Wedding photography is a commercial venture. Let's be honest. Nobody goes into it for only the "art" of it. And like all commercial art forms, certain styles become popular. It happens in ALL commercial art forms; graphic design, music, corporate art, photography, popular fiction and film.
Brides see work. They want their photos to look like what they've seen. It's a circle that feeds on itself until once in a blue moon, a new technology, or that-once-in-a-decade image maker comes along and changes the face of what we see. This is the nature of commercial art.
Just my 2 cents.
I love this forum... and yes, I'll probably copy someone. Sorry in advance. Just realize that you should really take it as a compliment. I love your work. My bride loves your work. And she wants my work to look just like yours. I can steal from magazines, from television, from books, from movies, the internet and from Fred Miranda.
I'm pretty surprised -- I think that most of the people I really admire on this board have work that is completely different from most I've seen. Each person has a talent that I appreciate. It doesn't mean I want my photos to look like theirs, but I can appreciate their work nonetheless.
I, too, learn by copying -- mainly to see how something is done. I'm just starting out, and I find it very helpful to set shots up that I've seen before. Once I know how to light, pose, and compose, I can start doing it my own way. But copying - or recreating -- is my way of learning. And there are only so many variations on rembrandt and butterfly lighting. I'm on other forums and I'm pretty sure this is the most creative and "different" forum I've seen. The newbies may copy others' work, but a lot of those with more experience have their own style - and those are styles I don't see often.
Hmm... I'm actually going to defend the OP here. Although his tone was a bit off-putting, his point still stands.
I've been hesitating to put as much work up for critique lately because I have seen blatant copies of my work. It may not seem like a big deal to many, but when it happens to you, it gives you a sinking feeling... I have a local competitor/friend who has done similar and now I'm afraid that a bride would view us comparably when, if I'm honest, I don't think we are.
Mel is much better at saying it though, so read her post.
lindabrowne wrote:
Could this be almost flagrant copying since the thought is the same even if the words are different? My apologies, but Melanie said it SO much better. https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/724003/0?keyword=2009#6549439
+1
Everyone on here is capable of taking great photos, and as long as you can create technically sound photographs you can go from there with creativity. I think it's a great idea if you can create your own little style or niche but with SO many other photographers these days, that is becoming much harder to do.
Here is a strange analogy : I have a friend that likes to play poker (texas hold'em). About ten years ago, live poker was about all you could find at casinos. He was a solid player and knew the game pretty well. Then came online poker. He started to play that and he kept telling me how he had never seen so many bad beats or how got rivered by an weak hand...blah...blah...blah. ANYWAYS, I told him that when you play online you see about 6 times the amount of hands than you would see in live poker. So of course all of those possible "bad beats" are gonna happen more often because of sheer volume. Make sense?
A photographer should feel proud of his or her work, and I think most on here do. But there will always be a few who are just doing this as a "job". In the end, isn't the fact that your client is happy the most important thing anyway?
Tony Hoffer wrote:
Hmm... I'm actually going to defend the OP here. Although his tone was a bit off-putting, his point still stands.
I've been hesitating to put as much work up for critique lately because I have seen blatant copies of my work. It may not seem like a big deal to many, but when it happens to you, it gives you a sinking feeling... I have a local competitor/friend who has done similar and now I'm afraid that a bride would view us comparably when, if I'm honest, I don't think we are.
Mel is much better at saying it though, so read her post....Show more →
Let me get this straight. You have a site with images; a blog with hundreds of 'similar' images; post images from your blog here; invite people to frequent your blog and critique your images...and you're "a bit" offended that people are emulating your style?
I will be the first to admit that my perspective is different from many here. My approach is more pragmatic than impulsive. And, I tend to look at most things from a business aspect first, a creative aspect second...
...but, clearly if you've decided make so many images publicly available, then invite people to see them, you would have to understand the style is going to be emulated just as you have emulated from others.
Respectfully Tony, though I like your work and you've mastered many techniques of your craft, I've not seen much that hasn't been done before. Selective focus, off-center subjects, using the sun/flash as back lights for silhouetting and rim lighting, wide angle lenses for groups, various camera angles, etc. have all been done by others. Again, you've mastered many of these techniques and can do them better than those just starting them...novel though, they are not.
