A new “trend” seems to have rolled into the photography world. What is this trend? It’s called the “morning after” wedding photography session, and to me it's a little absurd.
So you already know my opinion on this subject, yet the rational part of my mind is still able to diverge the topic in two somewhat logical paths (even the path that I think is absurd):
1) If I were the bride and groom getting the images done, I wouldn’t care what anyone else thought because clearly I am are already vain in the first place. I obviously see the need to have photo documentation right after I’ve consummated my marriage. This is important - my ruffled and unkempt hair, smeared makeup, disheveled sheets, clothes strewn everywhere. My ass is hanging out of my scantily clad "bride" underwear. Now that is a work of art.
2) But let’s get real: Do I really need images of this? What is the point of having them? Nowadays the only reason us of this present generation take pictures of ourselves is to share online - more importantly, Facebook. Facebook is heavily, and somewhat unhealthily, ingrained in our lives- don’t deny it. It IS the ultimate scrapbook. Scrapbooking places we’ve eaten, friends we met, places we’ve gone, and epic parties that we’ve been too. We even use Facebook to validate marriage. Now all of a sudden the new trend is to document where and how many times we've had sex? I bet Mark Zuckerberg never saw that coming.
An article in Jezebel that originally discussed this topic references an image of Kate moss and her husband Jamie Hince. Despite my previous tirade, I have no problem with Kate moss doing this. I feel like the standard is completely different for celebrities, as they are in front of the lens 95% of their lives. It was probably impossible for them to keep the images to themselves in the first place because 1) they are narcissists at their finest and 2) they make money and remain in the spotlight by releasing the photos to the press.
In this video from Good Morning America, the bride states she plans to have the images framed and put up all over their room. I honestly don’t see anything wrong with doing that – your bedroom should be your sacred place for just the two of you. The room and all its decorations are just for you and your significant other. What I can’t grasp is why you would want something so sacred to be strewn all over the internet for your coworkers, perhaps boss, friends, and relatives to see. One of the couples stated they were so delighted with the results of the shoot, they posted the photos on Facebook and said they were going to show their children when they were old enough. You don’t want to see mommy and daddy gettin’ it on, why the hell do you think they want to see YOU doing that? They got the images taken because they want to show everyone how in love they were? Isn't that the reason for wedding photography in the first place?
I think some of these images can prove to be tasteful and sweet, but an image of you and your significant other lying naked all over the dining room table is way over the top. Just imagine your relatives getting a hold of this image knowing they’re about to come over for Thanksgiving dinner. I’m pretty sure they just want to eat their meal and not have to think about the two of you having sex all over the house. Sure, maybe in the image weren’t actually having sex but who is to say you haven’t before or will later down the road. I’m no prude but this should all be kept private!
I think this OPINION piece is just that, a funny, amusing opinion. I didn't know Lauren was writing this but I enjoyed it and I agree with some of it and disagree with other parts of it. It's fine if you disagree completely but to claim that she doesn't have the right to write it or that "this isn't why I come to Fstoppers" is going a bit far. If you don't like articles like this we have so much other content to choose from. We are trying to produce content for a massive audience with different opinions and views of "what FS should be" and that means that nobody will like everything we post. Even I don't.
Lee, with all due respect (of which I have a great deal) many forms of wedding photography is all about people being narcissistic. It stopped being just a means of recording a special day a long time ago.
Lauren's piece is radically different than 99% of FS's stuff. Criticize a technique or equipment if you like... but I highly doubt that dissing someone else's work/taste is something any FS reader want to see.
I am sure Lauren has a personal blog where she can share her personal opinions.
I agree 100% that "many forms of wedding photography is all about people being narcissistic" and if you wrote an entertaining article about that I would publish that to. My biggest complaint about this article was that Lauren seemed a bit harsh towards the people who do want these pictures BUT I don't think it had to do with the pictures themselves but rather with sharing these personal pictures with the world on Facebook, or with your friends, or in one case your children.
Why don't you write a respectful counter argument article and I will post it tomorrow?
I appreciate that Lee. It was not my intention, in *any* way, to come across as disrespectful to either Lauren, you, or FS. If it was taken that way, I apologize.
No counter argument is required - I believe everything has been covered in this thread. What people choose to photograph is the concern of the couple and their photographer. I can't think of, off the top of my head anyway, another genre of photography that has been portrayed in such a negative light by an FS writer.
By the way, in a former life I was a software engineer on the iPhone team at Apple. Your shots Lee were one of the main reasons I went into photography.
