"Eh, mister. Your camera spoil, ah?"

[synapseman]

Hi folks.

Here's even more really atrocious AD wedding photography!

[synapseman]

[synapseman]

Rest of the series here.

And no, my camera not spoil. Only my film expired, nia.

[papermelodydoll]

erm.. why are u opening threads after threads when u could had complied them into one??

[synapseman]

Originally Posted by papermelodydoll erm.. why are u opening threads after threads when u could had complied them into one??

Different wedding, different couple I guess. Didn't want to mix them up. But won't happen too often, I promise. I don't get that many contracts to shoot blurry wedding photos. In fact, very, very few.

[jOhO]

u're obviously quite proud of your style, and i'm sure ur customers are all the happier for it, so why the modesty, or worse, the self-criticism.

i do not really think that you would put so much effort to show case such "atrocity" would u?

it could be tongue in cheek, but if i was the couple i would find such statments unnecessary.

as for commenting on ur images and the series, yes i find them quite atrocious, however i will respect that this will appeal to some, photographers or clients.

either way, if you're proud of your work it's all good, however, fake modesty will definitely kill it.

i'm sorry if i sounded too serious, this tongue in cheek doesn't work for me. not for such important images in ones' lives...

[synapseman]

Originally Posted by jOhO u're obviously quite proud of your style, and i'm sure ur customers are all the happier for it, so why the modesty, or worse, the self-criticism. i do not really think that you would put so much effort to show case such "atrocity" would u? it could be tongue in cheek, but if i was the couple i would find such statments unnecessary. as for commenting on ur images and the series, yes i find them quite atrocious, however i will respect that this will appeal to some, photographers or clients. either way, if you're proud of your work it's all good, however, fake modesty will definitely kill it. i'm sorry if i sounded too serious, this tongue in cheek doesn't work for me. not for such important images in ones' lives...

Hey, thanks for the comments. I respect you as a true craftsperson of the art of wedding photography, so I'll take your criticisms seriously. I really appreciate it.

Probably got overzealous and got carried away. I do know that there ARE people who actually hate such shots with a passion, to the point that they are offended (not the people who have asked me to photograph for them, though). It's really a like-it-or-hate it situation, nothing in-between. So yes, it is tongue-in-cheek, reflecting what people may actually think about it. Even the couples are well aware that these photos could be "controversial" in that sense, but thankfully, they adopt the "don't-really-care-what-other-people-think-as-long-as-we-like-it" mindset. I won't even suggest this type of photography to people I don't know too well.

Basically, for me, this kind of style firmly belongs to the "just for fun" category, and in a way, it's probably meant to be controversial, without which, the series would lack that kind of tabloidal punch. As far as mainstream wedding photography goes, this is pretty much as niche as it can get. Afterall, one man's meat is another man's poison.

I don't mean any disrespect to the industry, or to the couples. I'm not even trying to promote this style, or educate people that this is the way to go, because it's probably not. The intention is just to give fellow photographers a view of what alternative wedding photography could be like. (Note to readers: Don't anyhow try on other people's wedding though!)

Thanks again. I do hope this put things in better context for all of us.

[iamasaint]

Originally Posted by synapseman Hey, thanks for the comments. I respect you as a true craftsperson of the art of wedding photography, so I'll take your criticisms seriously. I really appreciate it. Probably got overzealous and got carried away. I do know that there ARE people who actually hate such shots with a passion, to the point that they are offended (not the people who have asked me to photograph for them, though). It's really a like-it-or-hate it situation, nothing in-between. So yes, it is tongue-in-cheek, reflecting what people may actually think about it. Even the couples are well aware that these photos could be "controversial" in that sense, but thankfully, they adopt the "don't-really-care-what-other-people-think-as-long-as-we-like-it" mindset. I won't even suggest this type of photography to people I don't know too well. Basically, for me, this kind of style firmly belongs to the "just for fun" category, and in a way, it's probably meant to be controversial, without which, the series would lack that kind of tabloidal punch. As far as mainstream wedding photography goes, this is pretty much as niche as it can get. Afterall, one man's meat is another man's poison. I don't mean any disrespect to the industry, or to the couples. I'm not even trying to promote this style, or educate people that this is the way to go, because it's probably not. The intention is just to give fellow photographers a view of what alternative wedding photography could be like. (Note to readers: Don't anyhow try on other people's wedding though!) Thanks again. I do hope this put things in better context for all of us.

Go with your heart dude. You have some really visually interesting images. I think your heading pretty much sums up what you are trying to achieve actually and in a way, it has worked.

[jOhO]

Originally Posted by synapseman Hey, thanks for the comments. I respect you as a true craftsperson of the art of wedding photography, so I'll take your criticisms seriously. I really appreciate it. Probably got overzealous and got carried away. I do know that there ARE people who actually hate such shots with a passion, to the point that they are offended (not the people who have asked me to photograph for them, though). It's really a like-it-or-hate it situation, nothing in-between. So yes, it is tongue-in-cheek, reflecting what people may actually think about it. Even the couples are well aware that these photos could be "controversial" in that sense, but thankfully, they adopt the "don't-really-care-what-other-people-think-as-long-as-we-like-it" mindset. I won't even suggest this type of photography to people I don't know too well. Basically, for me, this kind of style firmly belongs to the "just for fun" category, and in a way, it's probably meant to be controversial, without which, the series would lack that kind of tabloidal punch. As far as mainstream wedding photography goes, this is pretty much as niche as it can get. Afterall, one man's meat is another man's poison. I don't mean any disrespect to the industry, or to the couples. I'm not even trying to promote this style, or educate people that this is the way to go, because it's probably not. The intention is just to give fellow photographers a view of what alternative wedding photography could be like. (Note to readers: Don't anyhow try on other people's wedding though!) Thanks again. I do hope this put things in better context for all of us.

