What is YOUR job as a portrait/wedding photographer?

[collierportraits]

Just wanted to pose a question and let me preface it with this: It seems like there are two predominating schools of thought here and in our business as a whole.

One feels like our job is to capture your subject in the most flattering way possible. This would include suggestions on clothing, grouping, posing, etc. Basically being that the JOB, so to speak, is to capture everything in the best possible light.

The other school of thought is that ANY direction from the photographer is not being true to the event or the person. So very little in the way of direction, clothing advice, posing, etc.

Both of these would have a school of thought with regards to PP as well.

Now, while I'm sure that most of us probably fall somewhere in between the two of these, I'm just curious. What do YOU think is YOUR job as a portrait/wedding photographer? Thanks! ;) Edit: And tell us what you primarily shoot...

[form]

I don't know what my job is there except to take as good quality photos as I can and capture as many key moments as present themselves.

I do limited direction, sometimes more than other times, and always depending on the client's preferences and natural inclination to pose themselves or have no idea what to do.

I ask beforehand if they want posed or candids mostly, and go from there. I interfere slightly with things like cake cutting, bouquet toss, etc., those fast-paced things that need proper preparations. I ask them to wait for me to set up the lights before they begin, and sometimes with cake cutting I'll position them.

By the way you're referring to classical wedding portraiture vs. photojournalism. I'm about 85% photojournalist, 15% of the other. I think I miss some important shots being a photojournalist, and I'm always trying to improve what I do.

[_Jo_]

Both of what you describe, but mostly direction. eg; if the couple are in unflattering light/background, I will direct them to a more flattering position. If the bride has her flowers held high at chest level (as loads do!) I remind her to drop her shoulders and hold the flowers at stomach level. I never direct during ceremony (I stay unobtrusive) - I just capture the moments.

[_Jo_]

To add, what's the point in having a load of unflattering wedding images? We all know the way you stand, hold your head, shoulders etc can make or break a shot.

Most of my clients just stand and look at me waiting for instruction...I would look like an egg if I just stood there looking back. lol

[zagiace]

to tell a story

[_Jo_]

Not sure about others, but I find my photography is always evolving. I learn something new every time I shoot a wedding.

Yesterday, clients viewed their images for the first time - they were very excited and said after viewing that it was like re-living the entire day over and over...this is my goal. My end result.

[bnlearle]

I'd say I let the couple be for 90% of the day. After the wedding when I steal them away from everyone to get the beautiful couple shots, I direct on a limited basis. I give them direction in order to get them into natural situations and then fall back (and shoot like crazy).

So, I like having control AND not directing every aspect :) But to give a real answer, I'm definitely more in line with "less is more" in regard to direction. I've never once told people what to wear :)

Bobby

[form]

One thing I completely lack is the skill or knowledge to put the couple in an interesting situation with good character and poses...so that's why I'm a budget photographer.

[bnlearle]

Believe me, that was the LAST thing to come for me! It'll come :)

[form]

How can I make it come?

[bnlearle]

Just time, for me. I kept looking at other photographers' couple shots, printed them out to really remember them, and then starting throwing those ideas in my shoots. Eventually, I found what worked best for me and then it became second nature.

Believe me, this wasn't a little problem for me. I was SOOO insecure about this part. if it settled for me it can for ANYBODY! Just some time ;)

[form]

I expect that I won't have time to reach that point before I'm off to my full time college studying.

[DigitalSpecialist]

I come from the OLD SCHOOL of Wedding ART photography. Everything posed perfectly. Now I practice mixing Art photography with Photojournalism Wedding Photography. It is much easier to mix the two and come up with your own creations!

FORM I started shooting Weddings while still in High School. Continued Shooting Weddings and Portraits while in Service to our country. Then, during my colllege years I just shot weddings, and such as a fast way to earn extra money. Practice, and just keep working with people, try New Ideas at every wedding or e-Session you shoot. You will find what works for you as time progresses!

[collierportraits]

Bobby, I appreciate what you're saying but what about complementing clothing during an e-shoot? You say nothing and let them show up in anything?

[Ken Cravillion]

to tell a story

+123414

[collierportraits]

Digital, I know what you mean. I come from that school as well. I was heavily influenced by some of the old master's work. Today's work seems far more helter/skelter, although there are some incredibly talented photographers just on this board and many more not on this board. And digital has brought it's own host of "photographers", without any study of portraiture or photography.