Thanks Reed, I love a good debate. I just don't want things to get personal. We are actually planning an Iphone 5 (or 4g) fashion shoot right now. We hope to step it up a notch :)
Couldn't agree more. While many time FStoppers has brought up controversial topics, it's usually in the vein of "what do you think?", or "leave your thoughts in the comments" - This is vastly different from those articles.
I'd be quite angry if I was the photographer whose work is featured along with this disparaging article and non constructive criticism.
JB
I think I got a totally different opinion out of this than most of you. I thought Lauren was trying to say there is nothing wrong with the pictures but she just doesn't like SHARING them:
"the bride states she plans to have the images framed and put up all over their room. I honestly don’t see anything wrong with doing that – your bedroom should be your sacred place for just the two of you. The room and all its decorations are just for you and your significant other. What I can’t grasp is why you would want something so sacred to be strewn all over the internet for your coworkers, perhaps boss, friends, and relatives to see."
Read the title of the article. In fact read the article. She's quite clearly making it out that she thinks this whole idea is absurd. Opinion noted, but the client wants it, they're getting it.
maybe that was her intentions but she writes:
". It needs to die now. It’s not good for photographers, for viewers, or for those in the image. "
i think when you write such passages you have to take responsibility... because now we talk about everyone :)
Lee, being the one that wrote,
"this isn't why I come to Fstoppers". I have to stand by my statement. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE FStoppers. I read every article. But Op-Ed pieces that rip on what other people find appealing (just because it's different) is NOT the type of article I want to read on FStoppers. In fact, I put this in the category with other things that are "wrong with the world". People think that other peoples' taste or opinion is improper or incorrect or ... put any other word you'd like on it (including sinful)... and they want to put an end to it. There is nothing wrong with someone else's taste just because it doesn't fall inline with your own and there is no reason to "put a stop to it".
Where on this page does it say opinion piece? I'm not really concerned if the article is or isn't tasteful or small minded or tongue in cheek, but because it is out of character with what I rely on from FStoppers it comes across as an unprofessional misstep. The NYTimes presents an opinion piece this way:
'Op-Ed columnist David Brooks provides you with "the definitive biography and a unique look into the...etc etc etc...' When I found it on Facebook it certainly was presented as breaking news from FStoppers. It's all in the presentation... Still hangin with you guys, hope this is a small turning point though.
Their life, their choice. I do not see how this is in anyway harmful to photographers. People have different prospects of privacy. If you don't like the concept of the images, don't look them up, don't offer to shoot them, easy as that.
This article has taught me that when I have sex with my bride the day after, there's a 95% chance all I'm gonna see is black and white.
I believe it's been said already but it bears repeating.
A) We as photographers should never criticize anothers work based on our personal opinion. As artists, we should be above this.
B) Fstoppers has become more opinionated as of lately and less informative...which I believe gave you the popularity that you CURRENTLY enjoy. Please go back to what made you one of the best photography forums out there.
Lauren, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume that this rant was more off the cuff than intended, because I usually enjoy your posts.
Are you serious? Clearly not, you said "haterade". The whole beauty and power of sex - lovemaking, raunchy sex, make up sex, fetish, what-have-you - is that it's an intimate, real experience and connection between two people, whatever the nature of the connection. When you introduce a third party with a camera, lens, strobes, assistant, and artistic direction, you completely and totally alter the reality of the situation. To have real life people posing and faking their intimate relationship, acting "in it" while making sure to tuck their cellulite and stay at the right angle with the light and photographer, it makes a mockery of that experience. And when you start "selling" that sort of real and personal experience to the world as a projection of your personal life via Facebook... it's the ultimate, pathetic cry for attention and self-validation.
Again, I totally disagree. I don't like seeing my friend's wives/girlfriends in "boudoir" shots but I don't criticize the couple or their photographer.
Well, common decency has gone the way of common sense--it's just not very common. But no surprises there. I love the way photographers use their trade to justify certain subjects in the name of "art."
The question was: Do I really need images of this? The answer is no. So stop posting them. Sex between two people can be amazing--for the two people. But nobody else needs to be brought into the equation.
Everyone here has an opinion on this subject. The author has her's and she was merely stating it. It never hurts to hear somebody else's opinion, so try to stay more open-minded.
Personally, I don't need to see another couple making love on FStoppers any more than I need to see three topless women with their pants unzipped. It cheapens the whole thing and I don't find much beauty in it.
