a particular creativity in motion. That can be internally intuitive, as in the case of personal work or externally directed as in the case of commercial art. So, as I stated, you need to have education and experience and also develop awareness and sensitivities to integrate that. That does not necessarily mean formal education alone. It can mean practical guided experience through trial and error and mentorship. In any case the important thing in any development is that you are constantly listening to your own feedback and continually editing the developing approach you are nurturing. It doesn’t usually present itself to you in total; you have to follow the scent.
You’ve been a commercial photographer for over 25 years. How has your creative process evolved during that time, especially with technological advancements and changes in client expectations?
From a commercial standpoint, I can safely say it’s nothing like it was when I started. Nothing. There isn’t the time here to describe all the differences. Expectations regarding usage rights and compensation have changed in favor of the client. The mass markets for and proliferation of imagery have assured that. But there are still great clients out there that put appropriate value on truly creative work. It also helps if you have something creatively they can’t get anywhere else. Perhaps it’s that intangible thing we call “style” or that “driving force” I spoke of earlier. It’s that apparent “intangible” that I think musicians call “touch.” You can’t teach it because it’s in your body. I call it “visual signature” and it is the sum of everything a photographer does and knows. You want to bring it all to the photographic task at hand.Technical advances over the last 25 years are surprisingly easy for me to talk about. First of all, the digital workflow has transformed things, I think, for the better. Many who have been around for a while, like me, would agree with that. For everyone involved, from the photographer to the client. Also for the selling and marketing for sure. Digital has proliferated reproduction but has also made it easier for artists to discover any misuse on the internet. It’s a double-edged sword in most regards. That’s a whole other question and answer! From the standpoint of the artwork or the photograph itself, I would say the concerns of this photographer have not changed much from analogue to digital. I’m still trying to direct the viewer’s eye… and heart with my photographs. Tools like Photoshop have definitely expanded the plasticity of the basic parameters I’ve always had at my disposal like, exposure, contrast, color. Also consider the vast number of powerful tools that have not changed a whit with the advent of digital: focal length, framing and composition, depth of field, etc. Essentially: camerawork. And I do it all with discipline and a visual agenda whether it be the analogue or digital activities. I think that’s one foundational thing that distinguishes my work from many other digital artists in photography. I can safely say I am a 20th century photographer with 21st century tools. I am grateful that I had the opportunity to immerse myself in both paradigms. For me, it’s a great time to be a photographer!
Can you walk us through your creative process from the initial framing of the scene to achieving the clarity you aim for in your work?
In terms of “clarity”, the first few basic moves are 80% of the process and determine the outcome, which always must answer a question or at least pose a question. I’m OK with either and often that depends on the nature of the client and campaign, if there is one. The other 20% of process is refinement but don’t let that small number diminish its importance. It’s an entirely integral activity that deserves a lot of consideration and equal time. I am also of the mind that if I am responsible for the 80%, you might as well give me the last 20% in post-production! It’s become a major part of everyone’s process, and I take great delight in furthering the image in that regard. I believe it is an essential responsibility for me to follow through on. One of my jobs on assignment or in personal work is being able to see past the present that I am standing in and see some semblance of the final intention. A few photographers like to call this “pre-visualization.” It takes a lot of experience to gain those chops but, when you do, it takes a lot of burden off the messiness of any location shoot. That’s not to say that post -production is only for “fixing” things, but rather I would insist it is primarily for “furthering” things. Finding clients to trust you in that way is not always easy. But I still believe that is an important way I can add value.
But back to the 80%. As your question suggests, where you choose to stand and place the camera relevant to the environment and individual point of interest, is to begin to make a sketch of the photograph. In architectural design we call it the “parti,” a diagram of intention. I’m very much like a film director in this sense. The camera frame is the first editing tool I use. You have to set the stage. Mise en Scene. The legendary photographer Jay Maisel told me framing is not a “zero sum game.” That is, every square millimetre of the frame is important and has to stand on its own. Clarity here, does not make up for a distraction there. I’m not a Virtual Reality artist; I leave a lot out for the viewer not to see. That is both an ethic and a discipline. With that comes focal length choice, which is the first step in what I consider to be “degrees of abstraction” of what the naked eye sees. Shall I use a lens that simulates the human eye… or a wide or long one that can subtly or dramatically change the relationships and lines of the scene? What is the proximity of that lens to my central subject, such as a portrait subject? It depends on the questions being posed and what you want the viewer to experience. And I’ll add that this is all extremely subjective, thank goodness! Because if it wasn’t, photography would be a fairly boring technical exercise. All these essential choices take advantage of the emotional role “seeing” plays in our experience. But don’t be fooled, photography is not like your “walking around eyes” nor does it naturally aspire to be that.
