Photography Practice

Being a Multi-Genre Photographer (On Purpose, On the Clock)

There’s a kind of advice that gets repeated so often online it starts to sound like physics: pick one genre, stick to it, and everything will click.

Maybe that’s true for some people. But it’s not how I’m wired, and it’s not what I’m building.

I’m building three to four bodies of work, each in a different genre, on a structured timeline and with a deliberate cadence (Three sessions a week for 105 weeks). And right now, I’m not pretending I’ve “arrived” at the final answer.

This post is me planting a flag: here I am, currently in my genre selection process.

Because I’m on a clock.

As of today, February 5, 2026, I have 759 days until March 5, 2028—my sixtieth birthday. That’s long enough to do something real, and short enough that I can’t afford to drift.

The “One Genre” Advice Doesn’t Fit Everyone

The internet tends to speak in absolutes. But even in the mainstream advice world, there’s a quieter, more honest version of the argument:

  • You can shoot multiple genres—if they’re connected by a consistent style, and if you’re not confusing your audience with randomness.
  • The real win of multi-genre work is cross-pollination—skills and decisions learned in one lane making you better in the others.
  • And being a “generalist” isn’t automatically a lack of focus; it can be a foundation that lets you learn faster and adapt more confidently.

That’s the version that resonates with me.

Not “shoot everything.”

Not “jack of all trades.”

More like: build a small set of related pillars, and let a single voice run through them.

My Actual Identity: Urban Photographer (With Branches)

I keep coming back to one core truth: I’m an urban photographer.

Urban photography isn’t a single genre. It’s an umbrella: street, urban landscape, architecture, street portraits, moments, movement, light, weather, edges of people and city colliding (What is Urban Photography?).

My “home base” is the city, and my practice starts with walking—because walking is how the city reveals itself (Why walking the city is essential).

And within that umbrella, I’ve built a kind of constraint that keeps showing up:

One field of view. One way of seeing. (Finding style in the street — the 28mm field of view, and how Winogrand’s 28mm shaped how I see)

That constraint matters because it’s the thing that can unify multiple bodies of work without forcing them into the same subject matter.

The Real Problem I’m Solving Right Now

It’s not “What do I feel like shooting?”

It’s this: What 3–4 genres can I commit to deeply enough to produce bodies of work that stand on their own?

A body of work isn’t a handful of good images. It’s coherence. It’s repetition with intention. It’s a visual argument.

That’s why I keep circling back to process posts like:

Because the only way I know how to beat indecision is to build a system that turns intention into output.

My Current Shortlist: Three I’m Actively Testing (And One “Maybe”)

This is where I am today—not as a final decision, but as an honest snapshot.

1) Portraiture (Chiaroscuro + “real people” next)

This started in the home studio, because winter forced the issue—and instead of treating that as a limitation, I treated it as training.

Portraiture feels like a second pillar, not a detour—especially because it forces me to build repeatable control: light, direction, intent.

2) Urban Landscape

This is the quieter lane, and I think it might be the long-term anchor: light, structure, patience, and composition without adrenaline.

It’s still “urban,” but it’s less about moments and more about forms.

And I can already feel how this lane sharpens the others: it trains framing discipline that street photography sometimes tries to rush past.

3) Abstract Street (Winter-bound on purpose)

This is where I let weather and limitation become the brief.

This one is important because it’s mine in a different way: less tradition, more personal language.

4) The “Maybe”: Photojournalism / Documentary

This is the honest truth: I’m drawn to it, I’m reading about it, and I’m taking notes—but I don’t have the work yet.

So I’m not calling myself a photojournalist. I’m calling it what it is: a candidate genre I’m building toward.

My Selection Rule: The Genres Must Survive Contact With Reality

Here’s the filter I’m using (and re-using) as I test these lanes:

  1. Repeatability: Can I reliably shoot this in Toronto, week after week?
  2. Constraint: Can I define a tight brief so the work becomes cohesive?
  3. Energy: Does it pull me back out the door (or into the studio) even when motivation is low?
  4. Portfolio gravity: Can it realistically become 15–20 images that belong together?

That’s how I keep this from becoming “I do a bit of everything.”

The Point Isn’t More Genres. The Point Is More Clarity.

Multi-genre can be a strength, but only if the work is united by something deeper than subject matter.

For some photographers, that glue is colour. For others, it’s lighting. For others, it’s composition, pacing, or emotional temperature.

For me, the glue is shaping up to be:

  • Urban presence
  • A consistent way of seeing (often wide, often close, often honest)
  • A system that turns practice into output
  • A preference for bodies of work over one-offs

And that’s why this genre selection process matters. Because once I pick the pillars, everything else gets simpler: the gear decisions, the shooting plans, the editing approach, the website structure, the way I talk about what I do.

Where I’m At Right Now

I’m not “undecided” in the way people mean it.

I’m narrowing.

I’m testing.

I’m building evidence.

I’m deliberately putting pressure on three genres—portraiture, urban landscape, and abstract street—and keeping documentary/photojournalism as the fourth lane I’ll earn through assignments, not aspiration.

And I’m doing it because I’m on a clock.

759 days is enough time to build something real—if I stop treating genre like a personality test and start treating it like a project plan.

That’s where I am today. In the selection process.