The only image of the set that really makes me go "whoa" is the very last one. If the rest of the pictures had the same sort of color and striking clarity, then the set would be supurb. Alas, we're not all Hoffer so we have to make due with what we can get.
Runner up is the flare shot with the girl sitting. Nice moment, with nice flare to capitalize on the moment.
With that said, I don't think the toning, and certainly the B&W + grain, does this culture's colors justice. When you've got something as colorful and ethnic as traditional southern Asian clothing, I say let it shine with the brightest, most vivid color you can muster. Granted, shooting directly into window light makes this task hard.
And on a final note, I think this set would be stronger if some of the obviously bad shots were culled (the B&W shot of henna being applied, the completely OOF shot of the guy's head, the girl through the window, the woman washing dishes through the window). Perhaps this is part of the stylistic audiacity that people are oogling over, but it just doesn't work for me.
jcolman wrote:
I agree that Serg certainly has his own style. For that I applaud him. He's not afraid to go against the grain and offer something different. In his mind, so-called photography "rules" seen made to be broken. Some of his shots flaunt everything I've ever learned about photography but so what? Who's to say what's right and what's wrong except the client.
Having said that, his photos are not for everyone. I could never, ever shoot a wedding the way he does nor would I want to. Personally I think he will go far in this business despite his flagrant violations of the "rules". Only time will tell. ...Show more →
Why are you answering for him?? He doesn't break the rules, based on the photographs in here and all his previous post it's obvious he just doesn't know them yet.
This is why I suggested some training to take his work to another level. Some rules are then for a reason and you can't break them. When you do, an image doesn't look good. Composition is a huge part of photography and every wedding photographer MUST know at least basics. If you don't care, then maybe wedding photography is not for you. There are other directions you can take,where clients don't suffer from your lack of training and desire to become better! Hiding behind "I am an artist and can do what I want" is not a good strategy.
Regarding serg's shots, man..I don't think a lot of people get it. They're here for the experience of the moments from that day, nothing else. As opposed to so many photogs who claim different "great times, connections, moments," etc etc while shooting, Serg's photos actually make it feel like an experience you had. Pointing out technical flaws with his stuff doesn't even really make sense to me.
thats kinda what im getting at, there are implied "rules" (per say) but nothing that concrete in the least, thats the beauty of what we do. Photography is a totally subjective thing just like every single other art you can do what you want some will love it some will hate it. Some of my favorite images of all time, and some of the greatest photographs of all time have nothing to do with composition or lighting or lines or rules at all, they are all about submersing the viewer into the image and giving them the sense of the moment and making them FEEL as though they were there. forcing them to think about each and every detail, about what just happened to cause that and what is about to happen.
I think Sergio's stuff is beyond what most would consider "normal" but in a great way, i look at his stuff with the utmost respect because most people do not look at these moments the way he does. his images are in their core perfect in every single way. they draw attention to the right places, their tones and colors do nothing but create a mood for the image and keep things simple. yet each time he "breaks a rule" he does it totally intentionally and it does nothing but help the image and the viewer see things the way he wants them to see it, and thats what being a photographer is all about.
jeremy_clay wrote:
Regarding serg's shots, man..I don't think a lot of people get it. They're here for the experience of the moments from that day, nothing else. As opposed to so many photogs who claim different "great times, connections, moments," etc etc while shooting, Serg's photos actually make it feel like an experience you had. Pointing out technical flaws with his stuff doesn't even really make sense to me.
Jeff Ascough(about as big of a name as you can pick in this business) who most certainly doesn't shoot in a "modern" fashion always talks about shapes, and comments about James Nachtewey's work "I am drawn to the sheer aesthetic beauty of his images. Forget the content and just look at the use of his composition, the light and his understanding of the decisive moment."
I feel the same way about Serg's stuff. It's visceral, evocative, in your face, and I mean its just plain fun to look at. It makes my eyes happy, the light, the muted colors, the action, the personality. Me thinks you hit the nail on the head.
