|
Forums >
General Industry >
What makes a fashion photo, Fashion?
Just wondering what you all thought. Jun 18 05 10:47 pm Link Posted by LaMarco Photo: Wait, wait! I think I know, if she has clothes on? Jun 18 05 10:51 pm Link Posted by Glamour Studio /Gary: Posted by LaMarco Photo: Wait, wait! I think I know, if she has clothes on? LMFAO no boobies, check..LOL Jun 18 05 10:53 pm Link Posted by LaMarco Photo: Posted by Glamour Studio /Gary: Posted by LaMarco Photo: Wait, wait! I think I know, if she has clothes on? LMFAO no boobies, check..LOL Unless she is Sybil Buck. Jun 18 05 11:02 pm Link Even a ball less dog thinks that is hot and fashion. Jun 18 05 11:17 pm Link Yeah I have seen a fair amount of "fashion" photos that really don't show the clothes if any clothes are actually on the model. Unless the clothes are represented in some manner that provokes interest seeking more information or in purchasing the clothes, then I have a hard time calling it a true fashion picture. Jun 18 05 11:33 pm Link style, & ATTITUDE. Jun 18 05 11:45 pm Link there are books with famous photographers with photos of models with no clothes and the title of the book is fashion. sorry for me it is all about the clothes or it is something else. that something else is often great but it is not Fashion to me. Jun 18 05 11:52 pm Link if it were just about the clothes, we could stick em on a hanger, take the picture and be done with it. Fashion imagery encompasses a lot more than just the clothing (or clothing line), it's advertising. Like any other advertising image it's meant to provoke an emotional want or need for the product. It doesn't always have to be litteral... and as of late it rarely is (did anyone see Fashioning Fiction at MoMA QNS last year?) The goal is to make you connect the clothing with the desire and story built into the image. The other thing to consider is that a fashion photo is rarely a stand alone, it's often part of a campaign that gives each individual shot a greater context. Think about how catalogs are layed out- you have all these shots with models, editorial style, portraying the desired brand image and lifestyle... obviously wearing the clothes, but not necessarily featuring them prominently...just to show you how friggin cool and awesome your life can be- then you have what are basically line sheets of the individual items shot close up on the adjecent pages so you know what to order. It's a whole package. - sorry, I over think this stuff a little too much sometimes- best, Justin Jun 18 05 11:53 pm Link It's the attitude of the model in the photo along with a few other things. If the model in the photo is saying F$%# Me....... it's glamour If the model in the photo is saying F#$% You...... it's fashion Glamour says F*&$ Me Fashion says F$#% You Jun 18 05 11:56 pm Link Someone here quoted someone else recently on MM: "Fashion is about the clothes - Glamour about the cleavage it creates." Jun 19 05 12:02 am Link Let's not for forget editorial fashion. Clothing and fashion mean little. Edit: Sorry Justin, I've just seen you have this covered already. Jun 19 05 12:02 am Link actually, yeah- the f$!% me / F*@$ you scenario is spot-on Jun 19 05 12:04 am Link Posted by Mary: i've always felt it was more like: Jun 19 05 01:05 pm Link Posted by Mary: I like that a lot.. Jun 19 05 03:40 pm Link Posted by Anthony Citrano: Posted by Mary: i've always felt it was more like: Interesting twists here. Must think things outs. Must decide which way to shoot more. Hmmmmm, is that smoke suppose to come out of my ears??? Jun 19 05 04:00 pm Link If the clothing/styling in the shot matters. Jun 19 05 06:35 pm Link The girl. The subject of the fashion photograph. You can have the ghosts of herb ritts and helmut newton work together with a thousand assistants and they won't be able to make an unphotgenic girl look fashion. Its all about the model you choose. Your casting is the most important part of your shoot. Jun 19 05 07:04 pm Link I have also read that if you do not take the photo in Med Format, its not fashion. How do you guys feel about that one? Great input everyone. Jun 20 05 07:37 am Link Posted by LaMarco Photo: Stop listening to Urbam Myths....it's not the camera size Jun 20 05 07:44 am Link I truly think that this is a very good question. For a great deal of talent in the world of the web; fashion equals a photographer, stylist, model & hair & make-up. In short it is a failed picture with no vision. A fashion image starts in the mind of the photographer whom can articulate a personal world of style with technique to back it up. Hence items worn (or not) plays a small role. By enlarge fashion is a fashionable word. And because of this, talent with no vision and or a strong point of view will ride on the backs of those whom look to create fashion images. Fashion images do not come easy. Pictures of model (with or without clothes) come by the ton. Maybe with questions, such as this, some talents may take a look into creating stronger work. Jun 20 05 08:47 am Link Fashion is not always about the clothes. Sometimes it's about the hair, sometimes it's about the mood, sometimes about the fragrance, sometimes about the makeup. Ever see topless models walking down the runway of a "fashion show?" It's all about an attitude that must be understood. Jun 20 05 10:53 am Link If the point of the image is to sell clothing (fashion), then it's a "fashion" image. The image can be executed in a variety of styles. What Fred refers to on the runway for instance and what you see in some (generally) european mags, I've coined as "contemptous fashion", as it ostensibly creates a desire in the consumer to have the feelings of the model, which is portrayed as complete contempt for the industry and the consumer. John Jun 20 05 11:38 am Link I think that it is the lack of understanding what is fashion, that leads to the herds of piss poor fashion images. If photographers would only take the time to learn, maybe, just maybe there would be some real excitement in the air. Define fashion as you want, however without any true effort to learn, the modern photographer is lost creating empty so called fashion images. Irving Penn once told me that photographers are on there own. I keep hoping that he is wrong. However, he is right and fashion images suck more than ever. I would like to believe that the web, could be a real place to share ideas & grow. A salon. A place where we can talk about the true essence of an image, be it fashion or not. The bottom line being that we all grow and increase each other's vision & point of view. Jun 20 05 12:26 pm Link Posted by Fred Brown: WFS.* Jun 21 05 11:25 am Link Posted by Chris Hansen: Posted by Anthony Citrano: Posted by Mary: i've always felt it was more like: Interesting twists here. Must think things outs. Must decide which way to shoot more. Hmmmmm, is that smoke suppose to come out of my ears??? In my view, f*ck you represents too much hostility. I don't think fashion should generally have hostility. But I do think that a certain... attitude is essential. And that attitude is an ethereal sense of almost... untouchableness? Mythology? And for that, f*ck off is a better descriptor. Jun 21 05 11:30 am Link Posted by Anthony Citrano: Posted by Chris Hansen: Posted by Anthony Citrano: Posted by Mary: i've always felt it was more like: Interesting twists here. Must think things outs. Must decide which way to shoot more. Hmmmmm, is that smoke suppose to come out of my ears??? In my view, f*ck you represents too much hostility. I don't think fashion should generally have hostility. But I do think that a certain... attitude is essential. And that attitude is a ethereal sense of almost... untouchableness? Mythology? For that, f*ck off is a better descriptor. WAS.* Jun 21 05 02:33 pm Link |