Very well said. A part of the beauty of sex comes from the profound intimacy of the act. Having another person around making photos, or other persons viewing it, alter the experience.
As much as I would like to leave this issue and this piece as what it is an OPINION piece (opinions are neither right nor wrong as long as you can support them) and it is clearly stated at the beginning of the article that it is things like this and the "abused model" piece that was listed above are important. I am both a photographer and a teacher. As a teacher I am expected to have some knowledge about not only the process of teaching but also the issues and movements within the profession. As photographers we are expected to know the process of taking pictures, so should we also not have some social awareness of what is happening around in the photography world? I thank F-stoppers for showing both sides of this. While I only half agree with the article, that is MY OPINION, I value reading what others in the photography world think about it. Thank you for writing this article and for the valuable non-demeaning comments people shared on their opinions.
After reading the article, it sounds as if your real problem is with sharing them on facebook rather than having the photos taken. Your headline leads people to think otherwise. With that said, I agree that people shouldn't be posting such intimate photos of themselves anywhere that takes away from that intimacy. I, however, applaud couples that are confident enough in their bodies and their love life to get those type of photos done. I'm willing to bet that those couples have a pretty great sex life because they are willing to be open and comfortable with who they are.
I love it when people accuse someone of being judgmental and then judge the person harshly. Almost as good as calling someone a hater and then spewing hatred. Always makes me laugh at how unaware we are (myself included). Everybody lighten up
Just the point I signed up to make. Everyone's jumping down her throat to call her judgmental.
Lighten up indeed. Unless you are the subject or the photographer of those boudoir photos accompanying the article, then it's not a personal attack on you. Relax and move on. Cripes.
The article itself wasn't particularly noteworthy either way; my only comment on it would be to question the NSFW tag. Unless your workplace is in Salt Lake City, it's hard to see how it's NSFW.
The Kate Moss pic, hun. It has (shhh) boobies! Hide yo screen boys!
I'm ambivalent about this. I do think it's an extension of societal narcissism but isn't all photography (for our paying clients, at least)?
On the other hand, while I'm no prude and far from it, it does seem 'too much' and not ...... genuine. Taking pictures of the ceremony itself in a documentary style is awesome. Best pictures I've ever taken are that way. You NEVER know what you are going to end up with.
Morning after boudoir just smacks of something desperate to me. Kudos to the photographer for getting the commission and the gig but when I think of the morning after of my wedding as I lay there with my wife next to me as I drank coffee and nursed a slight hangover the last thing I would have wanted was to shave/shower/etc for a shoot....
It seems vain. It seems hollow. It seems ..... cheap?
It's an opinion piece, everyone has a right to their opinion. I disagree with the opinion. Points have already been made as to why this isn't a 'bad' or 'absurd' idea. For some photography is the memory of the day, but it's become more than that for others, they want to look like models in their albums...and that is vanity but we all except it. This service is taking that vanity to another level, but done with the right photographer and the right couple, can be done in a very tasteful way.
As for the grammar errors, I also think if you are a writer you've got to proof read your work. You haven't lost a reader (As in me) because of this, but it's good to get it done properly.
and some i diot s here said i tend to critizise.... the pot calling the cattle black.
kettle? cattle = cow.
Who can tell what you tend to do? You're illiterate.
I'm glad I'm not the only one thinking she's being very judgmental and prudish. I personally have taken erotic sessions of couples and enjoyed it WAY more than any boring portrait session I've ever done, so to each his own. If there's a market for it, serve it if its something you like shooting. I pretty much hate shooting weddings. And kids, and babies, and groups of kids, babies and wedding parties. If I can make a living photographing people having sex, by ALL MEANS I'm going to do it!
all of this article is smeared with arrogance and self importance. and when wolfgang tillmans is shooting he's anal beads, i dont hear you complaining. at art you cant make a statement what is wrong, only an opinion, so please whoever wrote it, clear your act.
The comment section should be called "Fstoppers' battlefield" :D
I totally agree with the autor, however in the end, consumer is the one in charge ;)
You're like an Fstoppers comment angel, Roman... Flit those wings!! :)
Which is worse- this photographic trend or the number of typos and grammatical errors in the post?
Opinions are opinions (although I do hold a fairly conservative view of this sort of thing myself)
BUT the invitations to Thanks Giving dinner will definately get a background check before an RSVP from now on! ROFL!
