How can I bring the essence of these photos into mine?

Pretty good stuff for a wedding photographer. Some great shots along with some other stuff. One of the great things about photography is the myriad of styles; everyone can find SOMETHING they like SOMEWHERE!

Qbx wrote in post #11922568
Quote:
Originally Posted by René Damkot

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html'

I guess you've heard of "the decisive moment"?

No I haven't, but I'm sure you will enlighten me.

I'll step in for René - the phrase comes from Henri Cartier-Bresson. More info. available here http://en.wikipedia.or​g/wiki/Henri_Cartier-Bresson and lots of other places.

For what it's worth, I'm partial to a fairly frequent wedding photographer poster here on POTN, Aleksandras Babičius; here's his web site: http://meninenuotrauka​.lt/en/wedding/

Ill tell you whats so different about him.... He's creative.

These are nice. Not the best wedding photography I've ever seen, but certainly very good.

V-Wiz wrote in post #11929793
Ill tell you whats so different about him.... He's creative.

Would you link to an example photo please so we might discuss it?
And I don't think being creative is really different unless you think most wedding photographers are not creative. Do you?

stsva wrote in post #11929026
I'll step in for René - the phrase comes from Henri Cartier-Bresson. More info. available here http://en.wikipedia.or​g/wiki/Henri_Cartier-Bresson and lots of other places.

For what it's worth, I'm partial to a fairly frequent wedding photographer poster here on POTN, Aleksandras Babičius; here's his web site: http://meninenuotrauka​.lt/en/wedding/

I can see why you are partial to Babicius - extremely fine and universally fine photography on that site in contrast to what we have been seeing.

As for the term Rene asked about. I think if he wants to explain it to me or convince me that I should want to learn about it then let him speak for himself and don't send me link-hopping to learn about something that I did not ask about. No offense meant here. But I'm busy enough without going on a wild-goose-chase on the Internet.

Qbx wrote in post #11931879
Would you link to an example photo please so we might discuss it?
And I don't think being creative is really different unless you think most wedding photographers are not creative. Do you?

Almost all of his pictures. I dont know i guess i see alot of the same stuff all the time. It was nice to see something different. Thats just me.

Qbx wrote in post #11922568
Everyone please have a look here and tell me that the photos and presentation of his or her work isn't far superior to what we are discussing.

As far as emotion is concerned: Not even close. More 'magazine' / posed and some overedited.
All IMHO of course. So YMMV.
I guess it's okay to agree to disagree however

stsva wrote in post #11929026
I'll step in for René - the phrase comes from Henri Cartier-Bresson. More info. available here http://en.wikipedia.or​g/wiki/Henri_Cartier-Bresson and lots of other places.

Yep. From that link:

Joe McNally has a book called "The moment it clicks". I guess that's about the same: Everything comes together in an instant, and the photographer needs to capture that moment.

stsva wrote in post #11929026
For what it's worth, I'm partial to a fairly frequent wedding photographer poster here on POTN, Aleksandras Babičius; here's his web site: http://meninenuotrauka​.lt/en/wedding/

Much better then the previous link, not quite as good as the first emotionally. (But very different style, so hard to compare)

René Damkot wrote in post #11935012
As far as emotion is concerned: Not even close. More 'magazine' / posed and some overedited.
All IMHO of course. So YMMV.

Thats exactly what I said....very staged magazine fashion editorial type shots. Its good photography for its type but no emotional content. The first guy wipes the floor with him.

....But I deleted the post cause I didn't want to get dragged into this again, but guess now I just did

Qbx wrote in post #11931960
I can see why you are partial to Babicius - extremely fine and universally fine photography on that site in contrast to what we have been seeing.

As for the term Rene asked about. I think if he wants to explain it to me or convince me that I should want to learn about it then let him speak for himself and don't send me link-hopping to learn about something that I did not ask about. No offense meant here. But I'm busy enough without going on a wild-goose-chase on the Internet.

I took the time to find the link for you, but if you're not interested in learning about one of the seminal photographers of the 20th century, feel free to ignore.

I agree with the René and GtrPlyr above me. I'm not saying the examples are *bad,* but they are different styles of photography, and are not capturing moments and emotion in the same way.

Does this guy have a fan club? I don't think I've ever seen a photographer so passionately defended on the forum before.

(I had to go back and look at him again -- I still don't get it.)

Yeah YankeeMom, I don't get it either.

I took the time to evaluate a sample of his work (15 images). Found some good work and some really bad stuff. And I gave specific critiques of the bad ones with reasons that I call them snapshots. His defenders instead of rebutting my critiques start talking about emotion and "the decisive moment". Well the decisive moment is just an ostentatious term meaning good timing - a concept that's been around for about 100 years. When shooting candid you look for developing action, get positioned well, pre-focus if possible, ready your equipment and pull the trigger at the right moment anticipating the shutter lag of your camera. Does he do this well? Take a look at the shot of the guys falling into the pool. I'd say this shot would have been better waiting a fraction of a second longer; but what really puts it into the snapshot category is that there is no light on the subjects. What a great shot this would have been to be able to see the expressions on these guys faces as they just about make contact with the water. Either the photographer wasn't ready or he doesn't believe in flash when shooting outside at night - either way it's a snapshot and missed timing. The shot of the bride in the mirror with a non-flattering expression on her face - if he'd waited a second he might have got a smile. Etc. I question whether these and other shots show good timing.

Regarding emotion let's not confuse the photographer with the subject. The wedding reception he shot was full of emotion. The photographer can't be credited with creating emotion. That wedding reception was a real raucous party, unlike most I have been to which were pretty sedate by comparison. I'd expect any decent photographer would have done as well - actually better because most would use flash or at least do some post processing to fix things which I mentioned on page 4 of this thread.

As I said before, he does show some creativity (the moose head) and does have some nice work; but I think he would greatly benefit from posting some of his work over on the Critique Corner in POTN and hearing from some guys that really know their stuff.

I can't say I disagree. Maybe I'm "jaded" by the great photography here.