kreislauf

Joined on Apr 20, 2013

Comments

Total: 164, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
In reply to:

canonpro: ****To all those haters, who say his work is poor, etc. Your just out of touch, Cooper really is an innovator, the firey trash the dress shot for example is from 9 years ago, seriously think of photos 9 years old and show me something from then that was this well done. How many photographers out there have tried to immulate his trash the dress themes. To the haters, look at your photos from 2006, and post them, to show us how great your work was.

@daddyo

nothing wrong with opinions, i give you that!
i give you some comments that are flagged as hate

By Erik Ohlson " Total BS. Garbage "photography." "

By ThatCamFan " Photo nr1 screams "moron" "

By Bobby J "This is something I'm supposed to like and enjoy?"

By Zconimir Tosic "Following the lines of his "talent", he could equally wrap all his cameras and lenses around his neck and jump into lake to make a spectacle"

By luxor2 "Trashing the dress, simply trash!"

By stevo23 "Poor taste"

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 22:12 UTC
On photo Sun-Elbow in Erik Ohlson's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

sorry. in one thread you disrespected JM Cooper as garbage photographer.
now i stuble across this in your portfolio.
very nice!

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6382885878/trashing-the-dress-the-anti-bridal-wedding-photography-of-john-michael-cooper?slide=2

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 22:00 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

stevo23: Poor taste.

he is an example. of some sort. i like some of his images displayed here. others not so much.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 21:55 UTC
In reply to:

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.

@Orcio14
surely 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 :)

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 21:53 UTC
In reply to:

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?

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 13:29 UTC
In reply to:

mcshan: Different isn't always better.

I try dude, I try!

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 13:27 UTC
In reply to:

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

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 13:23 UTC
In reply to:

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.

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.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 13:22 UTC
In reply to:

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!

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 13:17 UTC
In reply to:

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.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 13:14 UTC
In reply to:

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?

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 13:11 UTC
In reply to:

mcshan: Different isn't always better.

very true sir. but
"To Generalize is to be an Idiot"

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 13:10 UTC
In reply to:

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?

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 13:08 UTC
In reply to:

stevo23: Poor taste.

come on, buckle up. If you really try, you could develop some taste. It takes time but you can do it!

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 13:07 UTC
In reply to:

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"

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 13:06 UTC
In reply to:

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.

yeah, what do the think?

no wait, not important. just generic people...

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 13:03 UTC
In reply to:

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.

*giggle*

I hear the scream! just ain't shure it is the photo nr1 that does the screaming :'D

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 13:00 UTC
In reply to:

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.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 12:58 UTC
In reply to:

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*

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 12:54 UTC
In reply to:

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?

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 12:51 UTC
Total: 164, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »