Jack Conrad
Well-known
In the last photo, the father looks quite proud of how sharp his son's teeth are. 🙂
If this was my christening, I'd be asking for my money back
- Thread starter Snapper_uk
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 54
- Views 7K
goamules
Well-known
OK, after skipping this link earlier, I couldn't resist, and just looked. My God, my kids at 10 years old took better photos than these. These are a joke. Too bad, photographers in the past knew their craft. These could have been taken by any soccer mom with a cellphone.
And for the record, I didn't know who the photographer was, and still don't, I just went an looked at the photos. Which is what we all should do. I don't care "who", I care "what", and if they were shot by Ansel Adams, if they suck, they suck. No....redeeming....qualities....at....all.
And for the record, I didn't know who the photographer was, and still don't, I just went an looked at the photos. Which is what we all should do. I don't care "who", I care "what", and if they were shot by Ansel Adams, if they suck, they suck. No....redeeming....qualities....at....all.
Archlich
Well-known
To me, these are OK. And I assume the clients were happy, so nothing wrong with them at all.
Carefully clipped highlights, balanced flash and in-focus sharpness never warrant a good photo though.
goamules
Well-known
Bwahahaha! Yeah, and my dog just laid a technically superb one in the backyard too! Exactly, what....pray tell, are you looking at? Nevermind, you are the one person with the opposite viewpoint, there always is one.....
Millions of group shots, made by millions of amateurs this year with cellphones, are better. Technically too.
codester80
A Touch of Light
Based on the photographs in the link I would say Mario whatever-his-name has an inflated ego and over values his "talent". In other words, an artistic jack-ass based off how uncomfortable the Duke and Duchess look in the photos (force smiles, awkward stances). These photographs are supposed to be of a joy-filled day. What I get is a stiff, painful photo shoot where everyone just wants to get it over and done with. It's obvious the photographer did not connect with the royal family.
As for the technical qualities, they are what they are. Mario obviously was trying to put is mark on them. Based on the general reaction by those who have posted in this thread, his attempt is a failure.
He's no Annie Leibovitz.
As for the technical qualities, they are what they are. Mario obviously was trying to put is mark on them. Based on the general reaction by those who have posted in this thread, his attempt is a failure.
He's no Annie Leibovitz.
Ranchu
Veteran
I'm noticing only one person in your Leibowitz example.
😛
😛
Ranchu
Veteran
Huss
Veteran
Ned, if this is the ultimate troll, then well played Sir!
FrankS
Registered User
Beautiful pictures. Are they yours? If so, my hat's off to you.
Ranchu
Veteran
FrankS
Registered User
Yes, for sure. It's great for that genre of fashion magazine.
They show a lot more skill and talent (in a different genre) than these christening shots, IMO.
They show a lot more skill and talent (in a different genre) than these christening shots, IMO.
Ranchu
Veteran
W is like 3 dollars or so, there's a lot of good photography in it for 3 bucks, those big barnes and noble's usually have it. It's nice because it's a large format magazine.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
that leibovitz shot, while technically might be great, makes the Queen look like a wax figure. Frozen, dead, pale, static, scary a bit really. Madame Tussaud's or the real deal? not sure.
But no i also dont like the MT shots of this happening.
And no - nobody gives a rats ass what RFF people think of the shots, dont worry. 🙂
But no i also dont like the MT shots of this happening.
And no - nobody gives a rats ass what RFF people think of the shots, dont worry. 🙂
Rikard
Established
I like the photos in the order 3, 2, 4, 1. The forced smile stiff group shot really feels like a family member asked the rest of the family to pose for the camera. But the arrangement of people are better than average. The other photos looks like the photographer just snapped the photo where the subjects happened to be located. He did not bring them into a location with lights setup etc. In all I think they look less contrived than the Annie shot (which by the way looks a bit processed/plastic to me eyes).
I like this sort of stuff and I'm not trolling.
I like this sort of stuff and I'm not trolling.
pakeha
Well-known
photos are fine, not so the subject
nongfuspring
Well-known
They're supposed to look candid, as someone else said it's to reduce the sense of proximity, humanise the subject etc. Calling them technically bad is missing the point.
Testino does know what he's doing, just unfortunately what he's doing is making mawkish propaganda featuring a few of the world's most overpaid unemployed people that double as smiley faced figureheads for one of history's most brutal imperial regimes.
Testino does know what he's doing, just unfortunately what he's doing is making mawkish propaganda featuring a few of the world's most overpaid unemployed people that double as smiley faced figureheads for one of history's most brutal imperial regimes.
OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
I doubt he was a general random choice for a photographer, possibly the younger Royals wanted a more contemporary feel to their photographs too. Either way, I imagine they're happy and the photographer is happy.
I've seen far worse from so called professional wedding photographers, the clients of whom have no doubt scrimped and saved to pay a pretty high fee for their images....not something our Royal family will have done I wouldn't have thought, come to think of it - my pocket feels slightly less full today. God love 'em.
All in all, it does appear like the usual RFF backlash when a 'well-known' photographer gets a large commission and the images aren't universally liked. It's just our opinions and prejudices, thats all.
I've seen far worse from so called professional wedding photographers, the clients of whom have no doubt scrimped and saved to pay a pretty high fee for their images....not something our Royal family will have done I wouldn't have thought, come to think of it - my pocket feels slightly less full today. God love 'em.
All in all, it does appear like the usual RFF backlash when a 'well-known' photographer gets a large commission and the images aren't universally liked. It's just our opinions and prejudices, thats all.
OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
There's plenty of history left in the tank...
thegman
Veteran
I think they're perfectly nice photos, sure lighting, focus, and just about everything else is not what you'd consider 'professional', but nor are practically all of my favourite photos.
There are lots of skills which professional photographers will have, does not mean they're required 100% of the time.
There are lots of skills which professional photographers will have, does not mean they're required 100% of the time.
codester80
A Touch of Light
Take Testino's name of these photos and everyone would be raking these photos through the muck. Just goes to show how celebrity can warp people's reaction. I don't care what Testino has done in the past. We're not evaluating that work but what he has produced with his time with the royal couple. They're crap. But then maybe all of us who call it as we see it are missing Testino's point. Is he making a political point by producing crap while collecting (what I would guess) is a large commission from the royal family that he despises? The royals are not worth is best efforts? Regardless, I give the man a tip of the hat for having the cajones for produce these for the royals, knowing the world would see them.
Similar threads
