Over at A Photo Editor, the question was raised, should someone who is shooting weddings but trying to get into commercial work show their wedding photography.
For some reason it has always seemed to me that being a wedding photographer has not been looked upon favorably by other areas of the photography world. In fact I have been advised by more than a few people to avoid letting editors, AD’s, galleries, etc know that I shoot weddings!
While the answers given by the panel of experts was interesting, the discussion in the comment thread is much more so. Outside of one troll comment, there has been some great points of view from a variety of sources, including our own John Mireles, who got into wedding photography after starting out as a commercial photography. John says “I just shoot whatever I want. I really don’t care about labels so long as I’m creating work that I love.”
Are the walls we build between commercial photography and wedding photography and fine art photography useful? Or do they just create divisions? Is specializing in one style of shooting helpful or harmful? Does it help me as a wedding photographer, for instance, to have shot outdoor adventure and landscape for years, or does one have no bearing on the other? Should we, as photographers be able to pick up a camera and do most anything, or is it okay to say “That’s not the way I shoot, can I refer you to this photographer instead?”
Pick up the discussion below, or go comment over at A Photo Editor blog.
Back Home
2 Comments at "Controversy of Balance Weddings vs Commercial"
Traditionally what do the majority of photographers choose to shoot when they first think they’re good enough to go pro? It’s certainly not commercial work. It’s not aerials, architecture, food, corporate, fashion, magazine editorials, press.
It’s weddings.
Why is that?
I don’t think it’s just commercial photographers who look down on the wedding industry…
Mark,
The questions you have posed are questions the commercial genres have posed and answered many years ago (the 90′s). The conclusion most came to understand is the importance of having your own vision & signature style. How many wedding photographers have a unique vision?
Whether or not you think boundaries are useful, may not matter. The markets will decide.
Consider this paradigm.
You are the owner of a well respected French Restaurant, with frequent regular customers. You are looking for a chef. Salary is secondary, quality is primary. You have a high level of expectations, as do your customers.
Some of the applicants include:
- A Sushi chef
- A Tandoor chef
- A Cajun chef
- A recent graduate of The French Culinary Institute
- A first rate Nouvelle chef current working at another French kitchen
- A short order cook
- A Szechuan chef
Who would your first choice be for new chef (all other things being equal)?
This example is similar to the decisions of a AD, CD, or PE. There is no lack of very qualified photographers already working in these genres. Why would those looking to hire take a chance on anything less than exactly what they need? ADs have been fired for hiring photographers that do not perform well. It is one thing to create your own pretty pictures, and quite another to create a specific communication for a specific concept (with your unique style) on time on budget.
The boundaries are there to help communicate. Coming back to the paradigm of food. When you go to a Sushi restaurant you expect a specific type of food. If they serve enchiladas, burritos, and nachos you might consider a different place next time you go for Sushi.
Comment Now!