Can 'real' fashion be done with a 'glamour'-type model?

[shawngibson]

A lot of my models just do not look like fashion models; they look more like glamour models or actors (whatever an actor looks like?). I've done a lot to try to capture them in a 'fashion' spirit anyways; but most of the time when I try to do this I don't get what anyone doing real fashion for a living would call 'a fashion photo'; I end up with more of a celebrity portraiture kind of shot, bordering on I guess what you'd call glamour.

 

<p>

 

Should I only be shooting fashion-types if I want a fashion photo, and start learning a little about celebrity portraiture/glamour/etc? I'm asking this not on a 'do whatever you like' basis, but more of a 'could I ever be taken seriously in the professional world' basis...

 

<p>

 

Thanks people. shawn

[edward_kang]

<i>

Should I only be shooting fashion-types if I want a fashion photo, and

start learning a little about celebrity portraiture/glamour/etc? I'm

asking this not on a 'do whatever you like' basis, but more of a

'could I ever be taken seriously in the professional world' basis...

</i>

<br>

in my personal opinion, there is a big difference between fashion

models and glamour models, and there are very few women who can pull

both off.

<br>

for professional purposes i believe it's important to segregate the

two.

[tommy_z.]

Edward Kang wrote; <I>"...and there are very few women who can pull

both off."</I>

<P>

Some follow-up questions I would like to ask is:<BR>

What exactly does it mean to "pull off" the fashion look?<BR>

Is it the model?<BR>

Is it the way the shot is made?<BR>

<P>I am interested in this since I have struggled with the same

questions, and as I look back at the shots in my portfolio I've

realized that much of it borders between portraiture and fashion.

(well maybe this couldn't be helped since the bulk of my work last

year was shooting model portfolios for aspiring fashion models)

<P>The partial answers I have come up with are <BR>

1) EYE CONTACT...this isn't as critical in a fashion shot as it is in

portraiture.<BR>

2) In a fashion shot, the model is practically "acting", and the

photographer is the director as opposed to the "trying to

capture the essence of the person" approach of portaiture (though if

you look at the celebrity shots of Mark Seliger, then the lines get

very, very blurred don't they?) <BR>

3) In the fashion shot, the emphasis is on the clothes - the forms,

lines, and color they create along with the body of the model, or, in

the absence of any - the attitude.<BR>

4) Richard Avedon says "Sell the dream" when it comes to fashion

photography. so maybe 'pulling it off' means making a viewer think "I

want to look like that. I want to live the life she lives. What else

does she do (given the context of the picture and the fantasy built

around it)"

<P>

Question is: can this be pulled off with a model not incredibly tall,

shapely, and beautiful? Does it have to do with the percieved image of

what a fashion model should look like?

<P>Oddly enough, I AM sure of is that a lot of it has to do with the

skill of the model in "projecting" or "acting", the clothes she's

wearing, how she's posed and how the light/environment interplays with

her, and the skill of the stylist/make-up/hair artist.

<P>It would be interesting to see someone like Avedon tasked to shoot

Versace with a "glamour type model" and see how he does it.

[shawn_stupidpost]

Well look what happens when you see Madonna or Courtney Love in a

fashion photo. It looks different, even though it still looks like

Avedon, or whoever. It still looks like a real fashion photo, sort of,

but maybe because we equate a certain style with fashion I just

started seeing Avedon's blown-out backdrops as 'portraiture'; until

now even if it was an old man I sort of thought of it as a

bastardized fashion photo...). And these celeb-as-fashion-model shots

always jump out at me as be anomolies when I'm flicking through a

magazine.

 

<p>

 

I don't know what I'm adding here, just noting what I see.

[brian_yarvin]

Shawn:

 

<p>

 

Are these "real fashion" shoots you're doing? If so, what do the

stylists and designers think of the images?

 

<p>

 

If not, this seems like a logical next step. Find yourself an aspiring

designer and try shooting their outfits rather than the models.

 

<p>

 

Also, since most of the discussion seems to center on "girls" or how

women look, try shooting with men and see if you come closer to that

look.

 

<p>

 

Brian

[shawn_stupidpost]

No. Most of my stuff ends up not looking like fashion per se. But I've

started using a good make-up person and I'm really concentrating on

the shape of thing. I want to shoot with the make-up guy, a hair

person, and a lady I'm being put into contact with who is a designer;

I want them all on the set and I want all of their experience. We are

going to do a shoot with 2 girls and a guy in a rented hotel room. I

think this is the kind of thing which will make a big difference, the

participation of a number of people whose main aim is STRICT fashion,

as opposed to me who loves fashion but am approaching my photography

from too many angles, ending up with unfocused garbaldy goop.

