p.1 #5Vogue Magazine says dont hire a photographer
Chill. Any bride-to-be who took that article seriously would make a bad client.
The writer tried to mask her feminism-gone-wrong attitude with humor. It didn't work well.
To me, the takeaway for photographers is to realize that the wedding photography market is completely different from 30 years ago when I shot weddings and delivered the standard Art Leather album. The way I did business back then, including the range of products I offered, wouldn't work today. The more you understand the current market, the more you can leverage it to your advantage. I savvy marketer could turn the mercurial nature and lack of permanence of social media into selling points for the very album Molly argues against.
p.1 #13Vogue Magazine says dont hire a photographer
I thought it was a pretty Funny article.
If you followed all this bimbo's advise you wouldn't have a wedding at all. Everyone would just be sitting round ( Sitting? Oh, that sounds a bit old fashioned!) , I mean standing round with nothing much going on having most of the things that makes a wedding a wedding in the first place done away with.
The number one on the list really made me laugh..... no rings.
Yeah, right! And how many girls as a percentage of brides are going to say " I don't want a ring" like they haven't been dreaming of it all there conscious lives?
If you follow through on the sentiment of this " be controversial for the sake of getting some attention you couldn't summon up otherwise" bit of manufactured crap, Why would you have a cake?
At least half of the people at the weddings i go to don't eat it and it's a waste of food and money. Why the hell would you reject a ring that lasts forever but have a cake that sits there for a few hours, is hacked up, given to people then thrown out?
If you are not going to have a shooter because everyone has camera's on their phones, why the hell would you have bridal cars? Surely there are enough people in the bridal party that own a car that could give anyone that doesn't a lift?
And What about wedding dresses? When in the hell does a girl ever spend a thousand or 4K bucks on a frock she won't be able to wait to get out of and will never wear again even for her 2nd, 3rd or 4th weddings?
If the ring makes you the property of your husband, then what the hell does wearing a dress that makes you look like a toilet dolly achieve? Why not just put on that little black $49 dress that makes you look hot as hell instead of something you would never wear at any other time in your life that went out of fashion the same time they declared armistice day?
And what is with the white thing?
To uphold some outdated and now ridiculous notion you are pure and virginal and haven't been doing the horizontal hoola like a pair of rabbits on aphrodisiacs and getting up to all kinds of freaky shit since your 2nd date... if you even waited that long to play hide the salami?
Yeah, pull the other one, it plays jingle bells.
If you want to get on a high horse about stupid and outdated traditions with weddings, Bridal gowns are a real good one to start with. No wedding dress ever really did a girl justice in the last 25 years because they all look ridiculous in this day and age. After all, she already said to piss off the 10 ft veil so logically wearing something that looks like a toilet roll cover your gran knits to sell at the Church fete is equally uncool.
Ohhh, wait..... Right.... the author of the article that sounds like she has been jilted a few Dozen times, makes a fortune peddling Wedding dresses doesn't she?
Don't want to shit in our own feed bowl Eh? Year Photographers and rings are stupid but wearing a white dress in a style that went out 60 years ago... Nothing wrong with that.... at least while she is still in the bridal gown business and making a fortune from it.
Nah, lets just stick to saying stupid things that won't undermine our bottom line.
All well and good to talk crap to get attention to profit from but we wouldn't want to get too close to the truth and miss out on a buck would we?
Journos and "contributors". All think they are better and smarter than everyone else but go on to prove what a pack of conceited upstarts they are.
p.1 #14Vogue Magazine says dont hire a photographer
Amusing quote on f-stoppers:
It made sense back in the olden days, pre-Facebook albums and Instagram hashtags, when the whole world didn’t have phones with cameras on them, to have fashion magazines lying on your coffee table. But today, there's no need for these magazines and professional fashion photographers when everyone at Fashion Week has a camera, and you can always log onto the websites of Christian Dior, Hugo Boss and so on to see the latest. Even if you're not into surfing the net, have your friends take selfies and email them to you when they try on new fashions at Neiman Marcus. Also, since everyone has a computer with a keyboard, everyone is also a professional writer, so regarding the editorial content of fashion magazines . . .
p.1 #17Vogue Magazine says dont hire a photographer
Looks like the number 1 slam against the article in the comments is about the photographer. Almost like someone posted a link to the article on a photography forum....
p.1 #19Vogue Magazine says dont hire a photographer
Mark_L wrote:
Amusing quote on f-stoppers:
It made sense back in the olden days, pre-Facebook albums and Instagram hashtags, when the whole world didn’t have phones with cameras on them, to have fashion magazines lying on your coffee table. But today, there's no need for these magazines and professional fashion photographers when everyone at Fashion Week has a camera, and you can always log onto the websites of Christian Dior, Hugo Boss and so on to see the latest. Even if you're not into surfing the net, have your friends take selfies and email them to you when they try on new fashions at Neiman Marcus. Also, since everyone has a computer with a keyboard, everyone is also a professional writer, so regarding the editorial content of fashion magazines . . . ...Show more →
p.1 #20Vogue Magazine says dont hire a photographer
TTLKurtis wrote:
Oh and first looks are an awful idea apparently. That's funny.
I am pretty over first looks. I want to come up with something to take it's place but right now the first look ranks itself with signing the marriage license for me. I wish it wasn't so cheesy.