These are just a few of the many choices made in launching the direction of a photographic image, and I think you get the idea. Other things like, do I let motion into the shot or do I over or underexpose? Whether visible or not, where’s the horizon? In all cases the 80% is wrapped up on-site and in-situation reasonably quickly. But beware, it’s a commitment. It’s worth it for all on set to ignore the incoming text messages for a while and tune the world out and explore and confer intently during this phase. It’s somewhat impulsive and mysterious, but in the back of my mind there is always the questions that I want to ask or answer that is driving the direction. If I am working alone, the commitment comes fairly swiftly after exploring a few camera positions. In collaboration, however, I believe the best outcomes are when the art direction and photography are committed together and move forward as one in owning those decisions. I get a little cranky when the director wants to actually shoot every darn angle, “just in case.” Why not just decide, commit and then spend the time going deep with the scene? As a photographer on assignment, one of my roles is to assert some measure of professional confidence to the situation. I understand the pressure to succeed, but, and I say this tongue-in-cheek, occasionally people listen to me and it comes out great anyway!
In photography, I believe in “clarity” which I want to make clear is not the same as simplicity. I’m trying to communicate to the eye and the heart, and I think it is great when the information in the scene bounces back and forth a number of times between said viewer’s eye and heart… possibly never even finding a resting place or conclusion. In that case, the visual questions in the work remain open. Again, that depends on client “agenda” if we are talking about commercial assignment. Clarity can be very complex!
In your photography of both portraits and environments, how do you ensure that you capture the authenticity and essence of the subjects and spaces you're photographing?
Now that is a complex question! I’ll speak to the idea of “environmental portraits” to answer this. A good way to do that is to look at the recent history of photographic portraits of two well-known artists: Annie Lebovitz and Arnold Newman, each a generation or more apart from each other. Mr. Newman is arguably the inventor of the portrait that integrates meaningfully with its context. Ms. Lebovitz has carried that on and professes to get to the core and essence of a subject through her process without going into too much detail when asked about it. Perhaps she wants you to think she’s simply a savant. The “old school” Mr. Newman on the other hand, when he speaks of his work you get the feeling that in an environmental portrait session he is spontaneously attempting to harness a fair amount of chaos and relying on a good dose of “dumb luck” to create something memorable and at least “authentic looking,” as if his paycheck depended on it! (It’s always charming when a genius underestimates himself.) But let’s remember, he was inventing a photographic genre, so he may not have been able to completely understand his own actions and simply trusted his outcomes. But that right there is the generational divide between these two artists: how they view their own process. One stands on the shoulders of the other. Actually, no matter how they say it, they are both absolutely accurate because both of their creative outputs tell a story of the same apparent honesty, clarity and power by any viewer’s measure. History has documented this.
But what is “honesty” or “truth” in artistic work? In my world, truth in visual art can be subjective and ambiguous when you are trying to speak to the heart. It’s not CNN. If you go to my website, michaelmatsil.com, before you see the work, there is a brief intro roll out of three words that declares, “Truth, Made Visible”. How pretentious! I will admit here that that dead serious phrase is delivered with a wink of the eye. The website then presumably goes on to present evidence of that phrase, but the environmental portrait work on the site is truly just my little voice trying to amplify itself in order to create a truth and a story that is based on real life. Just like my elders Mr. Newman and Ms. Lebovitz were and are doing. In this case, I may have learned well.
That’s how I capture authenticity and essence in my subjects. If I avail myself to the environment, the formal elements and the personalities in a delicate way, a version of a story, based on the evidence emerges. But a little chaos and luck are always welcome. Thank you, Arnold! But if you ask too many questions, mums the word. Thank you, Annie! Either way, I’ve found my way into the archetypal and purely fictional “Environmental Portrait Club”, and I truly value my membership there. We have cool T-shirts too.
