fineart weddingphotography

[back2front]

Hi there have a look at this video, watch it all the way through, it doesnt start though till about 30 seconds in. Watch all of it though as it changes later on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7EyqjQhIBc

Any ideas what is being done?

thanks

[Johann29]

Mask the bride and groom. desaturate / sepia background. add heavy vignetting and burn shadows or increase shadow levels. i think its pretty easy.

[franko60]

IMHO fine art and wedding photography are two phrases that don't belong in the same sentence. Fine art photography is fine art, wedding photography is making pretty photo's of real people.

I guess if you created a story, hired professional models, created an image concept, lit and photographed them to illustrate your story and then post-processed the image to fill your vision, then I guess at a stretch you could call it fine art. Adding a vignette and sepia tone, however, is just photography, not fine art photography.

[back2front]

Originally Posted by franko60

IMHO fine art and wedding photography are two phrases that don't belong in the same sentence. Fine art photography is fine art, wedding photography is making pretty photo's of real people.

I guess if you created a story, hired professional models, created an image concept, lit and photographed them to illustrate your story and then post-processed the image to fill your vision, then I guess at a stretch you could call it fine art. Adding a vignette and sepia tone, however, is just photography, not fine art photography.

its more complicated than that, if you think its that easy prove it, edit a picture and stick it up.

[franko60]

Stick up what, exactly? I've already said that I believe that fine art photography is about creating a concept from scratch - that is from nothing. Wedding photography is about snapping whatever the bride and groom happen to be doing (ok - I agree that there are some damn fine wedding photographers. I was one of them for nearly 10 years and won many awards for it) but basically you are taking an image rather than making an image. What you do in photoshop afterwards doesn't make it art; it makes it a photoshopped snapshot.

[capice]

Originally Posted by franko60

IMHO fine art and wedding photography are two phrases that don't belong in the same sentence. Fine art photography is fine art, wedding photography is making pretty photo's of real people.

I guess if you created a story, hired professional models, created an image concept, lit and photographed them to illustrate your story and then post-processed the image to fill your vision, then I guess at a stretch you could call it fine art. Adding a vignette and sepia tone, however, is just photography, not fine art photography.

Mmmm, so you are NOT a weddingphotographer. Give it a try and then speak your mind. Making pretty photo's of real people..??? snapping??? That is maybe the way you would do a wedding but not a professional weddingphotographer.....It's obvious you have not a single clue what you are talking about.

[franko60]

If you'd read my post before responding, you'd see that I said that I WAS a wedding photographer, a multi-awarded one and voted in the top 2 in Australia in 2008. You'd also have seen that I considered what I did as photography but not fine art photography for the reasons I have already enunciated. So you see, my friend, I have quite a bit more than a clue what I am talking about.

But you are entitled to your opinion, as I am to mine.

[back2front]

Originally Posted by franko60

Stick up what, exactly? I've already said that I believe that fine art photography is about creating a concept from scratch - that is from nothing. Wedding photography is about snapping whatever the bride and groom happen to be doing (ok - I agree that there are some damn fine wedding photographers. I was one of them for nearly 10 years and won many awards for it) but basically you are taking an image rather than making an image. What you do in photoshop afterwards doesn't make it art; it makes it a photoshopped snapshot.

wedding photography is not snapping away at what the bride and groom are doing something, at the bottom end yes. the high end is nothing like that and demands a lot more skill, its virtually a fashion shoot, with some exceptions of people doing excellent reportage.

[capice]

Originally Posted by franko60

If you'd read my post before responding, you'd see that I said that I WAS a wedding photographer, a multi-awarded one and voted in the top 2 in Australia in 2008. You'd also have seen that I considered what I did as photography but not fine art photography for the reasons I have already enunciated. So you see, my friend, I have quite a bit more than a clue what I am talking about.

But you are entitled to your opinion, as I am to mine.

Well my friend, I have read your posts extensively....that is why I reacted on it.
Sorry to say but your post doesn't show that you know what you are talking about...It is a pity to see you have such a low opinion on the profession of your fellow weddingphotographers. Maybe that is the reason why you switcehd to foodphotography...also an art when done highend.
I agree on one thing you said, we are all entiteled to our own opinion.

[franko60]

I don't at all have a low opinion of wedding photographers. I just object to the use of the term fine art. I know some of the world's best wedding photographers, guys like marcus bell, yervant zanazanian, Ian Wilkinson and others and have a very high regard for their work.

I guess I just have a different understanding of what is fine art from you so I guess we'lljust have to differ on that.

[capice]

I guess you are right, not a problem to have different opinions on a matter.
Cheers
Rich