All for the image? A post Contest discussion

<p>The contest was great. There were many excellent images. I don't think it would be wise for anyone make big changes to their portfolio based on it. Studying images you like and adapting techniques for future shooting would be more the way to go. </p>

<p>What's a bit odd is that my B&W entry isn't particularly indicative of my over-all body of work ... while it's a journalist type decisive moment, it's a bit to theatrical for me. Even more odd is that the winner of the 3+ years group IS more indicative of my former tastes in wedding photography ... note the word "former."</p>

<p>Now that leads to answering David's question. Yes, my own image will influence how I proceed. It tells me to not do that. Time to move on and reinvent myself.</p>

<p>Where am I headed? No where indicated by any of the entries or winners, especially my own. A new place altogether. My background is as a career art director ... and I've decided to put that to work for me on my wedding work ... rather than a thousand images, I want to craft a nice portfolio of magazine quality wedding images that'll capture the client in a way worthy of Vogue. They are the most important people at a wedding and we get scant moments with them in the nerve wracking rush to pound out a laundry list of images everyone "supposedly wants" and rarely uses ... because they haven't been offered something different. </p>

<p>We have the gear and lighting, and know how to use it, also all the fashion contacts for styling the bride. I've already hooked up with some young, upcoming fashion shooters (one is a model) with jaw dropping talent that are getting paid peanuts for doing magazine work. We're working on a business plan as I write this. Very exciting.</p>

<p>This will be counter to 5 shooters with G5s flashing all over the place. Uncle Bob will be left out in the cold, unable to even come close. Walk away from the herd mentality. Finally, after advertising luxury cars, financial institutions, and jewlery that cost more than my home, I have all the marketing skills to communicate this to the right audience.</p>

<p>It may or may not succeed, but it sure as heck will NOT be boring. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>FWIW, I thought this was pretty interesting exercise and I hope it gets repeated. I know I certainly found inspiration (even though I don't shoot professionally). So I say thanks to all the judges and everybody who contributed.</p>

<p>Marc W wrote: "<em>It may or may not succeed, but it sure as heck will NOT be boring</em> ."</p>

<p>I am truly fascinated by your approach to a "dropping from the herd" mentality.</p>

<p>What I am curious about is the influence this will have on most of the participants. Interesting antonym from Marc, especially as it relates to his own work. It would seem most of you don't hope to emulate anything shown, but rather "reverse engineer" the shots and see what, if anything, you can add to your "bag of tricks. I've been doing some of that too.</p>

<p>My business model is to story tell. I have found the journalistic approach to wedding photography fun, and to offer a "story" in a series of images. One of the odd things is that for my clients (most of whom hire me for that journalist approach) the more posed/planned images are those which inevitably sell.</p>

<p>What I wonder is, will we begin to drift into a more fashion approach where we mix the 'notion' of journalism in our work, with the planning of the studio, where light/posing and backgrounds are a large part?</p>

<p>I am learning all the time from the connections made with others here... Thanks.</p>

<p>Right now I am doing things pretty similar to the herd. I have always done things pretty much the same way, and a few years ago the herd joined me. I hope the herd will move on to the next big thing soon. In ways the herd is already moving is but still are calling it photojournalism.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>David, my take on "story telling" is that it is a function of editing as much as shooting. I often find that I can take a newbe's wedding pictures and make more of them then they can because I'm a more experienced editor with an art director's eye.</p>

<p>Contests like this one focus on the individual image qualities, where a wedding is more about consistency. It's conceivable that an image in the less than 3 year category would be better than the 3 plus year one. In fact, that may well have been the case here IMHO. In general, what experience brings is that consistency. I once had a famous race driver tell me that I could learn to do a lap as fast as he could, the trick is doing it over and over.</p>

<p>As for new directions, it will be an adventure. Wedding photography has become a free-for-all IMO. I doubt it will get any better, probably worse. It's got many us (not all) in a reactionary mode, and we're working like dogs to keep viable in a sea of also rans from Uncle Bob to every Tom, Dick, and Mary with a new digital camera. The truth is that we are consistently much better than they are, but 50 people shooting candids is bound to produce stuff the client likes. There-in lies the rub ... while we can consistently shoot candid work that is far more powerful than most people, the clients all to often can't readily discern the difference. In addition to emotionally charged candid work, what the great digital camera toting mob obviously CAN'T DO is what I want to concentrate on as a "value added" aspect. </p>

<p>To change that game will take a new approach to infrastructure. Not returning to the traditional "studio" methodology as you suggest ... but a new approach more akin to a commercial production like those I had to manage in my former career as an art director. It will still be story telling, but using a whole new slant to it... one that better meshes with what a wedding is ... a fantasy event outside of a persons everyday life. It'll also make use of experiences, gear and ways of thinking that most wedding shooters do not have, nor are likely to acquire very quickly. The final proof will be in the images ... which, trust me, are already jaw droppingly different from anything we saw in all these contest entries. All we need now is to make it a consistant aspect of every wedding shoot. </p>

<p>I do not think this will dismantle current trends ... it'll create a new one ... at least in my market.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I think one thing that this contest has really solidified in my mind is how personal photography is. Some people really like a particular image, others don't at all. It would be really interesting to have these same images judged by a few brides or any other random people and see what the results are.</p>

<p><strong><em>"Or to put it another way, do you think you will try to adapt how you shoot to include more of what the winning images showed?"<br /><br /></em></strong>"No. Not especially.<br />What I did do (and do, do) is look at all the fine work here (and elsewhere) and think . . . Wow! I like that bit; or this piece; or how did she do that? or he got a great angle; or great timing etc." -WW</p>

<p>Seems like I'm agreeing with William more often than not. BTW, I believe that the portrait of the flower girl submitted by C Jo Gough was one of the best images I've ever seen on the forum.</p>