Savage Wedding Photos

-Chris-

http://www.amazon.com/gp/blog/A1K7OB8VJ7CMKI/

Our wedding photog posted this link on Facebook - these images really knocked me off my chair. Check 'em out!!

smelltheglove

I think I've come across this photog before, great work. Very colourful and perfect exposure in each one.

dazftw

Random being on amazon but still, there very very nice I must say.

dudara

Wow - I love his stuff. Very inspiring.

AnimalRights

His sesnsor seems dirty in the 1st picture?
I like some of them but I found most to be meh.

mikeanywhere

Why use Amazon for a blog?? (I didnt know they offered it anyway)

oshead

I agree with Janer. Some of them are nice. But most are normal. The colours are very much saturated. Not what i'd prefer if it is was my wedding.

daycent

They're nice alright but all very do-able. And any photog worth their salt is going to have 6 or 7 very good shots from any wedding!

Plus the yanks are generally so much more emotional and "showy(?)" which would help. I'd imagine

Eirebear

A bit of fun, but extremely gimicky to be honest...meh!

fluffyVW

I follow him on flickr he has some really really amazing shots!!!
His flickr is here
Be sure to look through his most popular there is some excellent shots in there

eas

daycent wrote: »

They're nice alright but all very do-able. And any photog worth their salt is going to have 6 or 7 very good shots from any wedding!

You think these are his "lucky ones"?

Eirebear

eas wrote: »

You think these are his "lucky ones"?

lol, while theyre not particularly to my taste or style, i completely agree with the point your making.

There is obviously a helluva lot of technical skill and artistic creativity in the shots.
I very much doubt he is just your average wedding photographer.

smelltheglove

Eirebear wrote: »

There is obviously a helluva lot of technical skill and artistic creativity in the shots.
I very much doubt he is just your average wedding photographer.

Agreed, he has a natural individual style and unfortunately individual styles are not always accepted by the majority of people.

Eirebear

smelltheglove wrote: »

Agreed, he has a natural individual style and unfortunately individual styles are not always accepted by the majority of people.

hmmm its nearly friday, that could definetly be the start of a good old fashioned "friday topic"!

Unfortunately however you are right to a certain extent, however considering the consumer driven society we live in everyone is looking for that "next big thing".
I suppose that makes it easier for us to sit here and write the guy off as a gimmik or a fad, but on the same token if he hits the right people with his style it could propel him further and faster than any of us could hope for.

Unfortunately, it would also mean a rapid fall unless he can change with the times. Especially in something that is as driven by fashions and styles as wedding photography.

Dodgykeeper

I had a look at his flickr and the site linked in the op and I think that they are very good his style is very vibrant and pleasing on the eye.

eas

smelltheglove wrote: »

Agreed, he has a natural individual style and unfortunately individual styles are not always accepted by the majority of people.

I'm finding it hard to figure that out....what are you saying Rachel?

daycent

eas wrote: »

You think these are his "lucky ones"?

Some of them, yes definitely. Except for the obviously set up shots. You don't seriously think all these were posed do you??

Edit: I said nothing about luck. Luck implies keeping your finger on the shutter release and hoping for the best. There was obviously skill involved in those but not that much..

smelltheglove

I saw some of his shots last year and was blown away, these more recent shots are still to the same standard. From what I get his style is quite relaxed, now when I say a style of work it is not always just the style in which he prefers to shoot but also the style in which he works with his clients, who all seem to be perfectly at ease with him and the camera which leads me to believe that not only is he very relaxed in his approach he also knows what he wants to get out of a shot, the playful manner of many of the shots to me makes him quite individual.

If I am correct then there is no doubt in my mind that he is a great wedding photographer, we all know that often we are on a tight timescale when shooting a wedding and he seems to get quite varied shots within the time scale. The majority of his shots have high colour/saturation which keeps a nice flow from one image to the next.

When I say that unfortunately individual styles are not always accepted by the majority of people I mean that 80% of people may go with the norm and the rest may be looking for something different. To me these are great shots and he should be proud but to some here they are just 'meh' as seen on page 1, hence my saying that they are not always accepted.

Eirebear

smelltheglove wrote: »

To me these are great shots and he should be proud but to some here they are just 'meh' as seen on page 1, hence my saying that they are not always accepted.

They where "Meh!" to me STG, it doesnt mean i cant respect the work and creativity that has went into them, i simply find the final results rather underwhelming at the end of it all.

smelltheglove

Eirebear wrote: »

They where "Meh!" to me STG, it doesnt mean i cant respect the work and creativity that has went into them, i simply find the final results rather underwhelming at the end of it all.

which is why I say not always accepted! maybe appreciated may be a better word.

eas

I just found your comment about any photographer being able to produce 6-7 good shots per wedding a bit misplaced considering the quality of this guys work, that's all. I know you didn't mention luck, but I thought that was implied.

I do not think all those photographs are posed, but I'm not sure I get the connection between how one is skill and the other is luck?

eas

smelltheglove wrote: »

When I say that unfortunately individual styles are not always accepted by the majority of people I mean that 80% of people may go with the norm and the rest may be looking for something different. To me these are great shots and he should be proud but to some here they are just 'meh' as seen on page 1, hence my saying that they are not always accepted.

When you said "majority" of people I wasn't sure if you meant people on this forum or clients or maybe photographers need to be cautious not to make they're styles too "unique'.

anyhow - was just curious. thanks for elaborating.

smelltheglove

I'm actually going for a more unique approach recently myself eas. I know its a dangerous route to take so I supply both traditional and my own special choices also for the moment but I do feel there is a market out there for something a bit different these days.

