Sam. You aren't sixteen ... really ... right? How's about you stop acting like it. "that's the rules (who's ... your juvenile rules?) ,throw a punch (is that how little boys see it when there is criticism?) expect one back ( you would be funny if it were not so sad)
VickiB said that the shots were gimmicky. A valid point. Now tell me that you know what a gimmick is (it's ok to look it up in a dictionary) and tell me where you think that VickiB is not right. The shots are ok imho. Gimmicky for sure. But kinda neat at the same time. My personal opinion is that they are nice in a quirky kind of way, the same way as when you cook and pour three pounds of spice on a two pound stake. Now that is just my opinion and worth what one has paid for it. But do tell me where gimmicky does not apply.
Sam, Sam, Sam ... you could have saved yourself so many defensive sounding keystrokes if you just kept it clean. But you and the backslappers had to get some pent up vitriol out ... even if you likely don't know what that means. (dictionary time again!) I guess if hate = fear then Fear = hate.
So Sam, be a man - admit you over-reacted and got rude. Somebody wasn't a back slap'n the usual way and you got confused! Be a big boy and admit it. Oh and tell me, really - would you want ALL the shots at YOUR wedding looking like an acid trip? I din't think so.
Pavel wrote:
Sam. You aren't sixteen ... really ... right? How's about you stop acting like it. "that's the rules (who's ... your juvenile rules?) ,throw a punch (is that how little boys see it when there is criticism?) expect one back ( you would be funny if it were not so sad)
VickiB said that the shots were gimmicky. A valid point. Now tell me that you know what a gimmick is (it's ok to look it up in a dictionary) and tell me where you think that VickiB is not right. The shots are ok imho. Gimmicky for sure. But kinda neat at the same time. My personal opinion is that they are nice in a quirky kind of way, the same way as when you cook and pour three pounds of spice on a two pound stake. Now that is just my opinion and worth what one has paid for it. But do tell me where gimmicky does not apply.
Sam, Sam, Sam ... you could have saved yourself so many defensive sounding keystrokes if you just kept it clean. But you and the backslappers had to get some pent up vitriol out ... even if you likely don't know what that means. (dictionary time again!) I guess if hate = fear then Fear = hate.
So Sam, be a man - admit you over-reacted and got rude. Somebody wasn't a back slap'n the usual way and you got confused! Be a big boy and admit it. Oh and tell me, really - would you want ALL the shots at YOUR wedding looking like an acid trip? I din't think so.
I will leave you with a little background on Sergio:
I've met the guy and he's slept on my couch. He's 19. Put yourself in his shoes. When you were 19 every adult in the world told you what was wrong with what you were doing. You vs. them.
I believe in this kid. I see something few youth have. Guy comes from meager background, (single mom) and is building a life. A career. No help. I was working at a fast food joint at 19. This guy is shooting 14 weddings next year and built it from the ground up. THAT'S commendable in my book.
All I'm saying is that we kill our wounded.
He shot for me. Twice. Our styles are VERY different HOWEVER, I told him exactly how I wanted him to shoot and he did it. Did it really well. No F1.4. No excessive flare. No jpeg. No homeless people. Small talk and he did awesome.
One-liner, bumper sticker comments like this:
everythings a gimmick", help no one.
Pavel wrote:
Sam. You aren't sixteen ... really ... right? How's about you stop acting like it. "that's the rules (who's ... your juvenile rules?) ,throw a punch (is that how little boys see it when there is criticism?) expect one back ( you would be funny if it were not so sad)
VickiB said that the shots were gimmicky. A valid point. Now tell me that you know what a gimmick is (it's ok to look it up in a dictionary) and tell me where you think that VickiB is not right. The shots are ok imho. Gimmicky for sure. But kinda neat at the same time. My personal opinion is that they are nice in a quirky kind of way, the same way as when you cook and pour three pounds of spice on a two pound stake. Now that is just my opinion and worth what one has paid for it. But do tell me where gimmicky does not apply.
Sam, Sam, Sam ... you could have saved yourself so many defensive sounding keystrokes if you just kept it clean. But you and the backslappers had to get some pent up vitriol out ... even if you likely don't know what that means. (dictionary time again!) I guess if hate = fear then Fear = hate.
So Sam, be a man - admit you over-reacted and got rude. Somebody wasn't a back slap'n the usual way and you got confused! Be a big boy and admit it. Oh and tell me, really - would you want ALL the shots at YOUR wedding looking like an acid trip? I din't think so.
Pavel wrote:
Oh and tell me, really - would you want ALL the shots at YOUR wedding looking like an acid trip? I din't think so.
Dude. I honestly was giving you the benefit of the doubt in my mind. Maybe his work is really great.
I just went through 10 minutes of your work, (not hard to find you) and seriously.......I mean really. You're saying this about Sergio's work. Dude. Speechless.
For those wondering what the work was like....I think Asim went to him for Christmas shots.
the lolz. The biggest mouths have the wors.....forget it.
