What's Wrong With Wedding Photography (The Iceland Problem)

Why would the couple want a photo with a ton of seemingly pointless negative space?

Because the saw that same picture done, probably in the photographer's very own portfolio, and hired him/her to do the exact same thing. And the photograph did it because that's what he was being paid to do.

Photographers are already an egotistical bunch, which is why all these wedding photographers seem to actively striving to take the exact same photos..

If they were truly egotists they would never strive to take the exact same photo as someone else.

Or, in the least, they would take photos for whatever reason they want. If it's to make money, and taking that same picture over and over makes money, then that's what they'll do.

I still don't see why this is a "problem".



This is like complaining that a car wash doesn't wash your car with paint.
 
Photographers are already an egotistical bunch, which is why all these wedding photographers seem to actively striving to take the exact same photos..

If they were truly egotists they would never strive to take the exact same photo as someone else.

Except that often their implied stance is that it's not the exact same photo. That seems pretty egotistical to me.
 
Except that often their implied stance is that it's not the exact same photo. That seems pretty egotistical to me.

delusional, maybe. egotistical, no.
 
This is somehow Bjork's fault, I just know it is!
 
Except that often their implied stance is that it's not the exact same photo. That seems pretty egotistical to me.

delusional, maybe. egotistical, no.

I would consider not being able to own up to your own obvious derivatives to be quite egotistical. But whatever, believe what you want.
 
Why would the couple want a photo with a ton of seemingly pointless negative space?

Because the saw that same picture done, probably in the photographer's very own portfolio, and hired him/her to do the exact same thing. And the photograph did it because that's what he was being paid to do.

Ah, there it is.

That hasn't been my experience. As I was second shooting with photographers back home, I would see which photos the clients wanted the most. They rarely ever chose the photo of them being ant-sized in the frame. Generally, from what I can tell, these photos were often taken as blog fodder, because they're trendy and popular among people who...aren't the bride or groom...

They were never the photos asked to be printed either.

And they rarely ever showed up on the couple's social media.

Just because a photographer's portfolio has an instance of a specific type of photo doesn't mean that the client gives a rat's ass about that type of photo, as opposed to the photographer, who loves this photo because it feeds their craving for peer re-affirmation.
 
Last edited:
then the problem is shooting for other people and not yourself. the end. This can be true in any situation, not just wedding photography.
 
I have thought briefly about how I'd shoot a wedding. It goes like this:

We'll talk and hang out a bit, get to know one another, before the day. Maybe kick around some ideas.

On the day I'll show up with... Something. Could be anything.

I may or may not boss you around. If I brought a pinhole expect to be standing still a lot. But maybe I won't say a word. Depends on my concept.

Three months later or so I will offer you between zero and ten prints, no larger than 11x14. Probably black and white. $1000 each. Note that zero prints is an option. You pay nothing. But you also get nothing. The concept didn't work out. Sorry.

You think I could sell that?

Wedding photography is a commodity for excellent reasons. People don't want novelty for their wedding photos.

wow mesmerizing information..
 
I shot a wedding over the weekend and I am sure I will never shoot another one like it.

The Wedding Cakes.




The Bride.



 
Wedding photography is a commodity. Social media makes it even more so as clients pass around "inspiratonal" images and ideas that they want for their weddings. Just looks at the Converse shoe trend, the "wedding party jumping" trend, the "country chic" decor trend, etc, etc. While I think wearing Converse All-Stars is tacky and overdone, just the other day I was talking to a girl whose cousin just got married. Guess what she thought the coolest thing ever was? Yep, that the entire wedding party rocked the Chuck Taylors with their suits and gowns. She had never seen it. For her it was novel, and that's likely how it is for most brides (let's face it, we know the groom doesn't have a say). This is why we see the same tired yet pretty shots over and over again.
 
I think the only question would be I come up with... since when is a photographer such a ego maniac they think shooting a wedding is about them or what they have to say or their vision.

Wow..do you even read this forum? Rotfl

It doesn't matter if it looks like other wedding shots. The primary purpose is RECORD not art. Go pick up some pastels and spare you clients.
Rest of it I agree with. Just real tired of this personal spin on doing commercial work where the photographers personal issues seem to be the front and center rather than the actual job.

Which is one of several reasons why I'm firmly committed to maintaining my amateur status. But I can't disagree with the thought process here. When someone is paying you for pictures it's about what they want, not so much about what you might like - and when it comes to commercial, well tried and true is generally what sells.
 
yup i also thought so.
Photographers are already an egotistical bunch, which is why all these wedding photographers seem to actively striving to take the exact same photos..

If they were truly egotists they would never strive to take the exact same photo as someone else.

Except that often their implied stance is that it's not the exact same photo. That seems pretty egotistical to me.

so
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top