The scan of the two page spread looks better because prints usually need more contrast/sharpness from the lower gamuts.

The overcontrast/sharpening (almost like a Lomo effect) usually works better on guys for me...interesting that your PP person chose to use it on a girl. The deer head is probably what triggered it though...you see this techniqued used a lot in magazines like field&stream, sports mags, etc.

You didn't like negative comments?? What irks me is gratuitous compliments. I had a couple looking at prints of Italian cities for their home. As they looked through they had more negative comments than positive. They liked two of the prints enough to order them framed. I knocked 25% off what I had originally quoted them and they asked why. I told them it was the least I could do in return for the most honest straight-forward critique I ever had on my portfolio.

All but one of the images you posted are too busy for me and seem to detract from your subject. The one where she is at the piano is the best one as far as my take on them goes. You were fortunate to have the opportunity to photograph her.

xrayvision wrote:
You didn't like negative comments?? What irks me is gratuitous compliments.

All but one of the images you posted are too busy for me and seem to detract from your subject. The one where she is at the piano is the best one as far as my take on them goes. You were fortunate to have the opportunity to photograph her.



You have a good point, but consider this - who is better to gauge how 'good' these shots are, the FM members who posted, or the editors of Vogue? I mean, if they print these, is that not the ultimate confirmation that the shots are, indeed, "good"? Some of the rude comments simply are rude for rudeness sake - it's like someone playing street hockey telling another hockey player he sucks, but he's already been drafted and made the NHL All Star game.

You might prefer these shots....Not as busy...All Published

NICEEE, i like all the tiny details in the shoot
the sets, styling, makeup.. they all went well together

When you open a Vogue magazine, those are the type of shots you see I like them all very much, very edgy, very fashiony, very Vogue!!!

Very nice work and congrats on getting published in Vogue! =)

Having seen benjikan's pictures on his blog, I know that he's a brilliant photographer. That said, I disagree with some of the folks here who think that criticism of a good photographer or published pictures make you a 'hater'. All art is about opinion and perspective and a magazine like Vogue is no greater judge of art than a random person who happens to have an open mind and appreciation of beauty.

I enjoyed the last three pictures a lot more than the first set you posted on this thread. Maybe the processing on the original set needs to grow on you, or maybe it makes more sense when viewed in context in the magazine itself, but they didn't do much for me on their own. The last three are pretty neat and I love the use of light and shadows that benji uses in many of his images.

EDIT: Just saw the spread on the first page. Makes a lot more sense now.

There should be no question in anyone's mind that this is a consummately skilled photographer. Both sets of images are impeccably executed in every way: lighting, exposure, framing, posing, style, and desired effect. His commercial success alone would validate that, even if nothing else did. And although I have no fear of looking at an image, critically, I cannot find anything where I would suggest an improvement to these images.

That being said, art is subjective by nature. Neither of the styles portrayed in these images are attractive to me, although I prefer the second set by far. The busy backgrounds, over-stylized sets, high contrast, and edgy feel, are entirely unappealing to me... but then again, so is the content of Vogue magazine. That does not make the photographs poorly executed or of low-quality! It simply means that we have different tastes, or are shooting for different purposes, or are shooting for different clients who have different preferences.

My hat's off to Benji both for the photography itself and for the privilege of having anything published in a publication of this caliber. I can only offer my pity and my sympathy to those poor souls who have nothing better to offer than petty, snide remarks with no substance.

finster1018 wrote:
looks like Vogue at Walmart.


So you have seen the magazine for sale at walmart

I think you comment made someone other than the photographer look bad


benjikan - congrats

thanks for letting me see and learn from your work.

best

steve

If anyone is interested in this BIZ, you might want to listen to this Podcast Interview in 3 parts.

http://www.crunchbase.com/funding-rounds?page=15&q=unattributed

Ben

macfrank wrote:
Very nice work and congrats on getting published in Vogue! =)

Thanks for the kind words. But it wasn't my first time. Here is my first cover from '86

http://www.benjaminkanarekblog.com/2009/08/11/one-of-my-first-vogue-covers/

Thanks Again
Ben

I love the second shot. Something about it just hits me from all angles.

I love how the pencil sketch of the woman draws your eyes to the next page.

Congrats!

crudolph wrote:
I love how the pencil sketch of the woman draws your eyes to the next page.

Congrats!

That sketch was done by Josephine.

Works for me! Thanks for posting the spread. Did you do the sketch, or was it the AD?

I like the shots - edgy and artistic. The first one is actually my favourite - the flowers do seem a bit overbearing and block out too much for my taste in the second - the third piano shot is great.

Keep up the good work and thanks for sharing

dmacmillan wrote:
Works for me! Thanks for posting the spread. Did you do the sketch, or was it the AD?

Josephine did the illustration.

These are not just pictures, these are art, culture.

Everyone has different preference.

I love them. Congrats.

I'm really stunned at the level of hate here. I agree with those above who've stated that unabashed and unearned praise is annoying. However, to say the images look like "Vogue at Walmart" with no reasoning is not criticism, it's just negativity. To say that the image(s) is too busy, or too contrasty, or the composition is distracting, etc. is a valid criticism (if that is one's point of view.) The point of criticism should be to suggest a path to improvement in the future, not to spit upon someone's work.

That said, I like the images. I also expect I've read a few more fashion magazines than most of the posters. To me the point is that they're busy and contrasty and stylized. They're not ethnographic studies or senior portraits, but conseptual high fashion shots. I like them for that. What's more is that they are exactly the sort of images I would expect to see in a high end fashion magazine for this sort of story. This is knowing the audience, and I say kudos to that as well.

I enjoy benjikan's pix because they're well made and let me look at a world poles apart from mine. Come to think of it, I read National Geographic for the same reason -- 'Vogue' and other fashion mags just have a different kind of wildlife.

Regarding the "haters", both ('boomertim1' and 'finster1018') have fine Websites dedicated to their preference; traditional photography. That's exactly what Vogue and its ilk do NOT want. Their aesthetic is about keeping readers off balance just enough to keep them intrigued and involved and they hire photographers who can do that. That benjikan has had success doing so over a couple decades speaks for itself.

I also appreciate that he credits that the other members of the team. This kind of work is the result of the collaborative effort of a number of creative folks and it's nice to that acknowledged.

Her intense eyes are what grabs me in the first shot. I do notice the deer, but after her eyes, my gaze drifts first to her outfit (which, I guess, is the reason for the shot), then I notice the deer. All fashion mags look different when the layout is done, and we are not seeing the context (what sort of shots will these be placed near?). I like both of them. I thought the color of the flower combined with the stripes on the model were a good contrast.

Marcy

That first shot is totally fantastic; I find it really connected with me. Extremely well done.

Michael Sessio wrote:
I wonder if you can answer one questoin, how much time in post is typically spent used on images like these?

Cheers

You never answered Michael's question...and I am also curious as well.

Thank you!

Benjikan

Thank u for sharing, pretty amazing stuff!
Interesting how much negativity goes around..

Thx!