Thank you for your much more serious explaination.

I think any of us with some/any experience (nothing to do with style) should never promote or insinuate that this trade is anywhere close to being a joke. not that you are here, as you have clearly and very aptly explained.

also because of the multiple thread "hit" on the forum, i thought i might want to make sure that the style is as you say, a little more fun and controvertial etc, but in no way a mockery or joke.

that was my biggest concern. this industry is my life, and i will defend it vigorously.

[synapseman]

Originally Posted by iamasaint Go with your heart dude. You have some really visually interesting images. I think your heading pretty much sums up what you are trying to achieve actually and in a way, it has worked.

Wow. I am really humbled that you'd actually drop by!

Like I said, it's all in the name of fun. Firstly, I'd only offer this to people I know (and I make sure they have also a conventional photographer no matter what). Secondly, I'd actually tell them that "the shots will be all blur-blur one. Out of ten shots, maybe only one can see half your face. And summore, maybe your face turn out green colour. Sure, ah?"

Y'know, just a few years ago, when Lomography was new and all the rage, I actually hated it, too. And it was a sentiment felt by many "old skool" photographers. It's just rubbish disguised as art! But horrible as it may have seemed, one thing's for sure: It was certainly eye-catching, and the obscured details did lend a sense of mystery to the picture. Kinda like the Blair Witch Project. Rubbish movie, but still want to watch till the end, and in the end, left feeling somewhere in between "what the h*** was that?" and "WTF?".

When other people look at my "horribly atrocious" photos (but presented in a nice album, lah) and wonder the same thing, my explanation is this: It's not so much a record of the day's events, but more like writing a dreamy fairytale.

That's how my dreams often appear to me anyway - the white balance is often way off.

[synapseman]

Originally Posted by jOhO Thank you for your much more serious explaination. I think any of us with some/any experience (nothing to do with style) should never promote or insinuate that this trade is anywhere close to being a joke. not that you are here, as you have clearly and very aptly explained. also because of the multiple thread "hit" on the forum, i thought i might want to make sure that the style is as you say, a little more fun and controvertial etc, but in no way a mockery or joke. that was my biggest concern. this industry is my life, and i will defend it vigorously.

And my sincere apologies for causing the misunderstanding! As I was posting, I was recalling the light-hearted moments I shared with the couple, and conveniently forgot about the wider audience. Your concerns are valid, so thanks for bringing that up.

I am not a full-time professional. But when I'm on the job, I do to the best of my ability to do the right thing. I also have my concerns when people do things to erode the reuptation of the profession (undercut prices, poor conduct, dishonesty etc).

You're right too, that despite the seeminly self-lampooning descriptors, I am very proud of my work, even if in the eyes of many, it's really rubbish. And even though I joke with the couple that their shots will turn out "all blur", I'm still serious when it comes to framing and the timing to capture the moment, etc. The processes are still very much the same as when I do conventional photography, just that the results are different. It's not a case of "anyhow whack, then haha, see? Art!".

And also maybe now's the time to admit that I chose these types of headers as an attention-grabbing stunt.

[cabbySHE]

for " yearn " to be different, there are subjects that you can try on with your guts to make any occasion or theme which normally consider serious and solemn to turn it into to hilarious or funny..like the different funeral ceremony of our multi-religion. should provide unlimited resources for you to explore on.

[synapseman]

Originally Posted by cabbySHE for " yearn " to be different, there are subjects that you can try on with your guts to make any occasion or theme which normally consider serious and solemn to turn it into to hilarious or funny..like the different funeral ceremony of our multi-religion. should provide unlimited resources for you to explore on.

Well, there are always limits to what can, or should be done. I don't "yearn" to be different just for the sake of it. As far as the client is concerned, whatever is "different" still has to be within good taste. Yes, it's good to explore, and do that, I shall. But much of it is also dependent on what the client wants. While the enthusiast may seek to explore new ideas for his own satisfaction, the paid photographer fundamentally still has to provide service. I'm not out to "try for fun" new funky techniques on other people's funeral just to test how much guts I have.

However, that said, I've seen funeral photographs that looked more like a party, with balloons, alcohol and smiling faces everywhere. And rightly so, as the family of the deceased treated it more like a sending-off party. This is more of visible in Western cultures, though. If this phenomenon should take off locally, and if that's what people want, then heck, I'll be willing to give it a try at least once.

[cabbySHE]

Agreed to your point, matter of fact, not only practiced by the Western culture but Asian too. I can't quote the actual facts and figure, but according to belief, people of certain age like above 90s or something, their funeral should be hold on the lighter mood instead.
Merry making I don't know, mahjong playing quite often.

It's good that you've got such open-minded clients. Yes, we are in 2009, not 1819, freedom for artistic expression. " Break Free "

[synapseman]

Originally Posted by cabbySHE Agreed to your point, matter of fact, not only practiced by the Western culture but Asian too. I can't quote the actual facts and figure, but according to belief, people of certain age like above 90s or something, their funeral should be hold on the lighter mood instead. Merry making I don't know, mahjong playing quite often. It's good that you've got such open-minded clients. Yes, we are in 2009, not 1819, freedom for artistic expression. " Break Free "

Acutally, even in Sg, for certain Chinese dialect groups, if the person has lived a long life, and has great grand-children, these children actually wear red to the funeral to signify a fruitful life.

[huan]

I like your creativity mind and likewise i shoot with a LC-A for friend's wedding. It is so-call not-the-norm camera but with some creative thinking shots can be well executed.
The more creative crowds will accept such concept but in general most peoples will not like what they see. But you did the correct thing in informing your friend that pictures will turn-out bad.
Have fun with it!