However, I think it has brought with it a beautiful fresh approach. And I'm a better photographer today because of it. I feel revived and resurrected from some of my older, more staid work.

[randplaty]

We direct for much of the day. It's how you brand yourself and part of your style. You need to choose one way or the other or a combination of both and tell the couple how it's going to be beforehand. We are photojournalistic for the wedding ceremony but sometimes we'll move a rose petal or something like that in order to get a better shot. After the ceremony we direct pretty much everything but we try to make it look like we directed nothing. In otherwords, if we pose them, we're posing them to make them look natural and unposed. It's editorial rather than photojournalistic, but its not traditional either.

For the reception, we try to go back to photojournalistic mode but we find that the couples often ask us, "How do you want us to cut the cake?" or even "How do you cut the cake?" Or "how do you want us to toss the bouquet?"... and we take table shots sometimes too... so there's some directing going on there. So in general, we try to make the bride and groom look as good as possible in whatever situation. If that means fixing someone's tie or helping the bride with her veil, or telling a funny joke so they laugh naturally, we'll do that.

[bnlearle]

Bobby, I appreciate what you're saying but what about complementing clothing during an e-shoot? You say nothing and let them show up in anything?
Yep :) A little more than half the time they ask. I simply tell them to dress in something they feel good in. The only "rule" I have is that they match attire wise. If she's in a ball gown he shouldn't be in a tshirt. Aside from that, I want THEM to show in the photos. If that is a ball gown and a tux or jeans and a tshirt, that's fine by me.

But my style is so strongly couple based. I've never cared about backgrounds, locations, clothing, etc. I care about the interaction of the couple and soft, usable light. Everything after that is just icing on the cake for me :)

Bobby

[tim]

How can I make it come?

(chuckle)

[collierportraits]

It's certainly good advice, Bobby to point out that it IS all about the couple, because it is. But don't you think it's a bit strong to say you've never cared about backgrounds and clothing?

Ok, yes, I nitpicking here because I love your work and you do obviously care about backgrounds...

[jeromego]

I don't know what my job is there except to take as good quality photos as I can and capture as many key moments as present themselves.

I do limited direction, sometimes more than other times, and always depending on the client's preferences and natural inclination to pose themselves or have no idea what to do.

I ask beforehand if they want posed or candids mostly, and go from there. I interfere slightly with things like cake cutting, bouquet toss, etc., those fast-paced things that need proper preparations. I ask them to wait for me to set up the lights before they begin, and sometimes with cake cutting I'll position them.

By the way you're referring to classical wedding portraiture vs. photojournalism. I'm about 85% photojournalist, 15% of the other. I think I miss some important shots being a photojournalist, and I'm always trying to improve what I do.
form, im a newbie and trying to learn about wedding photography. but what do you mean when you say 85% photojournalist and 15% wedding portraiture? whats the difference between both in terms of the style in shooting a wedding? thanks.

[form]

Portraiture is the posed, planned and directed shots. Photojournalism is the undirected capturing of things without interference by the photographer.

Give me a break, tim.

[Apexer]

Bobby, I appreciate what you're saying but what about complementing clothing during an e-shoot? You say nothing and let them show up in anything?

'Hope I'm not butting in -

I just shot my very first E-session. It was to literally be a Carhartt wedding so the groom-to-be was decked out in all Carhartt clothing, including a huge "CARHARTT" down the side of one arm on a hoody. She shows with uncombed hair. They were both happy, as it is "them" as they said.

As a middle aged guy I was torn, as I wanted to have them dress it up a bit. How will they feel in 20 years as they look back on these photos? I'm torn, but in the end they are my clients, I work for them ( though the shoot and wedding to come are being done for free ).

I think in the future I will verrry gently suggest that they look their very best, and if they insist in showing up in ___________, then so be it.

[bnlearle]

It's certainly good advice, Bobby to point out that it IS all about the couple, because it is. But don't you think it's a bit strong to say you've never cared about backgrounds and clothing?

Ok, yes, I nitpicking here because I love your work and you do obviously care about backgrounds...
Ha! Well, to be honest, I've never thought "oh no! why are they wearing that!" unless it's something I personally just don't like - my personal tastes. But I've never once thought "the photos would be awesome if they weren't wearing THAT!"

