login info join!
Forums > Critique > Thoughts on my Fashion Photography? Search   Reply
first12
Photographer
B R U N E S C I
Posts: 25,319
Bath, England, United Kingdom


c_h_r_i_s wrote:
Define fashion ? it's what people are wearing

In that sense, yes, fashion per-se is about clothes. We've come to associate the word 'fashion' with what people wear.

However, it's a very common mistake to assume that by extension fashion photography is also primarily about clothes, because it's not. The purpose behind it may be to sell clothes (and other 'fashionable' items) but the clothes are the product, not the means used to sell them.

Catalogue photography is about clothes, yes, but catalogue photography is not fashion photography - it's photographs of fashion, and there's a big difference. By the time somebody is browsing a catalogue they've pretty much already decided to buy something. The photos are therefore merely illustrations of the products.




Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

Apr 16 13 02:43 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15,112
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom


In part of my reply I'd quoted R. Avedon also from someone who works in the fashion industry.

Some catalogue photography makes Vogue look cheap.
Apr 16 13 02:45 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Darren Brade
Posts: 2,746
London, England, United Kingdom


-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote:

No again.

Fashion photography is ALL about the model, but not in the same way that a portrait, glamour or commercial shot is.

Yes, fashion is about selling clothes, but you don't do that by focusing on the clothes - focus on the model, the mood, on creating aspiration to be the model (as opposed to glamour when you're creating aspiration to fuck the model) and you will sell anything (including clothes) to the target audience, which is of course 99.9% women.


Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

That was just a simplistic explanation I gave.

Apr 16 13 05:37 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15,112
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom


Does fashion photography have to have a model in it ?
Apr 16 13 06:45 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Project4145
Posts: 338
Phoenix, Arizona, US


-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote:
Fashion photography is ALL about the model, but not in the same way that a portrait, glamour or commercial shot is.

Yes, fashion is about selling clothes, but you don't do that by focusing on the clothes - focus on the model, the mood, on creating aspiration to be the model...


Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

I don't, and don't want to, shoot fashion but I have always wondered exactly what defined it.  Thanks, Stefano.  That was clear enough for even me to understand.  smile

Apr 17 13 11:37 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Azia Rose
Posts: 228
Portland, Oregon, US


I really just don't see fashion in your portfolio at all. I don't want to buy anything the models are wearing sad

My advice is to perhaps look for weirder, less conventionally pretty models who have a good wardrobe and let them show you how it's done! Less sunshine, more focused lighting and collaboration. There needs to be feeling behind the pictures, not just pretty smiles. All of these shots are very good for the models if they want to have a great facebook profile, but not very good for booking them or you any real fashion work.

Keep doing your research, keep shooting what you love and maybe you'll discover that "fashion" isn't really what you want to shoot after all! Your work is only great if it keeps you and your subjects happy smile
Apr 17 13 11:47 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Dave McDermott
Posts: 258
Coill Dubh, Kildare, Ireland


I have seen work from professional fashion photographers where the model is almost naked. It's usually about the clothes and makeup, but I have seen some so called "fashion" photos that are borderline glamour. Where do you draw the line? The facial expressions in fashion seem to be more serious or pouty too.

I mostly shoot portrait and glamour, but I remember doing one shoot with a model where she was wearing a nice dress and in a few of the shots she was holding a handbag. It started off as a portrait/glamour shoot, but some of the photos looked more like fashion to me.

I also did a portrait shoot outdoors where the model tried on a few different outfits. The first was jeans and a t-shirt. Then she put on a lovely yellow dress. No complications so far. But the third outfit was a pair of very short shorts and a tank top, so there was a lot more flesh on display. I remember thinking to myself, "Hymm... should I put this in my portrait album or my glamour album?"
May 05 13 02:28 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Yarden Harel
Posts: 115
Herzeliyya, Tel Aviv, Israel


1. I don't see any fashion photography.

2. Despite #1. I love the series of the woman in the Boho dress. Those images are well captured.

3. This is my least favorite.
http://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/110420/09/4daf0bc82f3f1_m.jpg

Too plain for me.
May 05 13 03:46 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Garry k
Posts: 26,728
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada


c_h_r_i_s wrote:
In part of my reply I'd quoted R. Avedon also from someone who works in the fashion industry.

Some catalogue photography makes Vogue look cheap.

Indeed

May 05 13 06:18 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Dave McDermott
Posts: 258
Coill Dubh, Kildare, Ireland


Would you consider these images fashion or glamour or a bit of both?

http://www.markderoophotography.com/PFstudio.php
May 05 13 01:25 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
A-M-P
Posts: 17,911
Orlando, Florida, US


I see no fashion
May 05 13 02:19 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
A-M-P
Posts: 17,911
Orlando, Florida, US


c_h_r_i_s wrote:
Does fashion photography have to have a llama in it ?

