An AD friend of mine sent me this link in an horrible stupor [link] I mean after watching this... and his disclaimer (quoted from the link above) DISCLAIMER: If you hate this high-contrast, under saturated, over-sharpened looking effect, please just skip this post altogether.



The effect is plain horrible and it is amusing to see a review about it in such depth... I know he is riding the money wagon to imitate the "Dave Hill" effect and earn some cash from it but it is totally ridiculous when your photos look THAT bad and you do it only to be "hip" among people who like their photos looking like a fart.... :/

Am I ranting? sure, but make no mistake, I'm no puritan of photography, I don't think anyone should be judged if they use film or digital, if they use a point and shoot or the latest Leaf back, if their photos come straight from the camera or if there's post processing in them, my qualm comes actually in the aesthetic of the photo presented, it goes beyond me why would you want to defecate such effect in a photo ... in other words I'm actually ranting about the final product and the idea behind it: the final photo.

Talking with the AD who sent me this link she was astonished to see how many people are riding the Lucis art wagon and how many of them sent them portfolios with images like that to them, she told before as a way to orient people to what their agency wants they told them that kind of effect isn't really commercial -open a magazine and tell me how many of the photos you see there have that effect on them- but people got angry and told them that they don't know about "art" or any other amusing self imposed title with a rant on how good the effect is and how bad the agencies are, so the agency altogether decided to simply not call them...

I may be wrong but I think people take too lightly where they get their inspiration from photography, I mean it is easy grab a history of art book and start reading and watching the drawings, paintings, it is really easy to grab a book of the history of photography or even books that deal with the history of commercial artwork and photography , etc.

For the kind of people the AD was talking about (photographers that want to enter into commercial/fashion/advertising photography) it would be a nice idea if they came down from their tall white horse and analyze the stuff they make vs. what's being published in magazines, printed advertising -pamphlets, billboards, magazines, etc- and take a hard self critique to focus their work for the market they want, it isn't a matter of copying what you see in the photos, it is a matter of checking out what the client was asking the photographer to do (natural looking skin for a make up ad instead of a lucis art model which would look like a zombie) I do this regularly and it has paid off certainly.

Internet as a tool of learning is great however in some cases the scope of what you can find in terms of a good reading sometimes is just shockingly subpar... mostly because the focus of most of these blogs is based on:
-Gear: you should buy this lighting gear, this camera gear, this brand, etc.
-Photoshop: you should post process in this way buying this filter.

And few (really few)blogs focus on things like composition, model direction, good relationship with MUA, Stylist (even for product shots you may need a stylist), model, client, Concept creation and putting it to motion, etc.

It isn't only about having a 5D MKII, or having profoto gear, or knowing how to D&B the skin of a model, in reality it is about:

PJ: Knowing how to deal with difficult ambient lighting in a fast way keeping an eye on capturing in a good way something that is happening, be it a party in a club, barack obama in a speech, etc. if it is a wedding it isn't a matter of shooting and having a pretty bokeh, it is a matter of capturing the most important and relevant moments that happen in a wedding.

Fashion and glamour: it is knowing different aesthetic currents, knowing how to match concept with a location, make up, hair style, how to do rapport with the team working with you and how to make the model have the facial expression and pose you want, knowing how to make the clothing stand up from the model rather than the model being the center of attention.

Etc, etc.

So rather than day dreaming of gear, post processing filters, you will be far better working out your skills rather than spending so much cash in gear without knowing how to even use it. . There's no amount of gear or post processing techniques that can revert poor photography skills, a bad photographer will be a bad photographer with a hassie h2D with a leaf back and expensive studio lighting if the photographer is bad, however this doesn't mean if you are now working at certain level you shouldn't invest in reliable or better gear but do it only if you know how to use the gear well, not because you think gear packs talent inside.

By the way now that we are talking about this, I have uploaded a comparison graphic for different megapixels measures which is related to this journal, be sure to read also the comments that my good friend and awesome photographer rogue designer [link] made.

I really hope this update finds you well
My best wishes to everyone

Eduar