It should be a lot of time that I think and I document, today the wedding photographer is adjusting to trends and leveling, or are following the call of an artistic movement? I have already spoken on this blog of the staff to research what every photographer should do, try your own personal style and break away from the crowd. Obviously it is not so easy, especially in a world where the big voice makes the market. We are all forced to “sell” our product and then for the artist wedding photographer is less and less space.
It is that really so? I love getting the complicated questions, or those who force me to study to find an answer. The reasoning started from very close to me things: first of all I went to look a some “showcases” of wedding photography on the web and tried to see if there really is this great leveling.
Well, what emerges in these windows is the desire to impress the reader. The “classic” images of marriage, those for which many times the couple hired a wedding photographer can not see, they are put on display only beautiful images, great aesthetic impact and with a color treatment very standardized. Of this I think they are a little accomplices also the manufacturers of cameras. Now with the digital there is no longer entrusts to the film for the choice of the color rendering but to what the raw file that the camera produces is able to give us.
If we could make a jump back a few years we would find colors and editing completely different. But we are not yet come to the point. That is why these images are all very similar and because only a few photographers emerging from this chorus?
Well, after reflection and analysis I conclude it is not exactly so. This is just my opinion, but what you see in these great online windows of wedding photographs is simply the result of some competitions. That’s why we all look the same, images are filtered by a commission that has the taste and a specific culture. The truth about the style of each photographer, most likely, we can not verify that but with a much longer and more challenging work, or going to look at the personal site of each photographer.
What emerges from the galleries of the various contests and associations is similar to the artistic currents that have their specific rules and responsibilities within which the artist can space with creativity but in the end you can easily identify which belongs artistic movement.
Take the case of the Impressionists: Impressionism was born between 1860 and 1870 and lasted until the beginning of 1900. Manet, Cezanne, Degas, Renoir were among the most prominent members. It was a current that was derived from Romanticism and Realism. He introduced innovations that marked a major groove with the past, such as the denial of the importance of the subject bringing equate typically profane, religious and historical; They gave new life to landscape painting and greater freedom of expression to the painter. Finally the “emotions” of the painter were no longer hidden under the strict rules of technique but could manifest with powerful strokes of spatula, which created an alternation of smooth and uneven surfaces, thus giving a new openness to personal research.
This description tells us that an artistic movement is like a path marked with stakes driven into the ground, within this path, the artist is free but difficult to come out of these posts.
Let’s take the example of another pictorial movement: the Caravaggism. This style of painting was born at the turn of the sixteenth and seventeenth century, referring to the artistic patterns of Caravaggio. Baroque painting was deeply influenced by the work of Michelangelo Merisi (Caravaggio). The reproduction of reality with the use of strong contrasts between light and shade makes it extremely realistic thing that was not the case before him. In Caravaggism is this realism particularly in paintings of still lifes and interiors with human figures, usually represented on monochrome backgrounds and very dark and illuminated by a lateral light very sharp and theatrical.
Even this definition gives a precise area where the artists worked. Not only that, both descriptions define a specific historical period. I am sure that if we took a few more current would be very similar, that would give the definitions of “gender” very precise.
Why then today we cringe when photographers are aligned to a particular aesthetic pattern of wedding photography? Maybe compare the wedding photography to any artistic movement is decidedly presumptuous and perhaps we should stop here.
Painting is certainly a much more noble form of art of wedding photography but not for this we have to discredit the work of the wedding photographer.
Whilst it may be that it is not a real artistic movement, also a photograph of marriage is subject to the rule of currents and trends. This applies to all creative professions: design, music, graphics, fashion … all are influenced by the times in which they live and also the wedding photography can not be immune.
That’s why now I insist that it is not a real leveling of photography, that most brutally there are not copying each other to make all the images themselves in order to participate and maybe win competitions, rather we are all following the current, indeed, the artistic currents of the moment.
Yes because in this period I see the most current, or strands, of wedding photography.
The best known and named it the wedding reportage. A very difficult style that is often misunderstood, so often we read this definition to images that in reality are far from reportage. The real wedding reportage is a spontaneous story of the day, or the photographer has no effect on the action and never takes up so as it is happening.
The classic style is an evergreen, it will never die. Usually this term is meant to define that photographer that uses static poses for portrait photographs. In reality, the classic style is those images that so many are inevitable: the portraits at the bride, group photos, portraits of the couple cutting the cake. The same photos that our parents have in their own album with a more modern interpretation.
The fashion style. It is derived from photography for fashion. It focuses a lot on the bride producing images similar to catalogs of clothing and jewelry. There are few photographers who specialize in this genre as well as the demand is less, dare I call it a niche that is in high demand by a small circle of couples, usually close to the showbiz or fashion. The service does not include a story of the day but excellent portraits of the bride and the couple. It is a kind very suitable for elopement.
Is there any photographer who defines his “vintage” style. I do not think it is very accurate as a definition. This kind of wedding photographer uses optics that resemble the photograph of the 40’s – 50’s and a post production that reproduces the colors, a bit “washed”, the photographs of the 70’s.
There is also the fusion, is not a style but simply the fusion of 2 or more styles of those listed. The service that I propose is just that, a fusion of reportage with fashion without neglecting some inevitable photographs taken from the classic.
I will stop here because more styles most likely could be assimilated to these large families, or there may be a new trend which I am not yet aware.
So here, the picture today is all that and much more. There are also photographers who can not be pigeon-holed in any of these genres and I assume that there will be more and more. After all the wedding photographers are very many, unlike painters, and therefore also their peculiarities and uniqueness can be many.
The important thing is always to know how to choose the photographer for you, let yourself be carried by the photographs because it is what will remain.