 

<p>

 

I have no problem shooting men; but most of the time when I ask, men

get wierded out a lot more easily than women for some reason. I'm

going to start concentrating my efforts on real models with agencies

and experience, even if I have to pay. The poise and professionalism

of everyone involved is probably what makes the biggest difference.

 

<p>

 

what do you think Brian?

[brian_yarvin]

Shawn:

 

<p>

 

It sounds to me like you're spending way too much time thinking about

models and nowhere near enough about the rest of the shoot.

 

<p>

 

There are all sorts of people modeling today and you should be

prepared to make fashion photos of all of them. (since that's your

career goal)

 

<p>

 

Try the designer thing. Meet them and see the clothes and go from

there - this is the way real fashion shoots are done. And for that

matter, this is how real fashion photographers get work!

 

<p>

 

I suggest you don't pay models unless you have paying work, this will

create far more problems than it will solve.

 

<p>

 

Brian

[edward_kang]

Tommy says:<br>

<i>

Question is: can this be pulled off with a model not incredibly tall,

shapely, and beautiful?</i>

<br><br>

It can, but it is tougher.<br><br>

<i> Does it have to do with the percieved image of what a fashion

model should look like? </i>

<br><br>

I'm sure it has quite a bit to do with what we "perceive" as fashion

model-esque.

<br><br>

Brian says:<br>

<i>It sounds to me like you're spending way too much time thinking

about models and nowhere near enough about the rest of the shoot.</i>

<br><br>

I agree. Tommy nailed it on the head when he said:

<br>

<br>

<i>3) In the fashion shot, the emphasis is on the clothes - the forms,

lines, and color they create along with the body of the model, or, in

the absence of any - the attitude.</i>

<br>

<br>

To add Brian's idea, it also includes location, background, and most

importantly - lighting.

<br> <br>

I still stand behind the fact that finding good fashion models is

difficult - and still is the first problem. One interesting exercise

is to simply head to your local upscale mall, walk around, and window

shop. On any given saturday, the mall will be brimming with folk. Keep

your eye out for people who strike you visually. The kind of people

who you notice and then say, "wow, that person looks like a fashion

model."<br><br>

One thing you will notice is that these people are in a severe

minority. They will have their clothing tastefully chosen, with colors

(if any besides black) that match. Accessories will be matching and

in place. They will exude "fashion" to you. Their faces and skulls

will complement their bodies and their clothing.<br><br>

Now you have found a fashion model. It is up to you if you want to

approach them and ask if they would like to model. However, a slightly

more practical thing to do is to examine your own reaction to their

appearance. What made you think that they were fashion-esque? What

about their appearance and clothing gave you such a strong impression?

Take these things and write them down, and then apply them to your

growing body of knowledge about fashion.

<br><br>

i really do think that fashion is still portraiture. As a result, the

model and his/her clothing can stand alone. This is why Avedon could

do some of his fashion work on pure white backgrounds. This makes your

job as a photographer harder - but this is also why there are "glamour

shots" shops in every mall in the US, but not a single "high fashion

shots" shop anywhere.

[shawn_stupidpost]

This is prob'ly the most personally important thing I've posted. I'm

taking all of this to heart, starting with <i>

Try the designer thing. Meet them and see the clothes and go from

there - this is the way real fashion shoots are

done. And for that matter, this is how real fashion photographers

get work! </i>. <p>

 

Continuing with <i>Richard Avedon says "Sell the

dream" when it comes to fashion photography. so maybe 'pulling it off'

means

making a viewer think 'I want to look like that. I want to live

the life she lives. What else does she do (given the

context of the picture and the fantasy built around it)'</i>. <p>

 

And

ending (appropriately) with <i>"i really do think that fashion is

still portraiture. As a result, the model and his/her clothing can

stand alone. This is

why Avedon could do some of his fashion work on pure white

backgrounds. This makes your job as a

photographer harder - but this is also why there are "glamour

shots" shops in every mall in the US, but not a single

"high fashion shots" shop anywhere</i>".

 

<p>

 

Thanks guy. I'm gonna start searching out designers. Ryerson

Polytechnic, which has a fashion design program, is probably the best

place to start, and maybe some small, less-snobish agencies who

themselves are starting out?

 

<p>

 

shawn

[brian_yarvin]

Hey Shawn...how about trying to shoot some fashion with no models at

all? Just still lifes of the clothes?

 

<p>

 

Have agencies in Vancouver been "snobby" with you? I'm sorry to hear

this. I think they'd have a different attitude entirely if you didn't

act like you depended on them...shoot some great images for the hot

local designers and/or boutiques and they'll be lining up to provide

you with people. Act like you need them to make your career and they

will crush you.

 

<p>

 

Also...I suspect that when you make contact with the designers,

they'll know people who can model their clothes.

 

<p>

 

Give it a try!

[shawn_stupidpost]

Well, no one in Vancouver has been snobby with me cuz I live in

Toronto, a hop skip and a REEEAAALLLYYY LLLOOONNNGGG jump away...

