I really don't get why people hate on Serg so much. Honestly, at this point I would just wish people hated me enough to leave 50+ comments. lol.
To be fair, the tinting and post-processing here is quite conservative if you look at the bigger wedding photography market. There are people that have ridiculous amounts of processing on their pictures. Serg's isn't like that, so the whole claim of "heavy action usage" is kind of baseless.
Moreover, this is business. He has a look and he's marketing that look to the extreme. People that like him hire him. People that don't like him don't hire him. It's simple. At least he doesn't have to go compete in the cookie-cutter market.
Also, post-production is now just as important as capturing the picture itself. We live in the 21st century and digital photography allows us to take pictures to a whole different level. Whether everyone likes that level is a diff. issue. Do I get everything Serg does? No. Do I REALLY like the stuff I DO get? Yes.
If you like it, leave a nice comment. If you see something that doesn't fit, make a polite critique based contribution.
But why the HATE? I have never seen any other photographer on these boards have to deal with the RAW hate that some people come at Serg with.
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.
I don't mean to be rude at all but step out of your glass box for a second and take a look around, you are working/interested/dabbling/whatever in a field in which the subjective point of view rules. just because his images don't look like they could be put into sports illustrated or GQ does no mean that they can't be seen as great captures. Seriously your talking about that same frame of mind that brought out/intrigued Richard Avedon, Garry Winogrand, Salvador Dali, and Picasso and your talking about rules. Whether or not you think his stuff is good or deserves a place in the photo world, you need to take his images with a grain of salt because there has always been and will always be a place for the strange, "gimmicky", and "rule breaking" kinds of things Sergio is putting out there. just be happy for him that he is doing what he loves and has found a market for him self and is being successful at it.
I have follow Serg's stuff since he first started posting on Pbnation and he has beyond evolved his style, he has created an entirely new one loosely based on the old one, the kid (i say this even though we are the same age) has found the kind of image he enjoys creating and his clients love looking at. who are you to decide for his clients or your clients for that matter what they enjoy viewing. Yes you can give him constructive criticism, but at this point you have gone beyond anything constructive and have just began to rant. know one knows what he wants or what his clients want better than Sergio does. yes comments are helpful but some of them are not going to change his outlook or his theories behind photography.
I don't mean to come of snotty or pompous and im sorry is I have but if you cannot appreciate every aspect of this industry then you my friend are the on who needs to go back to learning.
I'll chime in...I reside in the People and sports section for the most part.
Saad...you ask why the "hate"? Its one thing if its just in the Wedding section, but when this type of attitude appears in two different forums...People and now Weddings then maybe one has to look at thy self.
Its the same ole BS...Serg post his images, his boys give him "ada boyz", but god forbid if someone gives a real critique. Then the, "well my clients love'em" or "I'm making a shiiite load of money"...or whatever.
Tony Brown wrote:
Its the same ole BS...Serg post his images, his boys give him "ada boyz", but god forbid if someone gives a real critique.
.
Vicki B said: Every single picture involves a gimmick.
You were saying?
And thats all she freaking said. You wanna talk BS? THAT'S BS. Fine, you don't like the shots. Leave a sour, pointless jabbing comment. She said nothing. Just showed herself an ass.
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.
Wow, I've never seen a wedding shot with a pin hole camera before! Just kidding, I know it's the post-processing, and under exposure in back lit shots that make it look that way. Was it intentional? Just curious...
It make quite a statement going against the grain so much. Everyone else makes Indian weddings look bright and colorful.
I tend to prefer that, which is why I love images 20 and 34. They really show the colors. On the other hand, 25 is a great image too!
Very unique set of images. It definitely sets you apart, which is a good thing in a crowded industry.
onsitemn wrote:
It make quite a statement going against the grain so much. Everyone else makes Indian weddings look bright and colorful.
You think the clients were hoping that Serg would maybe.....miraculously CHANGE completely how he edits for this one wedding? Dude. They knew what was coming.They hired him to do what he does. WHY is that hard to grasp.
They've met, shook hands had breakfest, lunch and dinner together. They then shot 2 weddings. It's a friend acknowledging another friends work. Your seriously asking why this is BAD while this is okay:
Sam Hassas wrote:
You think the clients were hoping that Serg would maybe.....meraculuosly CHANGE comepletly how he edits for this one wedding? Dude. They hired him to do what he does. WHY is that hard to grasp.
Some like Coke
Other Pepsi
I'm a Sangria man myself.
Ah, I have no idea who Sergio is, nor have I seen his work before this wedding. Just commenting on the work from my eyes. I'm not his client, so I have no idea what they expect from him.
Sam Hassas wrote:
I tried to look for an example of her own imagery. Couldn't find one. Big surprise.
Having never seen her, she comes off like the lunch lady in gradeschool.
Just so I don't come off that way, I acknowledge I've only shot one Indian wedding, and it was a while ago, so I'm definitely not an expert. I'll make it easy to find my imagery too.
Tony Brown wrote:
so you decide to take personal attacks at someone that gave a straight forward opinion on photographs posted on a website.
no wonder you guys are boyz.
Actually, I just went top your sitre and looked at your work. At a 2 minute glance I'd say that a clinet of mine would be more apt to hire you over Sergio. That's the point however. He caters to a market. LAst we spoke he's booked 14 weddings for 10' Thats DANG good. He's not even legal drinking age.
If someone disagrees with personal style, the way to debate it is NOT with stupidity. Agree to disagree.
Just kidding, I know it's the post-processing, and under exposure in back lit shots that make it look that way. Was it intentional? Just curious...