> Some of the images leave me cold, but overall effective, more "arty" than
> run-of-the-mill production-line wedding photography.
The problem is that "arty" is rarely what the client actually wants in
the end. They'll select you for your artistic vision, but will select
the images based on reality. There is a bunch of photos in there which
are "tossers". "Arty" and "Sloppy" are not the same thing.
> Maybe it's me, but do every single one of those shots appear soft and
> low-contrast? Perhaps an artistic style, but about halfway through I was
> screaming for some crispness.
His "max black" is set a bit up the tonal scale and that's why they
all lack contrast. There is no shadow detail in these images. It looks
like he underexposed everything.
Overall, I like some of his ideas, but they won't fly with the broader
market. The in-camera flash causing devil-eyes is completely
unforgivable.
--
Ken Norton
ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.zone-10.com
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|