Serg,why you always gotta start S(*T. Sam, you punk. you a bully.
Quan, why you startin' sh*$ too!
haha. Serg, if my wifey wasn't workin i wouldda been there to chill w/ cha in a heart beat that weekend you were in sacto. looks like you KILLED IT. I like going on acid trips w/o taking acid from time to time.
i think vickiB's first comment wasn't appropriate. but she later clarified.
sam, i like your work, but you are getting too involved. and you are getting quite rude as well. who knows if vickiB could look like a hot MILF? never know...
on sergio's work, i don't like the sephia-toned kind of look that seems like a signature sergio look. and i don't like the blown highlights either. my own work is terrible... so don't judge me based on my work on how to critic. i have my view points and they are just as valid as anyone elses. however, that's just me. people disagree. i remember though saying something in a previous sergio thread like "is it me... or do the pictures look kinda blurry?" which i was really curious about and not trying to be sarcastic.... to which sergio replied "lol. picture's are blurry.." as if i were an idiot.
Sam Hassas wrote:
Dude. I honestly was giving you the benefit of the doubt in my mind. Maybe his work is really great.
I just went through 10 minutes of your work, (not hard to find you) and seriously.......I mean really. You're saying this about Sergio's work. Dude. Speechless.
For those wondering what the work was like....I think Asim went to him for Christmas shots.
the lolz. The biggest mouths have the wors.....forget it.
It's ALWAYS the way. Huge words, no website, and..yeah. Those results. End thread.
Wow I'm surprised at the negativity at this particular set of photos...I think there are about 1,000,000 worse threads on this forum that should attract more scrutiny
I think the photos are lovely, Sergio has been able to work the ambient light exposure very effectively in what any wedding photographer would recognise to be very difficult lighting to photograph in (both the house and garden)
The photos portray a very good record of the day. There is a great artistic feel to them. As the couple I would have liked a few "orthodox" technically perfect exposures of key moments like the speeches (e.g. perhaps using a flash to balance the exposure) etc. but the strengths of this set, capturing the moments in an artistic manner with a lot of flair (and flare ) is very good
I have just three final things to say, and then I'll leave you boys to the substantive critiques you're so skilled at and so eager for, such as "you killed the set, dude," "mind blowing," and "Sergio is a pimp."
First, I would like to point out that a certain number of words does not a valid critique make. For example, no one needed to ask for more after reading Dorothy Parker's one-line review of a performance by Katherine Hepburn: "She ran the gamut of emotions from A to B." The minimal language of my initial critique could be taken as a challenge to explore what I might have meant, to discover gimmickry if present, and to figure out how to take one's attention-getting techniques and mold them into a personal style.
Second, I find it very telling that it was not I who felt the need to resort to ad hominem attacks. I had no idea of Sergio's age, nor had I looked at his posts in the past. I spend a lot of time looking at the wedding forum, but I usually look no further than the first few photos in a set to decide if I want to see the rest, and I post responses very infrequently. I made this comment only because it was so illustrative of the conversation I had on the weekend. I have never mistaken personal attack for reasonable disagreement.
Finally, I was amused by the references to Picasso and Dali as examples of painters who didn't follow the rules. In fact, both of these men underwent extensive classical raining in art. Thus, they knew the rules and therefore understood what it meant to break them. I believe this idea was the point behind Reason's comments, which he posted before this thread devolved into a forum on me as a bitter schoolmarm.
Dawei Ye wrote:
Wow I'm surprised at the negativity at this particular set of photos...I think there are about 1,000,000 worse threads on this forum that should attract more scrutiny
I think the photos are lovely, Sergio has been able to work the ambient light exposure very effectively in what any wedding photographer would recognise to be very difficult lighting to photograph in (both the house and garden)
The photos portray a very good record of the day. There is a great artistic feel to them. As the couple I would have liked a few "orthodox" technically perfect exposures of key moments like the speeches (e.g. perhaps using a flash to balance the exposure) etc. but the strengths of this set, capturing the moments in an artistic manner with a lot of flair (and flare ) is very good ...Show more →
Dawei, this has happened because someone has described a set of pictures as gimmicky/fadlike. Such comments may or may not indicate that the poster has no real understanding ofthe variety of styles or the camaraderie that exists in this forum (allowing for 'pimp' type comments etc.). What really pulls my chain though is that someone with very little posting history (from what I can see has ever really replied to threads) should be quite so direct and naive.
There are people who have incredibly fixed and rigid ideas about what wedding photography should be and Im ok with this but its a very grave error to assume that anything different looking is a fad.
Those that write off originality as gimmickery tend to find themselves becoming obsolete.
If someone has something to add, fine comment but if all they can manage is to describe something as a fad, then they need to take a step back and see if they really understand the shot/clientell/style.
I never comment on something that I dont like just because its not my flava. Ive had that done to me and its annoying, moronic and ignorant. There are plenty of ''grip and grin" shooters out there that do an ace job shooting grip and grin couples. Its not my cuppa but it doesnt invalidate what they do or what they do.