If you don't like it, shut up about it. I'm so tired hearing other photographers bitch and moan about what everyone else is doing. You don't like 'morning after' shoots, don't fucking do them. You don't like weddings, don't fucking shoot them. You don't like nature, landscape, sport, babies, porn, ect. DON'T FUCKING SHOOT THEM.
You speak about it being narcissistic? After reading this article, you clearly are the type of person who loves the sound of her voice and has to have an opinion about everything.
FStopper's is clearly lagging behind on the standards of their posts lately, especially that stupid tirade that girl wrote about craigslist photographers. I used to love coming to this sight to see cool, insightful videos, and now I look at pointless drivel like this?
C'mon FStoppers, get back on fucking track.
Why don't you follow your own logic? If you don't like the article, "shut up about it."
Umm. If they Pay me, I'll shoot it. Im there to make money not judge on morale issues.If you have too many moral issues, you shouldn't be in photography. Cause it's all about interpretation. Besides, they are PAYING CLIENTS!
sex is a part of life. it is beautiful, not distasteful. get over it.
Distasteful things are also "part of life". So... get over this silly argument.
I hope this is the last time we are presented with articles from this author.....
To quote South Park: "Really???? Really???? Really??????
As a photographer and as a potential client for this type of imagery, I see the value in steamy couples' boudoir photography. Sex is meaningful and beautiful and moving in a way that very few parts of life are. When I'm older and looking back, I want to remember this part of my life. Isn't that the purpose of photography?
Maybe that should remain on brain memory, not a memory card. Having someone photograph you in these moments doesn't alter your "meaningful and beautiful" experience?
Because...you don't want me to?
I like having photos of the things I want to remember.
You do not like what Lauren said? Great.
Think it is opinionated? Awesome. So is all the verbal rubbish posted here.
What happened to discussing a post in an adult manner without personal attacks?
Oh, and to those who made comments about Lauren having some sort of personal
agenda etc, most of what you read every day is written in a way to either
persuade or inform. This is called news. An objective view does not exist.
Granted, sometimes it is not as observable as here, it is there nonetheless.
Content analysis bit of semantics and some semiotics. Take the time to learn a
bit about writing and you will start noticing it everywhere.
Lauren, from a photographer who does not shoot weddings at all (I am a photojournalist
and do the death and mayhem stuff), I reckon this is not such a terrible idea.
Maybe it will add another service and hopefully a bit more money to every
wedding photographer. Think a few lenses and that trip to some photo stuck to a
wall. That said, I can see where you coming from regarding the bit about it
maybe staying in the bedroom. I do not think I would be comfortable or inclined
to look at my sister-in-law all over my brother on some bed. Does that make me
a prude then? mmm....I do not think so. Does it make me someone who makes a conscious
decision about what I want to see? Yip.
Bring on the next one. Make it about how you hate another new photography
trend. I'll sit somewhere in a hole where the internet usually do not work and
have an interesting read about something I have not seen before.
Actually an opinion piece, by it's very definition, is NOT news. Some "news" outlets seem confused about this.
All news today is op-ed... IMO
Chris, I don't know if I'd say all of it is but definitely more than it should be.
In the past op-ed pieces were clearly differentiated on the news and in newspapers and that doesn't seem to happen as much any more.
And as I stated below I don't have a problem with Lauren's piece or with FStoppers running it (even though I don't necessarily agree with her).
News is an opinion. The opinion of the photographer/writer/editor. The moment a writer/photographer/editor makes a decision to include something but exclude another he/she decides what is seen/read - thus an opinion of what happened/will happen. Turn the camera around/change word choice/run story/don't run story and it can be quite different.
All 'news' outlets do this. Some more, some less. There is actually no confusion in this.
I didn't say that news was not an opinion. News is supposed to be, to a high degree, objective but as you point out it is filtered (even unconsciously) through the individual who chooses to make the images or write the story. The decisions they make are based on their views of what the story is, their experiences, their morals, etc. So news can never be truly objective even if that is the primary goal.
I agree with you on that and I agree with most of your original comment.
I stated that an OPINION piece is not NEWS.
It's an opinion. Plain and simple.
There are definitely news organizations that throw a heavy dose of opinion out there under the guise of news. As the political system gets more polarized in the U.S. it seems to be happening more. I'm not saying this happens at most news outlets but there are some. I would say that either those organizations are confused about this or truly don't care.
And I wasn't bringing up this point to say that Lauren's piece shouldn't have a place on FStoppers. (However, they could possibly have had someone write a counterpoint to her opinion.)
Sorry about the late post but I just noticed the reply on the Disqus tab.