Photographer photographs her own wedding

it looked more to me like a camera shooting high ISO that couldn't handle it. and then a photographer that couldn't be bothered to WB or fix exposures in post.
 
"Wedding" for many Europeans (this couple is in Estonia) = "Dinner with friends." It's not the Broadway production American weddings are. Are her pictures better than most wedding photos? Depends on what you're looking for. Define "good" before you can define "better." Honestly, most wedding photos bore me to tears. These are at least fun and they do feel authentic to me, not forced. And I have no idea where anyone would get "hipster" from this, unless "hipster" has become a catch-all phrase for "things I don't like."

there's almost nothing about these that isn't hipster, from the being too cool to have standard photos, to the hipster clothes and hairstyles to the overpriced, retro-styled camera. It's hard to even find many reviews of this camera that doesn't mention hipster in the review or the comments. Of course if you don't like technically good wedding images, or even wedding images with a hint of actual emotion, I guess these would have some appeal.

The camera is a Fujifilm X-something, which was designed to look more like a Leica. This makes it a hipster camera? And European clothing style is all hipster, too? Technically imperfect pictures automatically are the domain of hipsters? Thinking that standard wedding photos are boring is being a hipster?

Gosh, this "hipster" monster just keeps growing and growing, doesn't it? Either that, or it's just become a lazy way to criticism something or someone without having to actually explain anything. And a bunch of people commenting on an Internet article isn't exactly proof of anything.

you seem to be very sensitive on the issue of hipsters... there's no need to be insulting or put words in someone's mouth. If you don't understand what hipsters are, look it up. Or do you expect every concept to be explained? This isn't school. and yes, there are many people that find the hipper-than-thou attitude of this particular group unpleasant at best. Spending a lot of money doesn't make someone cool. The camera is a Fujifilm X-T10. No one said all European clothes are hipster. MY language is pretty precise and you are adding your assumptions that aren't even implied by what I wrote. I very seldom say "All"; and it's quite silly to say that all European clothes are hipster. Europe is the center of fashion, and there are an awful lots of styles of clothing. Because I consider these people to be wearing clothes that would fit right in with the hipster mindset doesn't make any statement whatsoever on the attire of an entire continent.
 
If by "precise language" you meant "baseless over-generalization to criticize without providing substance" then I agree. Otherwise, it's clear that a very loose interpretation of words is at play and I for one am done using any more of them on this nonsense.
 
I took it as a film camera. I guess I didn't look at the camera closely enough.

Still, her photos were not too bad.

I've seen worse.
 
Those are awful wedding photos. Did the article say whether the photographer liked them? I know I don't like half the pictures I take...

I'm a firm believer of the motto, "you get what you pay for." Trying to skimp on the photographer was not going to be an option with my wedding. I'm not planning on doing it over, so might as well hire somebody who knows what they're doing and do it right one time.
 
I took it as a film camera. I guess I didn't look at the camera closely enough.

Still, her photos were not too bad.

I've seen worse.

It seems like it's easier to get that "filmic" look with Fujifilm cameras. I'm not sure why, but even when doing basic adjustments they don't have that digital sheen.
 
well,

her wedding photos are much better than mine are

... and I paid for them
 
I took it as a film camera. I guess I didn't look at the camera closely enough.

Still, her photos were not too bad.

I've seen worse.
Most are worst on here, I hate most of the staged wedding photos I see on here

I know what you mean...
its almost as bad as the film stuff..
or the B&W...
or worse still, a combination of the two. ugh. fugly city.
 
While not perfect in the technical sense, they seem to capture more "real" moments. Probably because it's more intimate when it's just the couple together rather than a couple followed around by some body with a bunch of camera hanging around their necks.
 
While not perfect in the technical sense, they seem to capture more "real" moments. Probably because it's more intimate when it's just the couple together rather than a couple followed around by some body with a bunch of camera hanging around their necks.


I think if I were inclined to go that route, and I wouldn't be, but if i were...
I think @gsgary did it right for the informal, "real moment" wedding shots.
give each table a camera and let them have at it.
all the informalness and realness to the pictures without all the "selfie" feel.
I could see the selfie shots for a few pictures....but not all of them.

personally though, I don't think you can look at @Vtec44 or @Robin Usagani s wedding shots and tell me that they arent simply stunning captures of one of the greatest moments in the bride and grooms life, with plenty of "real" moments shot in spectacular fashion. could just be me though.
in the end, all that really matters is how happy the B&G are with the pictures.
I dont have to look at them on my wall, so ive really got no horse in this race.
 
While not perfect in the technical sense, they seem to capture more "real" moments. Probably because it's more intimate when it's just the couple together rather than a couple followed around by some body with a bunch of camera hanging around their necks.

The key is not letting people see you taking pictures of their inmate moments...
 
While not perfect in the technical sense, they seem to capture more "real" moments. Probably because it's more intimate when it's just the couple together rather than a couple followed around by some body with a bunch of camera hanging around their necks.

The key is not letting people see you taking pictures of their inmate moments...

Unless that is what you are into.
 
While not perfect in the technical sense, they seem to capture more "real" moments. Probably because it's more intimate when it's just the couple together rather than a couple followed around by some body with a bunch of camera hanging around their necks.

The key is not letting people see you taking pictures of their inmate moments...
Your right I got caught having sex with one of the bridesmaids at my wedding in June, photo looks great though the photographer set up his lights very well
 
personally though, I don't think you can look at @Vtec44 or @Robin Usagani s wedding shots and tell me that they arent simply stunning captures of one of the greatest moments in the bride and grooms life, with plenty of "real" moments shot in spectacular fashion. could just be me though.
in the end, all that really matters is how happy the B&G are with the pictures.
I dont have to look at them on my wall, so ive really got no horse in this race.

I got a notification that someone mentioned my name in this thread :D

IMHO, moments are real (at least in my case) but the difference is in perspective and talent. Not everyone can take the photos as well as the bride above and I'm sure the bride would like to see her wedding in a different perspective. In addition, most brides would rather enjoy their wedding day as it is without gluing to their camera. However, if you're the type that would rather take photos on your own wedding day then hey go for it. I just hope that you have the talents to back it up or you'll ended up missing our on your own wedding for a bunch of crappy snap shots. lol :D
 
Last edited:

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top