stevo23: Poor taste.
he is an example. of some sort. i like some of his images displayed here. others not so much.
Orcio14: Technically, pictures are pretty good, however they probably reveal serious psychological problem of Mr John Michael Cooper.Fire, dirty shovel and kelpie at the wedding? Mr. John Michael Cooper had, I think, a very difficult childhood. It would be interesting to create a psychological portrait of the Author.
@Orcio14surely not what i ment. one should not glorify anything. or fall to the other extreme. that was my point!
to subject an artist by only one piece of his creation of art or phase in his creativite expression is like stamping a dog as vile only because it bit. conttext, my lad, context.
also, strong thesis that i would oppose. Mona lisa is a manifestation of the personality of da vinci? maybe true in a philosophical way. it sounds very vibrant. i am the last to disrespect art, but sometimes a picture is only an function of a situation. and should not be over-interpreted.like the mona lisa or the theory of relativity. for some reason, these topics are huge conversation starters in pop culture. and not soo mystical for people from their respective fields :)
FRANCISQUAN: I wonder what Claudia Winkleman would think of the bridal dress in flames after her daughter’s horrific accident on Halloween in which she was rushed to hospital with severe burns.
common, what are we suppose to write to a tragic event like a small girl catching fire?
mcshan: Different isn't always better.
I try dude, I try!
dom33: I don't like any of them and not because of the mood or dress trashing. Composition, setting, and lighting is not my taste. last one (15) for example. spotlight lighting against barn. Photograph screams artificial lighting.
"As shocking as this may be to you photography is the subject of the DPR forum"
you have to be kidding me
and while i reconsider, why is artificial lighting bad?
I really don't get the rejection of the art photography...
Before I got a speedlight and went through the trouble of understanding the proper usage, I considered using flash in photography as "cheating" and only used "natural light" or aka "i didn't alter the scene".
have the chance to be creative in some situations really opens up. don't be stalinistic and forbid only because you might not be capable of doing the same.
andyus08: obviously, this is a type of art ( and I admire the the technique here), but I don't understand why a couple would like this type of offensive wedding (to me it's kind of weird) as wedding is the most beautiful thing ever happened to man and woman. And I agree with some of the folks here that the couple may be an experienced model. IMO, it's a great showcase.
so you take it from a single image that the whole wedding was like that?gee, this are not x-ray crystallography images that contain all the information of the whole thing!
kadardr: A serious attempt out of desperation to show off as different. It is not the setups, the production, the creativity, the vision what is all wrong, it is the general concept what is all wrong, even despicable. Even if the operation is viable, and this is a marketable portfolio, I do not think it can go "mainstream". In wedding photography the client, the location the surroundings what makes the difference, the technique can be the same. Its all about getting the best out of the situation. I do not like overproduction. Prefer reportage.
then go and choose if your day ever comes.and consider: maybe they did the same. This is just a couple of images for the whole day of the wedding (these are only the last images for that particular bride dress, right?)
just use your brain a bit more, would you? and there is no need to approve everything. It is pretty alright without your opinion.
Paul B Jones: The bride with a shovel and the groom dead in the trunk. That would have been something different. As is, zero imagination.
really? a small detail in the picture and you reject the whole thing? because? your idea is better than his?
very true sir. but"To Generalize is to be an Idiot"
Thomas Traub: I don't like this approach to weddings.....
maybe, just maybe, it is only one part of the whole photographic project of their day?
come on, buckle up. If you really try, you could develop some taste. It takes time but you can do it!
mr bird: Wow, this site is full of negative people.
@bgmonroe,i guess you are right, gear-syndrome and an urge to compare the gear we bought.To be honest, I sometimes catch myself being driven by "need" more than "can use"
yeah, what do the think?
no wait, not important. just generic people...
ThatCamFan: Photo nr1 screams "moron" because so many things could go wrong and its dangerous. I do like most of the images but that fire one im calling him an id**t for.
I hear the scream! just ain't shure it is the photo nr1 that does the screaming :'D
Pitchertaker: Clearly a taste issue. For me #8, #14 were the only images passing muster. Everyone else take your pick. Marriage is supposed to be a happy affair.
#8 anticipates the bride being carried over the threshold and passion to follow. #14 speaks to the struggle that invariably occurs as two wills compromise on direction and desire. Just my take.
or maybe these shots were performed as part of an art project? I really don't get the idea of "wedding photography has to look and feel like that" and disregard anything else.Personally, i really hate the standard images you see for most weddings. You know, the typical style, mediocre photographers copy just because it has to be done like that.
Since when has photography folly any rules? last time i checked i wanted to take and edit astonishing photos. not ISO approved ones.
Dyun27: I'm very surprised by a lot of these negative comments. What's the big deal about trashing a wedding dress? The images are well-done. Obviously not everyone is going to feel the same about weddings or wedding photos. He had some fun with it. If people want to pay him to shoot them, who cares if they're not what many of you are expecting they should be? At least a pinch of original thought went into them, instead of the thousands of replicas gracing millions of wedding albums across the world. Marriage is not all bliss. Nice to see some artistic honesty at last. :D
hi risk situations? do you know anything about the actual situation? or are you guessing and superimposing your opinion?
You must be new to this, I share a secret with you: photography can sometimes be misleading and unrealistic because it sometimes is intended to be. *pssst*
Steve Balcombe: Great photography, I'm just not sure what it has to do with weddings.
usually because the subjects in the pictures are freshly wed?
well, you don't have to like them. or buy them. or hang them up your walls.
jesus, WTF must you drag it down like this?
people always have to find that argument of flaw in some other ones work, may it even be a weird statement like "... probably reveal serious psychological problem..."
the only psychological problem I can spot here is not the photographer, who is creative with his medium. Now you blame him for doing his job? because he did it not the way you expected him to? I am really mad right now!