Portrait Photography By Aistė Tiriūtė

Portrait Photography By Aistė Tiriūtė

I just keep seeing more and more photographers that are doing extremely well with their photography. Aiste Tiriute is another one of them.

"I live in a tree house at world’s end and I take pictures of ships coming home every night.
I’m a 21 years old photographer from Vilnius, Lithuania, now living and studying photography in London.
I’ve always liked to escape into other worlds through books, movies and music, but I found out that the best way to do that is by taking pictures. My photography is a way to capture moments and make them magical, bring the dreams into this world. I take pictures of the world I want so badly to live in." - Aistė Tiriūtė

Make sure to check out more of her work on her Flickr.

Log in or register to post comments


Great posts Chris, these are great!

"....I just keep seeing more and more photographers that are doing extremely well with their photography..."

and what does that mean?

they are making a ton of money?

or YOU like their results?

im not native english speaking but should that not be :

"....I just keep seeing more and more photographers that shot pictures i like a lot..."

He means that the images are striking, beautiful, and well composed. Money has nothing to do with it. His statement is not incorrect, and your correction is not incorrect. They just have different tones, and his tone is more subtle than your proposed correction. 

maybe im to picky here (working with oldschool journalist not blogger all my life).

but.. i would always write "i like... or...  i think he does a great job etc. " when something is subjectiv... based on personal opinion.

when i read "doing extremely well" i normaly think that means he makes good money in his job....

but then.. what do i know.... my english is not that good. :) 

I think that you are seeing something different that you did not explain. I believe he made the EXACT point he meant to make. I know nothing about the author of this article but in my eyes I see exactly what he means. I take what he said assuming he's seen more than a few pictures and believe his statement is valid. You attempt to make a point with no argument, thus sans validity. 

If you don't like the photos, say so, don't attempt to redirect your troll anger on the author. You probably tear apart everything you ever see and find ways to put it down.

I would argue that, in a world filled with "new" photographers trying to pawn off their work as world class art, 90% of the time it isn't. period. Maybe great in college art class art, but not good photography. Jadon makes a good point, well composed, beautiful, and money has nothing to do with it. This person thought this through and executed exactly what he wanted, and it poors with emotion and beauty. End point being, I would argue that this person is a serious photographer and is good at his craft, even beyond most professionals. And the same could be said about a lot of photographers, not most, but a lot. The more people are into this, and apply their ideas the more we see amazing, beautiful and thought provoking results, i believe most people would agree with this, thus making CHRIS LAMBETH's statement valid:

"....I just keep seeing more and more photographers that are doing extremely well with their photography..." 

most of this photos, anyway, are very common and boring...

What kind of lens do you normally use?

in my opinion, these are interesting but not because the photographer is good. None of these photos show any skill in the photographer. They are all generic 5d mark ii with a 50mm 1.2 shots, the only thing that makes these interesting is the creatively dressed and styled models with some hipstery color correction which has nothing to do with the photographers skill. Actually the more i look at her work, the less i like it Nothing against her as a photographer. But she is 1. Shooting with models(who know how to pose and do model stuff) 2. she is shooting with a 5d mark ii, one of the best ever portrait cameras with a very large dynamic range. 3. She is shooting wide open on a fast 50mm prime. 4. She is ignoring compositional rules intentionally, which is good. but not very original. 5. Most of her photos are shot in the forrest, meaning open shade(therefore no nonsense lighting) and nice location. 6. She is toning them with vintage film colors. Sure these are great photos but then you realize only a tiny bit of the success in these photos was actually the photographer. Most of it was external. I mean give any girl a first semesters worth of photographic knowledge, a couple models, a $3000 camera set up, a forrest, and lightroom and we could expect similar results.

I couldn't agree more. 

Your thoughts sound like an excuse for yourself:) It's so common for people who don't do anything or don't succeed to say: if only I had the same camera, models, money, surrounding, etc...

 He's not saying "if only I had the same camera..."

He's saying they're all the same, boring, shot with the same equipment.

You do make some very valid points.  You're right, we could expect similar results from said girl with the same tools, etc.  And they would be similarly nice photographs.  ;]

Does this mean that all photographers who use pro models, stylists, choose light friendly locations and own/hire expensive gear are lacking in skill? Is the way that the photographer interacts with the model, chooses locations for their lighting, probably does much of the styling herself, irrelevant? 

With all due respect, I don't see how your arguments support the notion that she is not good. What I see in your numbered points is 1) She chose her subjects well. 2) She chose her camera well. 3) She chose her lens well. 4) She has the courage to break the "rules". 5) She chose her locations wisely and managed her light and shooting conditions perfectly. 6) She has the aesthetic sense to choose a look that matches her subject matter and expresses her creativity better than bland digital would. You can see these things as external all you'd like but the fact is that good photographers control and manipulate all the "external" factors, bending them to their creative will, whether it's people, equipment, light, location, or software. She has done just that, admirably.

I've followed stories on this site since its beginning but somehow I just recently troubled to read some of the comments. The experience has been rather like lifting a familiar and well-trodden rug and finding something unpleasant underneath. I didn't realize that so many jaded people congregated here. Photography is a creative endeavor. The photographer featured here might not be perfect in your eyes or mine, but she is creative and she's endeavoring. Not everyone or everything has to be "original", nor can they be. If we offered some considered and constructive criticism we would be helping her create something. Otherwise we're wasting bandwidth and time that could be spent with our own cameras in our hands.

--Philip Weller

Very well stated. 

These series of artists that have been featured on Fstoppers are all producing the same, boring work. It's all the same. It's all boring. The photography is bad. It's just all somewhat surreal, desaturated and/or split toned garbage you see on a million Tumblr pages shot with 50mm 1.4 or 1.8 lenses.

Also to anyone who thinks i am somehow inferring that i am making excuses for myself. I do quite well in my photography without the use of $3000 gear, or professional models, or vintage film looks, or full frame sensors and lenses shot wide open. oh, and I am younger than her by 3 years and don't attend photo school.


 AND you now also completely lost all credit you may have had before! You're a tough guy!

Agreed. Only untalented, and boring photographers who lack creativity and vision are threaten by other photographers.   

i'm not threatened, and i like her work. I just don't feel like it should be showcased as above everyone else unless it is somehow above or particularly creative/interesting. Fstoppers used to be incredibly resourceful and original but with the new wave of authors its gotten repetitive, tired and 95% about gear reviews, contests, and photographer endorsements that go undeserved. I remember when i would get on fstoppers and be blow away by some of the stuff on here but now i get on and say "oh thats cool but its just a copy of what ever is on flickr explore" and "oh, if i like this, this, this, this this,  this and this page on facebook i can be entered to win a contest, how exciting!". 

FS is a free photo blog, you probably shouldn't expect much, you have to take the good with the bad/average.  They have to provide daily content, and they are covering the photo industry not the war in the middle east. How much mind blowing daily content do you think is happening in this industry? I just don't see how complaining about something that you are not paying for has any value. 

I agree with comments that this has all been done before and we have all seen it many times, we are after all  scouring the net every day for inspiration, so we are bound to see things over and over again, but even though i am not wowed by them, i think she has done a great job. Colours ad tone are nice, but i feel that there is very little interaction with the viewer and the models, but great work keep going and learning.

Jonathan pretty much hit the nail on the head with his final thoughts. (and not a nasty cruel word to be found in any of what he says)