|
Forums >
Photography Talk >
Olympic portraits..
USOC invites top photographers to shoot official shots of team members and they are getting a lot of criticism over the "finished" results. What do you think? IMO most MM members could have done the same or better. http://solsticevisuals.com/post/2622983 … ted-states Do you think any of them are good? Jul 01 12 01:13 pm Link Dafuq? Really.... da fuq? Wronkled flag... ripped and dirty seamless... huh?  Jul 01 12 01:15 pm Link If those images are for real, that is a serious disappointment. I shoot sports portraits weekly, some with very limited time with the athletes and there is no way I would turn in images like the ones in that post to my editor. I am sure my editors would never hire me again if I turned those in. Jul 01 12 01:20 pm Link D S P wrote: from what it seems, it was an event where many photogaphers were invited, and open to take snapshots. Jul 01 12 01:24 pm Link Those and more are on CBS's website as well http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-33747_162-1 … l?tag=page And the images are from Getty Images! Jul 01 12 01:27 pm Link http://www.uspresswire.com/search/fullt … mmit/page1 Thankfully it appears there were some much better photos taken at this event. This is a link from another discussion board I just saw. Jul 01 12 01:27 pm Link Maybe the organization that hired the photographer didn't have a budget for the shoot. In that case, shame on the organization for hiring someone with no experience. Jul 01 12 01:28 pm Link Photos By Jody wrote: Those are much better. Jul 01 12 01:30 pm Link me voy wrote: Jul 01 12 01:35 pm Link D S P wrote: If they are selective then why was this photographer there in the first place? I put the blame on USOC for not doing their homework. My question is: how much are they paying? You get what you pay for. Jul 01 12 01:49 pm Link Good photography is not represented by these photos Think any photographer on MM would have been a better selection Jul 01 12 01:59 pm Link Robert Helm wrote: i dunno.... Jul 01 12 02:18 pm Link me voy wrote: It was prolly press day. They set up a bunch of backdrops & some lights & let the photographers & athletes go at it. I looked up the photographer who's images are in question (google images) & he seems a paparazzi type, who shoots events, but has no control over light, etc. Jul 01 12 02:19 pm Link I don't know, the photos all seem to show the same photographer in the credits. Jul 01 12 02:21 pm Link Mark Laubenheimer wrote: Maybe it's her secret weapon? Jul 01 12 02:24 pm Link Lee_Photography wrote: Some would. Just as I am sure there are shooters here that would not compare to his photojournalism talents. Jul 01 12 02:24 pm Link B L O P H O T O wrote: actually, i think it's the photographer's secret weapon.... Jul 01 12 02:39 pm Link I think this brings photography to a new low. I find it disrespectful to the athletes. Kevin Russo -Photographer www.KR-Photos.Com Jul 01 12 02:43 pm Link Wow, while I hate to criticize others work, those photos were very amateur. I had the honor of photographing two of our Olympians for an ad campaign for Frontier Communications this winter. I had to say that these two women were a complete delight to work with. Jul 01 12 02:44 pm Link Mark Laubenheimer wrote: now THAT is a fivehead. Jul 01 12 02:58 pm Link dp Jul 01 12 02:58 pm Link Any of Lolo Jones? I think she's smoking hot, errrr, I mean, a phenomenal athlete!  Jul 01 12 03:21 pm Link The were set up on a carpeted floor with 100 athletes passing through each station. There's no way the paper is going to survive that. The time it would take to pull it out more would use 25-50% of the shooting time. That explains the paper. I can't explain the lighting. Follow the links and you can see they had very little space, although it didn't seem to be a problem for the guy who shot the BTS photos. Jul 01 12 11:52 pm Link Those photos make Borat look like a professional.  . Jul 02 12 01:21 am Link In excusable. Jul 02 12 01:52 am Link me voy wrote: You mean the USOC? With sponsors like Visa, McDonalds, Coca-Cola and many many more huge corporations, trust me, they have the money. They may not have even paid them. Maybe the photographers did it on spec. It's says the photographers were invited. Didn't really say anything about being paid. Maybe they did it on spec in hopes to sell to news outlets. Not really sure myself. Jul 02 12 05:04 am Link Mike Collins wrote: small space and 4 minutes? imagine what al hirschfeld could do with a bic pen and a cocktail napkin.... Jul 02 12 07:42 am Link Bob Matin, a noted sports photographer had an interesting take on this "Klamar’s photos were taken at a media summit. These sessions are also known as “photo day” or “media day” and can be best described as organized chaos. Remember photo day in high school? It’s like that, except there’s dozens of photographers in a small area. At a recent Yankees “photo day,” space was so limited that photographer Nick Laham had to set up in a bathroom… and you’d never know it." http://www.sportsphotographer.net/sport … ic-photos/ Seems the photographer is a pretty good sports photographer who was way over his head for this type of assignment. Jul 02 12 11:42 am Link Go here and look at these: http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2012 … es/100307/ The solticevisuals photographs are probably just lighting test shots that were posted by someone that thought they had a scoop or something. Jul 02 12 11:44 am Link wow really ? They are the same level of quality if not better then what most of you all are complimenting as "sensual , exotic , erotic , so tender (two girls doing a 69), so edgy , so unique , So stunning , so incredible , so _________ .... same type of quality level if not better then what the majority of the people are asking "have I improved after 3 months and $$$$ of equipment ?" Never mentioning the wrinkled Bedsheets they are using instead of Proper backdrops . Never mentioning the Dust spots , just focusing in on the crappiness of the crotch or tits in the shot more then anything else. These are the same level of quality if not better then .... Jul 02 12 11:53 am Link Robert Helm wrote: WOW. Those SUCK. Jul 02 12 12:12 pm Link Jason Hamper wrote: Still not that impressive. Jul 02 12 12:13 pm Link Well as someone from across the water who will not be supporting your athlete's ( sorry ) and someone who is most definitely an amateur with lots to learn I have to say that I WOULD have been embarrassed to put these out as finished images ! I am damn sure I COULD have done better , or binned the lot ! Jul 02 12 12:33 pm Link These give me hope that someday I will have that guy's job. EDIT: more info here: http://photographyblog.dallasnews.com/2 … pmic.html/ Not ideal circumstances. 3 or 4 minutes per athlete. Very small area to work with multiple photographers working on top of each other. Kind of explains why the athletes look so distracted and the lighting is so crappy. Sounds like a MM group photo shoot..... I would blame the producers for providing measly 10x12 shooting bays to work in. Maybe OK for headshots, but forget about full length. EDIT AGAIN: Now that I see some of the other links (atlantic.com ,et, al.) I see there were many good shots from the day. I wonder if the OP solisticevisuals link was an elaborate hoax? Maybe an assistant released some outtakes? Jul 02 12 04:53 pm Link Didn't see one picture that would have made it off of my hard drive, and I'm a simple hobbyist! The guy should find a new day job. Jul 02 12 05:00 pm Link Escalante wrote: A little harsh and bitter here? Jul 03 12 11:06 am Link The Terry Richardson of sports photography? To be found next on SI. Jul 03 12 11:08 am Link GETTY must be proud. The photographer probally thought I am getting paid so what?? Jul 03 12 04:41 pm Link Kevin Russo Photography wrote: +1 Jul 03 12 04:50 pm Link There are only two shots in there that I think actually worked for the athlete. This one works for the diver as it looks like she is diving into a deep pool (based on pose and color of backdrop):  And the Judo girl as it kinda looks like she won a difficult Judo match.  Jul 03 12 04:58 pm Link |