I couldnt get it myself so ended up convincing Dodgy to take me and hubby out for some differnt shots for our first anniversary if anyone remembers. I searched high and low for something a bit different for my wedding and just could not find it and I do believe there are a fair few out there that would be in the same boat, although it is important to still allow for the traditional aspect and some naturals in there also.

No I didnt mean the forum I mean people on a whole, some of my recent shots people did say to me, oh its not my thing then i had others overwhelmed, one person even saying that should be on RTE, although I have to say I laughed that one off:o

daycent

eas wrote: »

I just found your comment about any photographer being able to produce 6-7 good shots per wedding a bit misplaced considering the quality of this guys work, that's all

Well, I wasn't saying he was just any photographer, he's clearly talented. The "set up" shots are very impressive but the candid ones are fairly standard IMO. What I would mean by luck is being in the right place at the right time, i.e. in a certain part of a church to capture a particular candid. Like the one of the girl yawning in the pew in yer man's site.

Eirebear

daycent wrote: »

What I would mean by luck is being in the right place at the right time, i.e. in a certain part of a church to capture a particular candid. Like the one of the girl yawning in the pew in yer man's site.

I would suggest that "being in the right place at the right time" to capture a moment like that is every bit as much of a skill as being able to set up a posed shot.

daycent

Eirebear wrote: »

I would suggest that "being in the right place at the right time" to capture a moment like that is every bit as much of a skill as being able to set up a posed shot.

I was waiting for a response like that!:D No doubt eas is thanking your post as I type!

Tis a fact though that you can only be one place at a time! You may think you might be positioned in a great spot and end up missing something the far end of the church or whatever. No one is that good!

eas

yeah, luck plays a roll in photography, it's undeniable. I think where the talent lies is being able to see the photograph. A mediocre wedding photographer would not have registered a yawning girl as a potential shot. A good photographer sees the opportunity, reacts, positions, frames and gets the shot before it's over.

If you applied the "what you don't control is luck" discussion to sports photography or street photography you'd get a hammering I think.

daycent

eas wrote: »

yeah, luck plays a roll in photography, it's undeniable. I think where the talent lies is being able to see the photograph. A mediocre wedding photographer would not have registered a yawning girl as a potential shot. A good photographer sees the opportunity, reacts, positions, frames and gets the shot before it's over.

If you applied the "what you don't control is luck" discussion to sports photography or street photography you'd get a hammering I think.

Well said.

WATM

I read this thread earlier today when the majority of the early posts were less "appreciative" of the images, but I have to say that I'm mightily impressed. I've shot a decent number of weddings in the last four years, and there is a tremendous skill involved in being able to put the couple at ease while at the same time have the technical wherewithall to be capturing great shots.

It's kind of like watching a swan glide through the water - when somebody is that good, you don't see any of the work and machinations that are going on below the surface.

Rachel - I agree with you on the individual style of wedding photography having a place, we've tried to make ours that little bit different too. I guess its just that in New York or LA you can be a niche photographer who only appeals to 1% of your prospective clients, and that still works out as thousands of couples. Hitting 1% of our target market here in Ireland is going to leave us with a lot of free time on our hands.

Maybe we should have shot each others weddings???

wearethemastersons.com

smelltheglove

WATM wrote: »

Maybe we should have shot each others weddings???

wearethemastersons.com

Where were you when I needed you????

daycent

WATM wrote: »

I read this thread earlier today when the majority of the early posts were less "appreciative" of the images, but I have to say that I'm mightily impressed. I've shot a decent number of weddings in the last four years, and there is a tremendous skill involved in being able to put the couple at ease while at the same time have the technical wherewithall to be capturing great shots.

It's kind of like watching a swan glide through the water - when somebody is that good, you don't see any of the work and machinations that are going on below the surface.

Rachel - I agree with you on the individual style of wedding photography having a place, we've tried to make ours that little bit different too. I guess its just that in New York or LA you can be a niche photographer who only appeals to 1% of your prospective clients, and that still works out as thousands of couples. Hitting 1% of our target market here in Ireland is going to leave us with a lot of free time on our hands.

Maybe we should have shot each others weddings???

wearethemastersons.com

Cool site! And nice pics too.

Valentia

Going back to the original post. I think the vast majority of his shots are posed and looking at his Flickr the novelty wears off very quickly.

I always smile when I hear wedding photogs talk about individual style and a different approach. So many are doing it now that a sameness has emerged. The old narrow depth of field, frame filled with a partial element of a full shot being the main culprit.

The main thing about wedding stuff is that each couple are unique therefore each shoot is unique. They and their guests are not objective viewers of the end product. That's the photographers' trump card.

Like most of the links in this thread it important to do a technically competent varied, relaxed, lively shoot. Once you have the skill and an empathy with your clients all you need then is the belief in your ability. Not that difficult really.

AnimalRights

Dodgykeeper wrote: »

I had a look at his flickr and the site linked in the op and I think that they are very good his style is very vibrant and pleasing on the eye.

You're an old softy, romance written all over your face the 1st time I seen you pulling your whites on. :cool:

CH3OH

As someone reads this forum quite a bit( but hasn't posted any photos) , I feel that the photos are very good.
It helps a lot when you have a nice blue sky, an attractive bride and ( dare i say it) attractive groom!
I personally wouldn't be happy with the photo of the girl in the mirror (bridesmaid) where the focus is neither on her or her image. There is also a lot of clutter in the photo including deoderant and sunglasses on the table.
In the last one of the bride and groom , there appears to be a shadow near the grooms feet which catches my eye. Is it his flash on camera?

I find getting everyone to have their eyes open in groups difficult. It helps when they are wearing sunglasses!