 

<p>

 

Actually no one has been snobby with me; most of what I believe about

agencies is based on hearsay from friends and shop talk in the camera

places/labs. The only agency I've delt with personally has been very

nice to me, maybe because I'm shooting for free. We'll see what

happens when the agency actually sees my results and I tell them I

either want to get paid from now on or at least have them/the model

pay for all supplies; everything minus time and labour.

 

<p>

 

I'm only half an hour away from the fashion district in Toronto; I

actually work about a 5minute walk away from it. It's time to swallow

my pride, get ready for some harsh criticism, and get out there...

 

<p>

 

You've been an inspiration Brian. Thanks (and everyone else...). shawn

[shawn_stupidpost]

extrapolating all this new stuff, i bet the model will matter a lot

less if everything else is put into place and clearly demarked

"fashion...".

[shawn_stupidpost]

<i>I still stand behind the fact that finding good fashion models is

difficult - and still is the first problem. One interesting

exercise is to simply head to your local upscale mall, walk

around, and window shop. On any given saturday, the

mall will be brimming with folk. Keep your eye out for people who

strike you visually. The kind of people who you

notice and then say, "wow, that person looks like a fashion

model."</i>

 

<p>

 

So <i>that's</i> how I became an alcoholic!!! (just kidding). Should'a

been going to malls, not bars!!!

[twmeyer]

I thought the latest thing in fashion photography was using "normal"

people (the Gap and Levi TV commercials)... t

[shawn_stupidpost]

Yeah. You're right. I think that just furthers the whole idea that its

everything else which counts more than the model. I think what this

really boils down to is focus and effort.

[shawn_stupidpost]

...and trust in the fact that, if I use a good team and remain focused

on taking a fashion photo, any atypical-ness of the model just won't

matter. I think in that sense I've been quite conservative.

[jeff_spirer1]

<i>I thought the latest thing in fashion photography was

using "normal" people (the Gap and Levi TV commercials)... </i>

 

<p>

 

Esprit started this a number of years ago. I don't know if it's

still being done, but all the models in Esprit ads were employees or

relatives of employees.

 

<p>

 

I know someone Levi has been using recently (don't know if she's done

TV, but she's been in print and on the web site) and she is a

professional model.

[edward_kang]

Just because an ad campaign is using "Normal" people, doesn't mean

that you can transform anyone into a fashion model.<br><br>

 

Rarely are those people "Normal". They are chosen from a field of

possible models by the photographer who has a vision of how he wants

the model to interact with the clothing to create an image. The

process is selective and i stress again, it is the <u>photographer</u>

that has to be able to envision what he wants the model and clothing

to do. There is no formula for this except for careful examination and

experience.<br><br>

 

I hate to use Avedon as a swinging pole, but his early fashion was

really pretty much "glamour shooting". There was a transition in there

somewhere and part of it was his growth as a photographer.<br><br>

 

I may get railed on for this, but: there's good fashion photography

and there's bad fashion photography, and I believe what makes up the

bulk of the difference isn't anything beyond the photographer and the

model/clothing.<br><br>

 

Anyways, my opinions aside, I think you've already been given a lot of

good advice to go on, Shawn. Take your <u>vision</u> and run with it!

[jkantor]

We seem to be on parallel courses here. I long ago decided that there

was no point in shooting glamour models for a fashion portfolio. Your

picture is only as good as the weakest of its parts. If you want to

be a fashion photographer, you've got to be able to duplicate

_exactly_ what your clients see in Vogue and Elle - and that starts

with the model.

 

<p>

 

I was lucky to find a girl going to a nearby college that had a true

fashion look (and was 6' tall!) who wanted to work for prints. That

let me put together a decent first portfolio. I can use that to get

good models and makeup artists. (I'm not really looking for paying

work yet - I have a day job.) I also got a loan against my house so I

can afford to spend a few thousand dollars putting together a pilot

issue for an online music/fashion magazine. Even if I don't get

investors, I'll have an outstanding way to showcase my skills. I'm

using a variety of exotic and fashion look models - and if necessary,

I'll spend the $600 to get a really good local model for the day.

(E-mail me if you'd like to contribute something.)

 

<p>

 

By the way, fashion isn't about the clothes - catalog work is. As you

note, it's the fantasy that we're selling. And the problem with

designers is the same as with models (and makeup artists) - if they

aren't top notch, then it will show in your pictures. You need to be

extremely selective in what you shoot for your portfolio.

[nathanael_galler]

I think it's not the fault of your models but your 'fault'. You don't w a n t the models in an ordinary fashion style, you catch some other moments... But it's ok for an unconventional fashion fotography (see Terry Richardson a.s.o.)...

 

Also art is possible. Just keep this glamourous and cheeky manner and make your photography more fine...