And I really don't care about backgrounds... I swear! :lol: I use background if I can, I guess - but I look for soft light first and foremost. Often times I'll have some relative at a wedding point me in the direction of some pretty building, tree, or something like that. They don't understand that the light is more important to my photo than the background and that I want soft, even light more than the most beautiful background in the world. And it's not that I don't incorporate backgrounds in many of my shoots, either. It's just that I really couldn't care less about them. If I have them, fine. If I don't (and it's just ugly everywhere), fine as well. If I have them but the light sucks for them, I'm just as fine not to use them. Hope that makes sense! I'm just rambling now...

Also, I'm a wide open, L prime shooter. Nearly all of my shots are at f/1.2. You hardly see backgrounds anyways :D

[bnlearle]

'Hope I'm not butting in -

I just shot my very first E-session. It was to literally be a Carhartt wedding so the groom-to-be was decked out in all Carhartt clothing, including a huge "CARHARTT" down the side of one arm on a hoody. She shows with uncombed hair. They were both happy, as it is "them" as they said.

As a middle aged guy I was torn, as I wanted to have them dress it up a bit. How will they feel in 20 years as they look back on these photos? I'm torn, but in the end they are my clients, I work for them ( though the shoot and wedding to come are being done for free ).

I think in the future I will verrry gently suggest that they look their very best, and if they insist in showing up in ___________, then so be it.
Feel free to "butt in" any time!

My only thought is that whenever I see people looking at photos from 20 years ago, they always enjoy what they looked like as it sort of documents how it looked at the time. And usually, NO one thinks they looked particularly cool 20 years ago :) They laugh at themselves and find enjoyment in the realness of the photo.

I think it really comes down to your approach and your desired end goal. Do you want them to dress up at the risk of wearing something they wouldn't normally wear? Or do you want them to feel as comfortable as they can since taking photos for a couple hours is already uncomfortable for most people as is.

Last note. I don't know if you guys have noticed this, but guys tend to really set the tone for the photographs (at least in some way). I notice that if I have a guy who HATES being there, there are only so many photos I can take. Nearly every girl I've ever shot may be nervous or uncomfortable, but in the end WANTS to be there and get great photos. Lots of times, the guy couldn't care less. Why? Because guys just assume it's going to be some cheesy, traditional photo shoot where everyone wear's jeans and a tucked in white shirt. Most guys aren't going to feel good in that because they'd NEVER wear that! I find a lot of guys are super excited that they get to wear what they want, it makes them think that this isn't going to be some typical, cheesy shoot, and I can work with them a little more.

And remember, I'm not telling the client to not think or care about what they come dressed in. I tell them that they should wear something that THEY feel they look awesome in. Big difference ;)

Bobby

[Apexer]

And remember, I'm not telling the client to not think or care about what they come dressed in. I tell them that they should wear something that THEY feel they look awesome in. Big difference :wink:

Well put - thank you.

[razyl]

The whole candid vs posed thing for clients (and photographers) is quite confusing. The words I often hear from my clients when I ask them what they want from their photos, style, etc is: candid and 'not posed'.

What they dont always understand is that a lot of really great photos are great because the photographer has posed it really well. A great set up (position, posture, lighting etc) is a huge part of great photos.

So i try and educate them that I will 'pose' them (you could call it 'direction' or 'setting up' as better descriptions). But once the set up is done I think if I can allow them to relax and have fun and be themselves the photos will look 'natural'. Natural photos is my aim, because it doesnt matter whether a shot is heavily set up, if the couple look natural, are having fun etc, I think they will be very happy with the shots.

So, to answer the OP question: I think my job is to make the shots look as fantastic as possible....which often means setting things up......but it's critical that I can allow them to be relaxed and get a natural look to the shots.

Darryn

[*Mike*]

Interesting question... And I'm surprised how many people approach it entirely from a creative, stylistic perspective. Maybe I'm just pragmatic...

I consider my primary business to be creating saleable images - and cultivating client relationships that will further build my business. That tends to be one of the most defining ideas when it comes to wedding and portrait photography... Obviously it's shaped by our preferences and style.

So, for us, we tend to shoot portraits very intentionally - working with the clients choice of clothing, location, posing, etc., combined with lighting and technique to make them look the absolute best that they can. On the day of the wedding we tend to be very unobtrusive - and capture the story of the day - while being there to answer questions (should we cut the cake now?), and fulfill any special needs or requests.

More than anything though, it's a matter of communicating expectations and needs well ahead of time. That's why we do consults before sessions and weddings...