You’ve worked with a wide range of prestigious clients, from G.E. Capital to Syracuse University. How do you tailor your approach when working with different industries and organisations, and what do you believe is the key to maintaining long-term client relationships in commercial photography?
I think one of the best things about commercial work is that you get to get called back by an art director who happens to be part of a particular corporation, organisation or brand… again and again. It’s a personal thing. After the first experience, the second or third usually feels good because we all know each other better and the level of trust and respect goes up. We hit the ground running and that’s refreshing. That’s the ideal experience. Obviously, the art director is with a particular organisation because that entity believes they can further the company or institution’s mission or brand. The photographer is there because the art director believes you are the best choice to fulfil that mission. But sometimes the mission changes and so does the personnel, and the “ol’ gang” gets broken up. That means a change in corporate or organisational concept also accompanies a change in talent. That’s very understandable even though I may be losing a client. Fortunately, in the best working situations, the relationships transcend the “job.” In many instances, the displaced art director, art buyer or photo editor continues to seek you out in their new ventures and roles. And if I am a good partner, I do the same. In fact, a significant component of my future employment comes down to nurturing and participating in individual relationships and that is a comforting fact. In other words, an informal, but proven network of trusted professionals who will call on each other regardless of the larger entity they are involved with. Maybe most importantly, these relationships also encourage photographers to expand their palette by being trusted by familiar art directors to try new things in new situations. What will happen as AI generated photo-illustration wipes out this human side of creativity is anyone’s guess. Sorry, but I had to throw that in there if we are talking about long-term client relationships.
As far as “tailoring my approach”, I think I mainly rely on my previous statements about “style” and “driving force.” I want to be in situations where my talents, drive and the particular value I can add as an individual artist can be best applied to specific and well-defined agendas. Don’t get me wrong, flexibility and competency are requirements in any professional photographic assignment. In many situations that is all that the client is looking for; getting the job done competently at the right price and doing it exactly to some spec. In nearly all endeavours, hiring takes a lot of thoughtfulness and solid judgement. It can also be treacherous and requires a sensitivity that transcends resume fodder. So, my message to art buyers is, hire the appropriate photographer for the job, whether it be basic illustration or a complex message. I’ve experienced the entire gamut, but I am best suited for developing stories and ideas rather than rigid illustrations.
As a member of Production Paradise, how has being part of this global network influenced your ability to connect with new clients and collaborators?
Well, let me be clear: I live in “no man’s land”. Northern New Mexico offers me the environment and the culture I want to be around and there is some work for photographers here. The clients are mostly small businesses and publishers related to the tourist industry… and the photographers do a good job, but in most cases the work is predictable as are the outcomes from the assignments. But the clients do not put a reasonable monetary value on one-of-a-kind assigned photography. By my count, there are maybe three high level commercial shooters here and they’ve admirably evolved in order to take advantage of what work lies beyond New Mexico’s borders, and within. There is one pro here who works mostly for the in-town client types I mentioned before and has diversified into at least five different specialties in order to make a living. There’s really nothing she can’t shoot really, really well! For that reason, she’s got a solid “lock” on those small businesses and publishers. There is another who has retired from national advertising work and does compelling social issue projects and publishes amazing books based on them. The third one does zero work in town and travels the world on assignments and is associated with major brands. They’ve all found their way to success in establishing independent and strong ideas using a recognisable visual signature. Where they live, is not primary to their photographic lives. But Santa Fe is a heck of nice place to come home to!
With that said, I want to have it both ways too! I see Production Paradise as a platform or steppingstone to living where I like living and having clients that are not geographically anchored to my home. To me that’s what the global network of Production Paradise can potentially offer my career. A chance to connect with the broader world of clients who still value specificity in photography and photographers. It’s a work in progress since I am inside of my first year of membership. I’ve participated with other marketing platforms and portals and I can safely say that Production Paradise is much more engaging with its members. They have set up a structure for their photographers and other creatives that allows us to participate as much or as little as we like. Of course, in this case, more is better, and their Spotlight Magazine and Awards give great incentive for members to regularly put their best work out there and onto the platform. Then they take that work and distribute it in a variety of powerful ways. So, this is not a situation where you pay a fee, upload a portfolio then walk away and wait. Production Paradise’s methods have incentivization built in. They also have very mature, dedicated and experienced personnel who maintain personal relationship with every member. It’s impressive.
In an industry that is constantly evolving, what role do you believe platforms like Production Paradise play in helping photographers stay relevant and connected to new opportunities?
Platforms like Production Paradise connect specific talent with specific clients. It’s that simple… and incredibly important in a market where the demand for specificity is diminishing. Those kinds of meaningful client/photographer relationships are becoming rare and I approve of any organisation that encourages that. It’s a very big world now, so this platform helps distil the marketplace and lower the signal to noise ratio and make quality work and relationships happen.
How do you stay inspired and keep your photography fresh in such a competitive field, and how has being part of a community like Production Paradise contributed to your creative growth?
Well, as I stated earlier, somehow Production Paradise has developed a structure that encourages participation and linked it to success, in the form of responses from potential clients directly to the member.If a member does nothing and does not participate, most likely nothing will happen. It makes sense that the more work you push out the door onto the platform as marketing fodder, the more motivated you need to be to produce more work and keep the effort going. I am frequently invited to join all manner of marketing portals related to various photographic specialties like architectural photography. They’re upstarts and offer this to me for free. I look at the portal and they’ve done a fine job of presenting the site and displaying the work. But my first question to such an offer is, “So what is it you do to promote your platform and its content while I help you fill your platform with quality photography?” The answer is a predictable, “What do you mean?” or “We’re working on that.” I politely ask them to stay in touch and get back to me after they’ve figured those things out and established a fee structure for participants.
There always needs to be mutual benefit in professional relationships. Getting stuff for free is great when winning a contest or a lottery, but the situation I just spoke of is naïve and very lopsided in favor of the platform’s business building agenda, if one even exists. They should have at least a business plan to present to you as incentive to participate and as incentive to produce new and fresh work for their platform. As I spoke of earlier, Production Paradise appears to me to have this dual incentivization built into their structure. I will also add that they are not “photography only,” but invite all manner of creatives in the assignment work world, such as agents, reps, location scouting, studio rental, you name it. That’s also a resource to me as well! It also helps me feel like I am part of a larger network which is important to me as a sole proprietor. When you’re at it on your own, support is important.
During this interview you used the word “specificity” and “specific” quite a bit regarding your photography. Can you expand on that?
When I use the term “specific” I mean a specific answer to a specific question, which I’ve established is my creative working template. I think it can best be answered with an anecdote. You know the movie Tootsie with Dustin Hoffman? In the story, Hoffman’s character is a frustrated out of work actor who, to put it mildly, is difficult to work with. He’s arguing with his agent who has just informed him very forcefully that “No one wants to work with you!” To sharpen the point, the agent reminds Hoffman’s character of the time that he was asked to play a tomato in a stage production and was given a tomato costume that had arms and legs like a person. Hoffman’s character insisted that the way it should be played was for him to just roll around the stage, armless and legless like a tomato if it were animate.
In an interview with Hoffman around the release of Tootsie, he spoke of the nature of “specificity” and art. He asserts that without specificity, there is no artistic performance. A tomato indeed does not have arms and legs and not everything in stories must be anthropomorphized for immediate recognition. There’s room for ambiguity, subjectivity and fancifulness, as well as steadfastness to a story. Those characteristics in no way deny the ability of the vehicle to communicate a truth.
When I speak of my creative efforts as both asking or answering questions, in both cases it needs to be specific, otherwise the photography becomes something people have already seen or know, like a row of red stop signs you see block after block when driving. You acknowledge them and obey them; there’s no questions to ask or interpretation to be made. Their characteristics are not specifically responding to any particular location, only one universal demand: Stop! It’s generalized to the extreme in terms of perception and acknowledgement. Photography is already vulnerable to this pitfall because of its “realism.” So, I use terms like specificity a lot in order to remind myself not to go to that “generalized” space! The very small sacrifice in that attitude is that it makes me a less prolific photographer. But I don’t mind that. I’m not a “shutterbug” and I don’t need to photograph everything I see, just the things I want to communicate. If I desire to be more prolific, I just have to get out of the house more and avail myself to the inspiration out there!
We thank Michael Matsil for his time and insight! You can see more of their work on their Production Paradise member page and website.
