They have never met...

Well, I like the shot. A lot.
I can see that although it's technically a couple shot, the female is the bride and the bride takes centre stage on her wedding day. The groom is just a prop when it comes to the photos. The look on the bride's face is a classic capture! ... and I love the background.
As for using friends to model, why not? In an actual wedding the photog is shooting for the couple, for publicity shots with models he can let his creativity flow freely. :thumbyo:


Hahaha That's pretty how it is at every wedding. The bride has her own perfect wedding planned since she was a little girl and the groom is just there as a photo prop.

In addition to being able to practice some of the lighting, it was a challenge for me to put 2 strangers together and make them naturally look like a couple. I never hide the fact that this was a styled shoot.

For me, capturing the emotion is a lot more important than technical perfection. A standard technically perfect picture can be bland and boring IMHO. However, it's not an excuse for me to be lacking on the technical aspect of photography. I do other shoots that are highly technical and I'm very well versed in studio, creative lighting, posing, and composition guidelines.
 
Last edited:
Next time you should get a super hot girl and a super ugly guy. It will make people wonder how a guy like that could score a hot girl like that. :D.
 
You want to do the polar opposite? Ok.. find a really ugly girl.
 
I saw some wedding shots recently (can't remember if it was on TPF) and both the b&g were so good looking and the pics so perfect that I was wondering if they were models and if wedding pros ever hired models to beef up their portfolios. The pics was outside in snow and the bride had a blue cape. It was stunning.

I'm curious - Would you feel obligated to disclose that the pics were not real (for lack of a better term) if showing them to perspective clients?
 
.........I'm curious - Would you feel obligated to disclose that the pics were not real (for lack of a better term) if showing them to perspective clients?
How are they not real? They're actual photos.
 
.........I'm curious - Would you feel obligated to disclose that the pics were not real (for lack of a better term) if showing them to perspective clients?
How are they not real? They're actual photos.

That's why I put for lack of a better term. They are real photos but not taken at an actual wedding of an actual b&g. While they show the skill of the photographer, they don't involve the chaos of a wedding day or, if models are used, the inexperience and awkwardness that usually has to be overcome when taking shots of non models.

I don't have any issue with the use of friends or models for these purposes, was just curious if vtec would use them in his portfolio and if so would feel obligated to disclose that they were staged.
 
I'm curious - Would you feel obligated to disclose that the pics were not real (for lack of a better term) if showing them to perspective clients?

I shoot 20-25 weddings a year so I don't really need these photos for my portfolio. When I show them, they're noted as stylized and I tell the clients straight out and I explain to the client what that means. I keep about 10 full complete weddings (photos from the very beginning to the very end) to show online and off line so a few random photos don't usually make it into my portfolio anyway. :D
 
Stylized. Much better term than "not real" lol, sorry about that. Thanks for satisfying my curiosity. I enjoy your work and look forward to seeing more of it.
 
LOL That's the industry term for it because we have to "style" it. A local wedding photographer recently did a stylized wedding session with full Renaissance costumes. So it pushes the boundaries into more creative than wedding work.
 
had you not said that they have never met, i would have thought that they were married! lol
 
The bride is so beautiful~
Love this photo~
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top