(And no, I'm not making any comparison at all between any of the 3 aforementioned photogs)
jeremy_clay wrote:
"VickiB" just has it out for younger photographers if you check the post history.
"I am not a wedding photographer, nor do I aspire to be one (much like Gelett Burgess's purple cow ). In fact, I sometimes read this forum for the same reason that I sometimes listen to Rush Limbaugh--because it gives me a perverse pleasure to be outraged at his arrogance. I, too, was quite shocked to learn how young most of the "stars" on this forum are and how few weddings they have shot--shocked not because they have become so good in such a short time, but because they are so presumptuous as to see themselves as not only authoritative, but "the only game in town." Frankly, if a daughter of mine were getting married, I would not be at all attracted by the tilting and the excessive flare and the groomsmen-as-mafiosi shots I see everywhere on this forum. I believe that traditional wedding photographs are timeless, and I have often said that I'll bet the recipients of the trendy shots popular in this forum will be sorry in twenty years that their photos seem so dated."...Show more →
wow...just WOW! thanks for pointing that out j! i guess we cant put ANY stock into what vickiB says...after all, she comes out and says that she only frequents this place to seek out posts like this and then provoke them with comments....you know, for her pleasure.
its outrageous to say that these shots are nothing but gimicks (but now i know the motivation behind the comment). are they a unique STYLE? hell yes! and thank god for that! same goes for sam/jclay/evan/zerga/serg/pat/etc/etc. are their styles for everyone? hell no. do they add flavor and variety to this place? YES.
jeremy_clay wrote:
Regarding serg's shots, man..I don't think a lot of people get it. They're here for the experience of the moments from that day, nothing else. .
People were always looking into the sun and couldn't see the bride and groom? All the guests had some sort of strange ocular malady that caused 2/3 of their field of vision to go randomly out of focus? They lost their ability to see details in things that were white?
Precisely what I would like to see in wedding photographs is "the experience of the moments from th[e] day"--not distorted renditions that make someone say "wow!" today but "why?" tomorrow. All the techniques I decry can be used fruitfully to enhance the portrayal of the day, but they can also be used for their own sake. I was simply saying that here, they seem to be used for their own sake with no regard for the image they convey.
Serg, is this your first Indian wedding? Looks dope brother. You managed to capture the ceremonies as well as some of those nice moments between the couple. Me likes.
VickiB wrote:
People were always looking into the sun and couldn't see the bride and groom? All the guests had some sort of strange ocular malady that caused 2/3 of their field of vision to go randomly out of focus? They lost their ability to see details in things that were white?
My personal experience while watching the images not-withstanding, I nearly spit my water while reading that. ! Now I know why our helpdesk people @ work insist we don't have fluids near the computers
deep blue -- why? thats what everyone does. might blog the rest of the wedding in B/W, because i can :P but in serious mode, all of my shots are toned. which means that everything is changed in relation to everything else. no colors are lost or anything, they are just toned differently. everything is within its own palette.
Sergio Mottola wrote:
deep blue -- why? thats what everyone does. might blog the rest of the wedding in B/W, because i can :P but in serious mode, all of my shots are toned. which means that everything is changed in relation to everything else. no colors are lost or anything, they are just toned differently. everything is within its own palette.
I get what you're saying and honestly, the approach to this situation is pretty strongly rooted in personal preference. I, personally, just think that toning just doesn't work as well for cultures where color is so important. For a traditional american wedding, it can be great. For this, less so.
Then again, that's just my opinion. Take it for what its worth.
i like deepblue. he knows how to actually respectfully disagree :P
sam -- it was via text message so it's been deleted for a while, but my best recollection: "wow! thank you for being so fast. we love them and can't wait to see photos from sunday!"
deepbluejh wrote:
I get what you're saying and honestly, the approach to this situation is pretty strongly rooted in personal preference. I, personally, just think that toning just doesn't work as well for cultures where color is so important. For a traditional american wedding, it can be great. For this, less so.
Then again, that's just my opinion. Take it for what its worth.
dbj,
I largely share your same opinion and preference... but I think to some degree that I "get" the appeal.
