Fairytale Photos
I dislike photos that are overcomposed. Lots of wedding and family photos are like this.
— geospiza
Why do people like to have their wedding and family photos taken this way--lined up looking like they were waiting for the firing squad to begin?
In the early days of photography, the results were often very rigid-looking because people had to sit still for an eternity (in photographic time--maybe 20 to 40 seconds--to get a clear picture. Is that how that 'look' or 'style' become associated with photography?
Or, is it the fault of people who do wedding photography? Are they just unimaginative? Or is it people who get married that have that problem?
Why do people hate getting their picture taken so much that they look like they were going to be shot--literally?
— geospiza
Why do people like to have their wedding and family photos taken this way--lined up looking like they were waiting for the firing squad to begin?
In the early days of photography, the results were often very rigid-looking because people had to sit still for an eternity (in photographic time--maybe 20 to 40 seconds--to get a clear picture. Is that how that 'look' or 'style' become associated with photography?
Or, is it the fault of people who do wedding photography? Are they just unimaginative? Or is it people who get married that have that problem?
Why do people hate getting their picture taken so much that they look like they were going to be shot--literally?
Comments (12)
There is the above-mentioned "firing squad":
There is also what I call the "Downton Abbey":
There is also the "Artistic Statement":
And of course the ubiquitous "Heart Hands":
This is only the tip of the iceberg.
I think it is the fault of the married couple, the amount of money people spend on weddings these days makes one really think that people have normalised insanity. There is a delusional objective having this 'fairytale' wedding that rehearse an imagined portrayal of their love and I personally would DIY everything for more a small, intimate backyard wedding that would cost less entirely than the amount people spend just on photography. Wedding photographers themselves set the stage for these superficial poses because the photos look expensive, they appear worth spending the money on and the appearance of this 'quality' transcends the stuff one can take independently. And as the setting and environment helps with the opportunity to be creative, it provides little legroom for photographers to move beyond that.
I did the photography for a friend' wedding alongside a professional photographer and my photos naturally showcased the actual experience, the closeness and you could feel the love and emotion through them. You can still have great artistic photos that are not "statements".
Your photos are very lovely and they are indeed more naturally appealing. I think there has been somewhat of a backlash that has emerged in response to some of the things you mention, with more people deliberately choosing to simplify. However, there remains a large segment of the population for whom their wedding must be a big production. I suppose there are many possible reasons for this. One reason is that people simply have enormous egos. Others have expensive tastes and they choose to indulge (whether they can afford it or not). Another reason might be that there is often a lot of pressure from the wedding industry to upgrade and include every cost imaginable. Couples are made to feel inadequate if they don't go along with the spending. Yet another reason is that if your peers are spending a fortune, it is only natural for a couple to feel an expectation to do the same. You have to be strong willed to resist all of the pressures to organize a high cost wedding.
All of this is unfortunate, in my view, because all of the high production distracts from the seriousness of what is actually going on, and can ruin it with superficiality. In some ways maybe it is an honest reflection of the naivety with which couples typically enter into marriage. What really needs to be asked is, if you were to take away all of the glamour and all of the spectacle, would there be anything left?
Photos reflect context. So, if a couple decides to have one of these over-expensive over-choreographed traditional weddings that don't bear any special connection to them as individuals (agree totally with your critique), it doesn't much matter what the photographer does. Your photos are an improvement on the other examples, you did what you could, but it's still recognizably just another boring wedding. The couple disappear into the tradition and there's nothing much left over.
Those expensive weddings are nothing more than a show and following what Baden has stated, the tradition is recycling the same superficial process that a photographer cannot transcend because it will be a problem for those who assume such photos are a must.
How ridiculous is the 'firing squad' photo? The average wedding cost in Australia is $50,000 and being 'cheap' is not the issue, it is about being intelligent and looking for quality in a cost-effective manner where the celebration reflects who you both are. That is why for me it would be a tiny wedding in a backyard where I bake my own cake and get a friend to take some snaps, the most expensive part of the wedding being the honeymoon.
Quoting geospiza
That is exactly it.
It is a reflection of the couple and if they choose a superficial and expensive wedding, then I would imagine their relationship to be just the same. However, it is not to say that getting married is the issue and to celebrate that union, but as marriage is a tradition you become caught in a creative trap.
The photos that I used reflect my position on the subject (they are not mine but are examples very close to what I have done) that show expression and feeling and have a realistic and natural quality to them, but I particularly like the dancing. It is the couple being unaware that a camera is looking at them and you take shots of family and friends present to witness the union. It is portraiture and so it is not that there is something inherently impossible in taking creative photos at a wedding due to the limitation of the traditional landscape, but strictly speaking, the photos are about people. What photographers have forgotten is that it should reflect who those people are.
Having photo's that are out of the ordinary is quite OK in a wedding. Afterall, just for example the bride typically has this somewhat "fairy-tale princess" dress, something that wouldn't be worn even in a gala dinner. And naturally if a woman wears a white dress just once, then taking a photo of it is an important event.
Think about funeral photos. They ought to be sad and solemn, not showing that people are bored or happy to meet some old relative that they haven't seen for a while.
Now where the overcomposed photos are annoying are in Company photos. These are many time so much of politically correct propaganda that it is hilarious.
The photo of happy people... and obviously women and minorities included!
Or this one. The "Our happy and energetic crue". Notice again the politically correct demographics in the photo:
"Look it's a laptop!"
"Wow, you really know your stuff Tom!"
Corporate flavoured happy faces, yum, yum!