Sorry. I know this will read terribly. But your post reeked of "ego."
coffee-black wrote:
Let me get this straight. You have a site with images; a blog with hundreds of 'similar' images; post images from your blog here; invite people to frequent your blog and critique your images...and you're "a bit" offended that people are emulating your style?
I will be the first to admit that my perspective is different from many here. My approach is more pragmatic than impulsive. And, I tend to look at most things from a business aspect first, a creative aspect second...
...but, clearly if you've decided make so many images publicly available, then invite people to see them, you would have to understand the style is going to be emulated just as you have emulated from others.
Respectfully Tony, though I like your work and you've mastered many techniques of your craft, I've not seen much that hasn't been done before. Selective focus, off-center subjects, using the sun/flash as back lights for silhouetting and rim lighting, wide angle lenses for groups, various camera angles, etc. have all been done by others. Again, you've mastered many of these techniques and can do them better than those just starting them...novel though, they are not.
Sorry. I know this will read terribly. But your post reeked of "ego."
To anyone else who posts hundred's of images, makes regular updates to their blogs with more images, displays their equipment and answers direct questions regarding "how do you...?"...then is surprised by when others begin to repeat the work...Understand, you are supplying all tools for them to do so. This is a natural occurrence.
If you want to be 'cutting edge,' don't post your work unless you can continue to move the edge forward. If you want to teach, don't be bothered when others learn.
Being a successful wedding photographer means more about your ability to sell your work than it does your expertise of your craft. Why, because there is nothing new about photography for very long.
So much easier to learn now than pre internet for those who want master wedding photography.
In my late teens i used to bike ten mile into town and peek into the studio windows of the great photographers. A kid today can and will view hundreds of sites which is better than looking through hundreds of studio windows were that even possible.
I think it's great for those wanting to start a serious business. Unfortunately we open ourselves to all unqualified and that means those with no business sense can view our work and then compete with silly prices. Creating the perception that they offer $3000 quality photography for $500.
So what to do? you either pull off work that could be pulling clients for fear of teaching the competition or you accept it as part of the game and go on. Where the balance lies i don't know.
The OP is correct and the concept can be expanded to life in general. There are a rare few 'doing'. Most are just 'blowing in the wind', myself included.
I am actually quite surprised by this whole thread... several of the heavy hitters on this forum have often spoken about how they learned much of their technique on this very board ad I'm not 100% sure the OP's intent is genuine... I went back and read all of his posts and none of them offered any sort of considerable information or critique towards anyone's work... nor does he ever offer any of his own. I am basically clueless... oh well. I'll just go back to taking my own pictures.
i read somewhere that the best theories / ideas always dissolve. That is to say that the generator of a wonderful concept/idea almost always sees their idea fade away as others appropriate it, make it there own, and take the idea in new directions.... I feel it kinda applies here.... No?
The great thinkers (and I, my friends am not one...) liberate their brilliance to the masses and allow them to be a building block to new ideas.
I suppose the truly great idea makers are not afraid of people copying them because they are sure to generate new, more exciting, and unique ideas....
This argument has been in the artists' circle since the beginning of time. Unfortunately, or fortunately, it depends on your point of view we are not only artists, but service providers.
As service providers, the creative art can be lost sometimes. Photographers are busy and look around for ideas, because we don't necessarily have time to tap our own artistic abilities. That is the dangerous spot where copycats are born. Like the OP says, "anyone can trace." Often we talk about what sets us apart as photographers is service...Maybe what should set us apart is our art...
not_an_artist wrote:
The great thinkers (and I, my friends am not one...) liberate their brilliance to the masses and allow them to be a building block to new ideas.
Murph
If it's a building block to different and new, then I'm all for it. It's when it's a blatant copy without any invention added, then it's just gotta stop (or be kept to yourself and used as a tool to improve, rather than an attempt at marketing yourself).
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/724003/0?keyword=2009#6549439