Let me try this for a second and then I'd appreciate anyone else's feedback on my thoughts.
Let's pretend for a moment that we were in India and were wedding photographers. Suddenly rather than the western wedding being the norm and the indian one being the exciting different one, the tables would be turned.
You would probably find that given that the vast majority are uber-colorful multi-day events, in order to differentiate themelves, and maybe in some cases just due to personal preferences, some wedding photographers would by necessity shoot the wedding differently... and in some cases you might even have some "outrageous" shooters who just say EFF all this color bull-crap.. I'm shooting it ALL in black and white... or toning, or whatever.
Now western weddings would be more rare, so the simple fact of shooting a western wedding would be a differentiator in and of itself, therefore there would be less of a need to make it a unique, different event. Everyone would focus on always getting the gown perfectly whit because "White color is such an important aspect of western wedding". Eventually one of these "rogue" photogs would say ... eff it. I'm shooting a western wedding and I'm gelling cts and turning the gown a shade of gold. Some brides would love it because they've had enough of having their album be identical t every other western bride's album (keep in mind that while shooting a western wedding for an indian photographer might be a unique experience... but hanging out with other western chicks is probably NOT a unique eperience for western women in communities in India.
Anyway... to the majority of indian photographers, messing with the white gown might seem outrageous, because what the heck with all the colorful weddings you shoot day in and day out, the one chance to get to shoot gorbeous white, you make it gold...WTF?!?!? But heck the client is ecstatic.
That could be, to some extent going on here.
Just food for thought... what to us might be "doesn't work as well for cultures where color is so important" to 21 year old Indian Americans might be "ok we get our heritage and all, but that's our grandparents' culture... we're INDIAN Americans and we too want to be photographed desaturated, partly out of focus... and by the way where is OUR EFFING PERFECTLY IN FOCUS BUM?"
...
so... makes any sense at all, or do I just chalk this up to pointless finger exercise?
Ahh, the poor boys. A little clique of guys who discovered the saturation button in photoshop and probably have every filter ever sold. It sure seems catchy! And it is .... for a little while. Forced perspective, colors never seen before on THIS planet and real cool rule breaking ad nauseum. And what is great is that we can pretend it is "style". Vicki was kind. But that back slap'n possy here, and that is what several like poor Sam here are, can't seem to stand someone who ain't drink'n da Kool-aid.
I can understand. You guys want to feel like you are something. So one buddy raves and that dude raves back. But really, don't you ever get tired of it. Naw, I know, what was I thinking.
My nine year old think the shots are cool. Of course. Hers look just like that. Look daddy .... look how neat this is when I turn the dog green! But one day she will turn twelve - and I hope outgrow the stage.
Sam. Your work of course is great. I wold not criticize at thing. It is important to keep improving and I can see that you are making great strides. That portrait of your girlfriend knitting shows you are developing, every day as a .... ummm ... ya know ... photoshop photographer. But I think a bit more green, to cement your style.
Pavel wrote:
Ahh, the poor boys. A little clique of guys who discovered the saturation button in photoshop and probably have every filter ever sold. It sure seems catchy! And it is .... for a little while. Forced perspective, colors never seen before on THIS planet and real cool rule breaking ad nauseum. And what is great is that we can pretend it is "style". Vicki was kind. But that back slap'n possy here, and that is what several like poor Sam here are, can't seem to stand someone who ain't drink'n da Kool-aid.
I can understand. You guys want to feel like you are something. So one buddy raves and that dude raves back. But really, don't you ever get tired of it. Naw, I know, what was I thinking.
My nine year old think the shots are cool. Of course. Hers look just like that. Look daddy .... look how neat this is when I turn the dog green! But one day she will turn twelve - and I hope outgrow the stage.
Sam. Your work of course is great. I wold not criticize at thing. It is important to keep improving and I can see that you are making great strides. That portrait of your girlfriend knitting shows you are developing, every day as a .... ummm ... ya know ... photoshop photographer. But I think a bit more green, to cement your style.
