Here’s a couple of shots from a recent assignment with Katia. She’s a very talented young actress with a great future ahead of her.
Katia
January 13th, 2010
SWPP Convention
January 13th, 2010This week I’m not doing much photography at all as it’s the Annual SWPP (Society of Wedding and Portrait Photographers) Convention at the Novotel in Hammersmith. All very exciting for the geek in me, I’m dusting off the anorak for its usual outing. In truth there’s lots to see and do; business schools, photo workshops in every discipline you could want, exhibitors galore and lots and lots of kit!
Johnny and Jemma’s Wedding
September 24th, 2009
I have just received a postcard from Johnny & Jemma, they’re in Sydney at the start of their 18 month honeymoon! I think it can be best described as a ‘gap year honeymoon’ as they’ll be working their way around the globe. Have a great time! Maybe I could take a second honeymoon???
How far is too far?
September 10th, 2009One issue that affects all reportage photographers, whether at war or weddings, is how far do you go in order to provide comprehensive coverage? How much is too much?
An extreme example of this is the paparazzi coverage which led to the death of Diana, Princess of Wales.
In general, and as illustrated by that case, pursuit of a photo is never worth someone’s life. But what about more typical circumstances which any of us may encounter? In providing a comprehensive coverage of a wedding should I be on the lookout for that which may be embarrassing (ie: too much to drink), upsetting (Bride – or Groom – arrives very late), humiliating (split trousers happens surprisingly often as in-laws squeeze into clothes bought optimistically!).
These may not be circumstances which you would want to see at your wedding, but if they happened, if they made a talking point during the day would you want to be reminded of them as part of a multi faceted event, are they a colourful contribution or an unwelcome memory? Might you want the photos, but not in the album please? Would you want to remember your wedding through rose tinted glasses, or is a ‘warts and all’ approach more likely to make you smile when showing the album to your grandchildren?
Your thoughts on this will be most welcome, especially as it’s an issue which returns to the fore again and again, and about which I still have no definitive position.
Traditional wedding photography versus modern reportage
July 28th, 2009To kick off the new blog section of the website it seems like a good idea to have a post which will hopefully engage readers and get people commenting – some sort of debate. With that in mind, let’s consider the different styles of wedding photography available.
Traditional wedding photography tends to be formal in style, with pictures of the couple, with and without various family members, the best man, bridesmaids and so on, usually posing on the steps of the church or registry office.
Over the last few years however, new styles of wedding photography have emerged. Some photographers adopt a fine art style, focusing on detailed and exacting composition, while others adopt a more free-form approach, treating the wedding like a news event and capturing images of moments throughout the day. In this style of wedding photo, images are likely to be taken of the guests, and anybody or anything that catches the photographer’s eye, rather than just concentrating on the couple, building a more complete picture of the day as a whole.
The arguments for classical wedding photography are basically that it pleases the older generation, produces guaranteed results and no surprises. You have a known quality and a good photographer can obtain very good results by organising the positioning, the body language and so on, and control lighting and composition. Sceptics might argue however that this is just a record of the clothes worn on a certain day, or that it is dull and boring and lacks creativity. When looking back years later, formal photographs may not convey emotions and memories – just artificial posing.
On the other hand reportage photography records what is happening in real time on a spontaneous basis and gives more flavour of the day, it brings out the emotions and will produce a unique album about the function. It is not the photographer’s idea of what should be but a series of cameos which should be much more interesting. It catches people off guard and one can pick up all the side shows and interesting sub-plots and it brings the whole day to life. The events of the day dictate the images captured, which represent things as they actually occur, rather than only getting artificial, posed pictures. A wedding album compiled in this style will have a natural narrative, and tell the visual story of the wedding day from start to finish.
So, readers, where do you stand? Which is better, formal wedding photography or a more modern reportage style?