Am I?

[juntanpho]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/passiveflight-photography/

critique (harsh or otherwise) welcomed 🙂

[Brownie]

I looked at your work and was curious as to what you enjoyed photographing the most.

 

Tell me a little about your work and what you feel is strong with it and what you feel can be improved upon.

 

[juntanpho]

Well, I’ve been doing this for about 6 months now, and I began with experimenting with everything, people, portraiture, landscapes, the HDR hole (let’s not even go there >.<), but increasingly I found everything else apart from portraiture boring. Last month I did my first wedding, and at first I felt like that was what I wanted to do, but I got so tired just from that one wedding, so I decided not to do more. Right now, I enjoy photographing people the most, especially studio portraiture.

The strong bits of my work? I think that my portraiture really is my strongest field, but I’m not really sure on how to elaborate because I’ve never thought about my work in those terms before. I still feel like I have a lot to work on, but again, unsure of specifics.

[Brownie]

Cool, I understand. The first step into understanding what you do is to question why you do certain things, why do you crop things, compose things a certain way, etc. etc. I was curious if you had really thought about it like that, and it’s definitely okay if you hadn’t.

 

First thing I notice is that you’re work seems to be very contrasty. Another thing is one some of your recent portraits seem to be  “hot”, or blown out, in the highlights. I think this photograph (http://www.flickr.com/photos/passiveflight-photography/7168068903/in/photostream/) is the strongest portrait you have for me. It’s the most interesting for me.

 

Maybe I’m just a cynical twenty year old, but the wedding photos don’t really do anything for me. They don’t seem to put a unique vision of the day, if that makes sense. I found that you have a lot of really nice monochrome landscapes buried in your collection. I like those a lot, technically they are really solid, for the most part. In fact this one here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/passiveflight-photography/6873161043/in/photostream/) reminds me of a BRILLIANT photographer by the name of Josef Koudelka who photographed with a panorama negative size. I think you’d enjoy his work

 

If there’s anything else or anything you want me to address specifically, I’m glad to elaborate! 😀

[IHF]

Keep keeping on 🙂  I enjoyed your portfolio, and I think your studio portraiture is really good.  I only see you improving more and more once you hone in on it.  but, that’s not to say you should quit shooting landscapes, nightscapes, stills or whatever floats your boat.  Don’t close any doors you haven’t opened yet, you have an eye

[DavidVRJ]

I love your photos man. I found myself pausing and taking a deep look at many of your photos. Keep it up, and with some good marketing you could  go far. Your photos have a unique look to them, in which the imperfections make them unusually captivating and thought provoking.

 

That being said, weddings are not your forte, at all. I think you do best when you have more control over the photo, and are not good at capturing the unexpected, candid moments. Your lighting and composition were a bit basic in those shots, especially compared to all your other shots. You’re still great though

[juntanpho]

Thanks guys! I really have realized that weddings isn’t the way to go 😀 LOL.

[jetpix]

So, how many of you have shot weddings?

@ Brownie – “unique vision of the day”?  What does that mean?  Is this something your photog professor said?  Shooting a wedding is about 1 thing – making the client happy.  It is THEIR day.  These are THEIR memories.  There are lots of ways to shoot weddings – many different styles.    I’m not sure giving them a “unique vision of the day” is always the best course.  Give them something they can relate to – not someone else’s artistic interpretation of the events . . . . . unless that’s what they’ve asked for.

@ David – Lighting a bit basic in a candid shot . . . .  hmmmmmm . . . .  yeah . . . . . it’s a CANDID SHOT.  If you stop to fix the lighting, or move the subject to better lighting, it’s not CANDID anymore, is it?

Shooting a wedding (other than the formal portraiture sessions) is one of the hardest things a photographer will do.  You have to be everywhere at once – you need 20 sets of eyes, 20 camera/lens combinations all going at once, and need to do all of this discreetly.  You need to be unseen, unheard, yet omnipresent.  You take the lighting you are given in many situations, and often, there is little time for setting up the perfect composition.  It’s photojournalism in the midst of chaos.  Generally, speaking, I don’t have too many problems with the wedding photos – but I certainly understand why you are shying away from them – they are a pain in the ass, aren’t they?

[Brownie]

David hit is exactly right,

” I think you do best when you have more control over the photo, and are not good at capturing the unexpected, candid moments.”

 

[Brownie]

Jet,

I mean as a way to stand out in wedding photography.  Sure. you can do every standard wedding photograph but nothing that’s going to be powerful and standing, his wedding pictures don’t hold my interest from an artistic and in some, technical standpoint. Is the family pleased? Probably. And that’s all that matters in commercial photography. I just don’t think anyone would go, “Oh, wow, WHO took THIS?”

 

 

[Author]

Posts