No

I'm actually working on a fashion editorial that has no llama.

May 05 13 02:20 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Aymee Chantelle
Posts: 13
Tampa, Florida, US


Most the styles are in right now but the big name fashion companies are getting ready for their fall lines now so it's skinny people in heavy coats, dark colors, couture, and no smiles.  I personally don't like the idea of a select few names telling me what to wear and apparently neither do a lot of people.  Smaller cities are starting to rise up in the fashion world and times are changing.  Here in Tampa there's a big boom for reconstructed, urban, and year round summer-wear.  You hardly ever see anyone in the New York, LA, London, or even the vomit coming out of  Miami.  Each region, body type, and culture has it's own fashion now.  The newer pics you have posted would fit in great here.  It all depends on what you plan on pursing.  If it's big name fashion then you will want to stick with the more rigid rules.  If it's local designers and rising fashion you are heading in the right direction and they certainly don't look like any senior pictures I've ever seen.
May 05 13 03:53 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
picturephotos
Posts: 521
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


Original Sin Photos wrote:
Hi all

I'm just wanting to see what you all think of my fashion photos and what I'm doing good and what I could improve on.

Thank you in advance.

As others have mentioned, your work looks more like portraiture than fashion (either editorial or commercial).  Have a look at the links Brunesci provided, and rethink the emphasis of your shoots:  It should be about the clothes, the accessories, the shoes, the style, the trend for that season - the model is merely one element in all of it, not the focal point.  Fashion photography is highly creative, but it's also all about selling things.

c_h_r_i_s wrote:
Does fashion photography have to have a model in it ?

No.  It's known as off-figure.

An argument can be made that fashion photography doesn't have to include clothes either, depending on the context, but that is a discussion for another thread.

Aymee Chantelle wrote:
I personally don't like the idea of a select few names telling me what to wear and apparently neither do a lot of people.

They aren't trying to tell you what to wear, they're trying to get you to buy their stuff, just like every other industry out there.  If enough people, like you, don't like what a major label is offering, they'll spend millions on market research figuring out what you do like.

/threadjack

May 05 13 04:57 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
AJScalzitti
Posts: 12,197
Atlanta, Georgia, US


c_h_r_i_s wrote:
Does fashion photography have to have a model in it ?

Nope, just say two great campaigns from Brooks Brothers and Ralph Lauren that do not.  Off Figure is usually part of a larger campaign mind you, but its part of fashion and very common in accessories

May 05 13 05:12 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
E H
Posts: 512
Calgary, Alberta, Canada


Your centering the model is a turn off (personally), except for the spinning dress image,,just something to think about. I do agree you do not have the 'fashion look', study it then shoot it...
May 05 13 05:29 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jorge Kreimer
Posts: 2,204
Los Angeles, California, US


-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote:
You don't have any fashion photos in your portfolio!

There are a few pleasant commercial shots and lots of pretty girls but nothing that most in the actual fashion industry would call "fashion".

Check out the following links to see where you need to be heading if you really want to shoot fashion.

www.fashiongonerogue.com
www.fashioncopious.com
www.models.com




Just my $0.02

Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

I have to agree with Stefano. There is no fashion in your port. Sorry.
Fashion can take very different styles. Check and compare the photography of Helmut Newton with Mario Testino. That will make it easier to understand fashion. Those two were, and are masters at it.

May 05 13 09:29 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Dobias Fine Art Photo
Posts: 1,675
Haddon Heights, New Jersey, US


I look at your photos and think, "Ba-donka-donk."

Have you considered hooking up with fashion designers?  It's not that you don't have good portraiture work.  But,....
May 06 13 03:55 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15,112
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom


Jorge Kreimer wrote:
I have to agree with Stefano. There is no fashion in your port. Sorry.
Fashion can take very different styles. Check and compare the photography of Helmut Newton with Mario Testino. That will make it easier to understand fashion. Those two were, and are masters at it.

In fact some of H. Newton's work was quiet ordinary catalogue type images. Mostly what you see of his work is show case.

MM mentality if it's not something you'd see in Vogue or aspire to by some famous photographer it isn't fashion.

May 06 13 04:44 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
AJScalzitti
Posts: 12,197
Atlanta, Georgia, US


c_h_r_i_s wrote:

In fact some of H. Newton's work was quiet ordinary catalogue type images. Mostly what you see of his work is show case.

MM mentality if it's not something you'd see in Vogue or aspire to by some famous photographer it isn't fashion.

Actually most of what we see from really amazing photograhers are their personal projects and not what pays the bills every week.

May 06 13 04:53 pm  Link  Quote 
first12   Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers