Model
Kayla Donia
Posts: 185
Vancouver, Washington, US
American Apparel Add Campaigns... I'm very interested in getting an opinion on these adds. We have all this talk about GWC's, and after seeing these adds, they all look like GWC photos to me... What does everyone else think? http://www.americanapparel.net/gallery/ … index.html
Photographer
Chip Miller
Posts: 155
Brooklyn, New York, US
Terry Richards!
Never liked his work anyway!
Model
pamela mars
Posts: 1719
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Suzan Aktug wrote:
American Apparel Add Campaigns...
I'm very interested in getting an opinion on these adds. We have all this talk about GWC's, and after seeing these adds, they all look like GWC photos to me...
What does everyone else think?
http://www.americanapparel.net/gallery/ … index.html i love that look!
it's very basic, clean and honest.
i don't think that company wants a high fashion look-so it really works for them.
Photographer
Mann Made Imagery
Posts: 5281
Lubbock, Texas, US
Chip Miller wrote:
Terry Richards!
Never liked his work anyway! It does look like his style. Honestly, I don't like a lot of his work but there's a few that I do. VERY RARE, but yeah.
Photographer
former_mm_user
Posts: 5521
New York, New York, US
this has been done already, quite thoroughly. search the forums.
Photographer
John Van
Posts: 3122
Vienna, Wien, Austria
It must be genius, because he got paid big bucks for it.
Photographer
Mclain D Swift
Posts: 1279
Black Diamond, Alberta, Canada
I don't like it at all--nothing more than snap shots. I can give my camera to any one and they can produce those images. I certainly hope this photographer doesn't shoot like that all the time and make big bucks. Maybe that's the type of images that particular shoot called for?
Photographer
Meehan
Posts: 2463
Merrimack, New Hampshire, US
Model
e-string
Posts: 24002
Kansas City, Missouri, US
Considering the behavior of the company's creator and some of those who work for him... GWC.
Photographer
Stacy Leigh
Posts: 3064
New York, New York, US
Meehan wrote:
Ads I hope so....because I kinda' think they stink!! And some of the shots give me the willies- too young models in really provocative poses, makes me feel like I should look away.
*Please don't anybody pick on me for my opinion 
Stacy Leigh
Photographer
Cassandra Panek
Posts: 1569
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US
it occurs to me that sometimes it take a lot of work to make it look like no work went into it at all.
Photographer
former_mm_user
Posts: 5521
New York, New York, US
JvR wrote:
It must be genius, because he got paid big bucks for it. no, dov shoots them himself to avoid spending big bucks on a photographer.
Photographer
former_mm_user
Posts: 5521
New York, New York, US
Mac Swift wrote:
I don't like it at all--nothing more than snap shots. I can give my camera to any one and they can produce those images. *sigh*
no, you couldn't.
Photographer
Things To Look At
Posts: 44
New York, New York, US
The question is, do you find the people in the photos attractive? Never mind what seems to be crappy framing, technique, or lighting, etc.
He is good at making people look attractive, as though they were real, genuine, attractive people. And because his style is so low brow and GWC, it heightens the viewers belief that they are actually really cool, sexy "normal" girls.
I'm big on glamour and polish myself, but I think its a great ad campaign. ...he's good.
x,
burke.
Photographer
BonedaddyBruce
Posts: 475
Orlando, Florida, US
Looks like typical MySpace self ports and webcam shots to me at a glance....
...After looking at a few of the slide shows.... I still think it's typical of MySpace... Even has out of focus shots and shots of nothing relating to the model or clothes.
Photographer
CLT
Posts: 12979
Winchester, Virginia, US
It's a marketing scheme. It's not about photography. Publicity, like we're doing here. It's a tool for people to talk about their company, their products, etc. If it wasn't for MM, I would have never even heard of American Appearals.
This doesn't qualify as GWC, according to MM's definition. Despite that they are in line with GWC's style and quality, the existence of those pictures were not to get girls to undress, but for commercial marketing.
Photographer
Gems of Nature in N Atl
Posts: 1334
North Atlanta, Georgia, US
If the concept sells, then its good. It's all about the money.
Photographer
BonedaddyBruce
Posts: 475
Orlando, Florida, US
Things To Look At wrote:
The question is, do you find the people in the photos attractive? Never mind what seems to be crappy framing, technique, or lighting, etc.
He is good at making people look attractive, as though they were real, genuine, attractive people. And because his style is so low brow and GWC, it heightens the viewers belief that they are actually really cool, sexy "normal" girls.
I'm big on glamour and polish myself, but I think its a great ad campaign. ...he's good.
x,
burke. IMO...Some of them are attractive in that "natural and real" style you speak of... Some where just bad.
Over all... they where GWC style. Although there is SOME technical merit in several of the images my opinion.
Would I call it good work?... Not from a professional stance, but from an ad campaign?.... for the target audience?.... Yes.
Photographer
hallopino
Posts: 666
Palatine, Illinois, US
I've had a client actually show me these photos before and ask for something like that.
So public likes them, and there is a paycheck in it.
Model
e-string
Posts: 24002
Kansas City, Missouri, US
CLT wrote:
It's a marketing scheme. It's not about photography. Publicity, like we're doing here. It's a tool for people to talk about their company, their products, etc. If it wasn't for MM, I would have never even heard of American Appearals.
This doesn't qualify as GWC, according to MM's definition. Despite that they are in line with GWC's style and quality, the existence of those pictures were not to get girls to undress, but for commercial marketing. Actually if you know about the company, the owner has had many lawsuits filed against him for sexual harrassment - he has even slept with several employees, and he has this weird business model where he encourages sex in the workplace. I'm not sure if that includes his models, but I do know that he finds most of them by just approaching girls on the street that he thinks are hot. It wouldn't surprise me if he was sleeping with them as well (or trying to).
Photographer
Halcyon 7174 NYC
Posts: 20109
New York, New York, US
I want to know if the croping is done in-camera by the photographers, or later by highly skilled editors that work for AA. I think that would be a key to answering some of the other questions about the intelligence in the images.
In other words, is it odd lighting plus innovative framing, or odd lighting plus refinement by professional graphic designers. Maybe a little of both.
Photographer
CLT
Posts: 12979
Winchester, Virginia, US
e-string wrote:
Actually if you know about the company, the owner has had many lawsuits filed against him for sexual harrassment - he has even slept with several employees, and he has this weird business model where he encourages sex in the workplace. I'm not sure if that includes his models, but I do know that he finds most of them by just approaching girls on the street that he thinks are hot. It wouldn't surprise me if he was sleeping with them as well (or trying to). I am aware of those lawsuits. I am also aware that the owner took those photos himself. His motivations are certainly questionable. "Certainly questionable" did I just say that? I did. LOL. Anyway, moving on... If we call him a GWC, it would be Guy With Company. Those girls posed for him not because he had a camera, but because he had a company and that the pictures were going to be on a website, a promise to be made famous, if you will.
Model
e-string
Posts: 24002
Kansas City, Missouri, US
CLT wrote:
I am aware of those lawsuits. I am also aware that the owner took those photos himself. His motivations are certainly questionable. "Certainly questionable" did I just say that? I did. LOL. Anyway, moving on... If we call him a GWC, it would be Guy With Company. Those girls posed for him not because he had a camera, but because he had a company and that the pictures were going to be on a website, a promise to be made famous, if you will. See, I think that does fit perfectly with the definition of GWC.
Photographer
James Graham
Posts: 741
Brooklyn, New York, US
Do you mean Terry Richardson?
And I don't think it's him...
Photographer
CLT
Posts: 12979
Winchester, Virginia, US
Ched wrote:
I want to know if the croping is done in-camera by the photographers, or later by highly skilled editors that work for AA. I think that would be a key to answering some of the other questions about the intelligence in the images.
In other words, is it odd lighting plus innovative framing, or odd lighting plus refinement by professional graphic designers. Maybe a little of both. I tend to believe it's the post production.
Photographer
Steve Bevacqua
Posts: 216
Saugus, Massachusetts, US
The stuff's kinda creepy imho. Kind of makes me think of what Larry Flynt would do if he ever moved into the fashion world.
Photographer
former_mm_user
Posts: 5521
New York, New York, US
e-string wrote:
See, I think that does fit perfectly with the definition of GWC. oh boy. i thought gwcs all used digital slrs and big softboxes because they want to be like "the pros". i've never seen a gwc make an engaging snapshot, as it is much harder to do, and actually requires "vision".
Photographer
CLT
Posts: 12979
Winchester, Virginia, US
e-string wrote:
See, I think that does fit perfectly with the definition of GWC. You know how I love to agree with you ;-) lol
EDIT: Corporate culture aside, it is still... all about marketing. Overlapping happens. There's no saying that a talented, skilled, experienced, professional photographer can't be a pervert. And there's no saying that a successful entrepreneur can't be one either.
Model
e-string
Posts: 24002
Kansas City, Missouri, US
Christopher Bush wrote:
oh boy. i thought gwcs all used digital slrs and big softboxes because they want to be like "the pros". i've never seen a gwc make an engaging snapshot, as it is much harder to do, and actually requires "vision". I'm talking about the MM definition.
American Apparel's pictures are engaging? Not for me. Definitely no more engaging than any GWC's snapshots. Vision? That almost made me laugh. All that guy cares about is money and sex. That's not vision, and using snapshot-like ads is not that creative.
Model
e-string
Posts: 24002
Kansas City, Missouri, US
CLT wrote:
You know how I love to agree with you ;-) lol
EDIT: Corporate culture aside, it is still... all about marketing. Overlapping happens. There's no saying that a talented, skilled, experienced, professional photographer can't be a pervert. And there's no saying that a successful entrepreneur can't be one either. I know that more than anyone. A talented, skilled, experienced, and professional (not to mention established) photographer tried to have sex with me during a shoot. So by one definition, he is a GWC. And by another (which includes image quality), he's not... just a pro photographer who is also a predator.
Photographer
former_mm_user
Posts: 5521
New York, New York, US
e-string wrote:
I'm talking about the MM definition.
American Apparel's pictures are engaging? Not for me. Definitely no more engaging than any GWC's snapshots. Vision? That almost made me laugh. All that guy cares about is money and sex. That's not vision, and using snapshot-like ads is not that creative. i don't what the mm definition is, but the vast majority of bad "photographers" on this site could not take a good snapshot, and they would deride anyone who does.
and yes, the american apparel ads are quite effective because they are well-executed. i wouldn't say genius, but i could name a few other frequent snapshooters that are.
Photographer
CLT
Posts: 12979
Winchester, Virginia, US
e-string wrote:
I know that more than anyone. A talented, skilled, experienced, and professional (not to mention established) photographer tried to have sex with me during a shoot. So by one definition, he is a GWC. And by another (which includes image quality), he's not... just a pro photographer who is also a predator. Just curious, would you rather shoot with a t,s,e, pro who is a little perverted, and recieve high quality, artistic images, OR shoot with an amateur who's the nicest guy you know, and receive only mediocre imaghes?
Model
e-string
Posts: 24002
Kansas City, Missouri, US
Christopher Bush wrote:
i don't what the mm definition is, but the vast majority of bad "photographers" on this site could not take a good snapshot, and they would deride anyone who does.
and yes, the american apparel ads are quite effective because they are well-executed. i wouldn't say genius, but i could name a few other frequent snapshooters that are. The definition is under Info > FAQ's.
Model
e-string
Posts: 24002
Kansas City, Missouri, US
CLT wrote:
Just curious, would you rather shoot with a t,s,e, pro who is a little perverted, and recieve high quality, artistic images, OR shoot with an amateur who's the nicest guy you know, and receive only mediocre imaghes? Well I do work with pro guys who are a little perverted and get me great pictures. I also shoot with some very nice guys whose images are sometimes not of a quality I feel can add to my portfolio.
The guy I'm talking about is in neither of those categories. He literally tried to have sex with me. That's not "a little perverted".
Photographer
former_mm_user
Posts: 5521
New York, New York, US
e-string wrote:
The definition is under Info > FAQ's. i can't believe i'm actually arguing about this, but...
that definition says nothing about technical prowess. i maintain that most "gwc"s on this site would never shoot without "proper lighting".
Model
e-string
Posts: 24002
Kansas City, Missouri, US
Christopher Bush wrote:
i can't believe i'm actually arguing about this, but...
that definition says nothing about technical prowess. i maintain that most "gwc"s on this site would never shoot without "proper lighting". Really? Have you ever seen one shoot? Because I shot with quite a few back when I was a newer model. None of them had professional lighting. The best one had was a shitty light from Home Depot.
And it does say "amateur". But I wasn't even focusing on the technical skills. I was just saying that the snapshot ads aren't that engaging, creative, etc.
In my own mind, a GWC doesn't usually shell out that much $ for professional lights, etc. But a few do... and some pro guys are mainly in it for sex.
Photographer
CLT
Posts: 12979
Winchester, Virginia, US
e-string wrote:
Well I do work with pro guys who are a little perverted and get me great pictures. I also shoot with some very nice guys whose images are sometimes not of a quality I feel can add to my portfolio.
The guy I'm talking about is in neither of those categories. He literally tried to have sex with me. That's not "a little perverted". no no no, I'm not talking about past experiences. I'm asking if you were to take a new assignment, which would you prefer, as if those were the only two choices?
Photographer
Garald Todd
Posts: 67
Dubai, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Meh, looks like the intro shots for a soft core porn set, for the most part. Which, from an advertising point of view, is probably brilliant. Afterall, porn is rather popular.
Certainly not my style, by any stretch, but it has it's own appeal, if not a certain degree of creep factor. The Vanessa set in particular. The big socks and the bubblegum/posing etc seems like it's right out of the movie "The Cheerleaders".
The shower/wet t-shirt set... wha???
I dunno, not a bad thing I suppose, but doesn't make me wanna buy cloths:P.
-G
EDIT: Just notice, he even used a porn star (Lauren Phoenix) for one of the shoots. /shrug - Sex sells.
Model
e-string
Posts: 24002
Kansas City, Missouri, US
CLT wrote:
no no no, I'm not talking about past experiences. I'm asking if you were to take a new assignment, which would you prefer, as if those were the only two choices? Slightly perverted with great pictures. Hell, even I'm slightly perverted. I don't see that as a big problem if a photographer is too. lol
If he's a sexual predator, then it's a different story. I'll take the nice guy over that. (Unless the predator is a female photographer.)
Photographer
CLT
Posts: 12979
Winchester, Virginia, US
e-string wrote:
Slightly perverted with great pictures. Hell, even I'm slightly perverted. I don't see that as a big problem if a photographer is too. lol
If he's a sexual predator, then it's a different story. I'll take the nice guy over that. (Unless the predator is a female photographer.) Wow. I just learned a few things about you that I don't know how to properly process. Um... wanna shoot?
|
