Photographer harshly criticized for ‘shoddy’ Olympic portraits

Simon photo said:
If the photographer in question created this look intentionally then he has woven meaning into the way they look, if it was unintentional then fine im wrong.
Click to expand...

what meaning is interwoven in the way they look? What meaning is interwoven in taking the shot and not removing creases from a white sheet of material?
 
I can't believe people are still going on about it.

Here's the deal.

He's a press photographer.

He took these photos as a press photographer.

They are crap.

They were most likely supposed to look like magazine shots.

He / the company didn't do any kind of post processing.

He failed miserably and now has a bad rep for portraits.

Bottom line is, a photo journalist that does that every day shouldn't have been working on this particular job and the evidence prices it.

That's it...
 
Phil Young said:
I can't believe people are still going on about it.

Here's the deal.

He's a press photographer.

He took these photos as a press photographer.

They are crap.

They were most likely supposed to look like magazine shots.

He / the company didn't do any kind of post processing.

He failed miserably and now has a bad rep for portraits.

Bottom line is, a photo journalist that does that every day shouldn't have been working on this particular job and the evidence prices it.

That's it...
Click to expand...

if only they'd gone to you in the first place ,,
 
Simon photo said:
If there is meaning i think i know what he's trying to say
If not then like i said i will be wrong.
Click to expand...

surely there is either meaning or there isn't.

You are saying that you are either getting his meaning or that you are inventing meaning that isn't actually there.

That doesn't make any sense
 
joescrivens said:
surely there is either meaning or there isn't.

You are saying that you are either getting his meaning or that you are inventing meaning that isn't actually there.

That doesn't make any sense
Click to expand...

Who knows! I know what i get from the images and im happy with that, if other people can't see what i see its not anyone's fault, its not right or wrong.
Attacking the guy who shot these is however still wrong. He probably doesn't give a flying **** what anyone thinks to be honest especially what a handful of amateur photographers think!

When damien hurst pickled his shark
And when Tracy emin made her bed
Do you really think they were concerned about what the general ignorant were going to think or say about it?? NO they did it because it was what they wanted to do, the way they wanted to do it and as a result have written themselves into the history books, rightly or wrongly they still made an impact
 
Simon photo said:
Attacking the guy who shot these is however still wrong. He probably doesn't give a flying **** what anyone thinks to be honest especially what a handful of amateur photographers think!
Click to expand...

Why is it wrong? Why aren't we allowed to voice our opinion if we don't like the images? Why is it ok to voice an opinion of how much you like the photos but not ok to voice an opinion about how much you hate a photo?

and if he doesn't care either way what people think then what harm is it doing by voicing an opinion one way or another?

Simon photo said:
When damien hurst pickled his shark
And when Tracy emin made her bed
Do you really think they were concerned about what the general ignorant were going to think or say about it?? NO they did it because it was what they wanted to do, the way they wanted to do it and as a result have written themselves into the history books, rightly or wrongly they still made an impact
Click to expand...

Why are the people who don't like their work the ignorant ones? Not liking something doesn't make you ignorant.
 
Last edited:
joescrivens said:
Why is it wrong? Why aren't we allowed to voice our opinion if we don't like the images? Why is it ok to voice an opinion of how much you like the photos but not ok to voice an opinion about how much you hate a photo?

Why are the people who don't like their work the ignorant ones? Not liking something doesn't make you ignorant.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between voicing an opinion and down right attacking.

The general ignorant are, man woman and child, the world over.
 
Ok so my general ignorant comment makes me sound like a sociopath lol
What i mean is, a football fan may consider me ignorant due to my blood boiling dislike of football and my unwillingness to even give it a go.
I don't attack or debase anyone who loves it its just my opinion.
And likewise with art.
 
Shocking amount of elitism and snobbery in this thread. General ignorant, not being able to tell difference between good and bad etc,.

And yes some controversial artists have found fame and subsequent appreciation as they were maybe ahead of their time (this has happened all through time with many art forms) however these images are not in that camp - at all.
 
Simon photo said:
Ok so my general ignorant comment makes me sound like a sociopath lol
What i mean is, a football fan may consider me ignorant due to my blood boiling dislike of football and my unwillingness to even give it a go.
I don't attack or debase anyone who loves it its just my opinion.
And likewise with art.
Click to expand...

you have no interest in football whatsoever so therefore you would never enter into a conversation about it. In this thread here everyone is interested in photography and this is one section of photography.

The correct analagy would be that you do like football but can't stand manchester united, so on a football forum you engage in discussion about how much you dislike manchester united. You would be entitled to voice your opinion as loudly as you wanted to in that instance
 
joescrivens said:
you have no interest in football whatsoever so therefore you would never enter into a conversation about it. In this thread here everyone is interested in photography and this is one section of photography.

The correct analagy would be that you do like football but can't stand manchester united, so on a football forum you engage in discussion about how much you dislike manchester united. You would be entitled to voice your opinion as loudly as you wanted to in that instance
Click to expand...

Of course i engage in conversations about football, i air my opinion. Just because i don't support a team or know who manages who won't stop me having my say about the aspects i feel strongly about but that won't stop people thinking im ignorant either.
 
I don't know the full circumstances but is it maybe a possibility that the press somehow got hold of the shots before PP and made the naive assumption (like many do) that a photo shoot is done as soon as the shots are in the camera. It seems very strange that the photographer who clearly has experience would put these out in this current form. Unless we are missing a significant fact that would give these images some context or maybe I'm thinking to much into it.
 
Simon photo said:
Of course i engage in conversations about football, i air my opinion. Just because i don't support a team or know who manages who won't stop me having my say about the aspects i feel strongly about but that won't stop people thinking im ignorant either.
Click to expand...

at this point i feel like you are arguing for the sake or arguing so i am going to step out.

cheers
 
I guess with all the armchair professionals on this forum then this set was destined to get slammed with the "i could have done better" comments.
Thing is, none of us did it, most won't ever get the chance to do it and while we all go back to shooting photos of water drops and light painting mumbling on about it. the guy that's on EVERYONE'S lips right now is in another country, possibly somewhere nice and hot, perhaps with sand between his toes working on assignments we can only dream of.
 
yeah but hes on everyones lips for doing a crap job (whether we agree he did or not thats whats largely being said) was that really a clever reputation to get ?

'nah dont hire him he did those crap olympic shots, remember'

Like i said before those who say theres no such thing as bad publicity should look at gerald ratner and 'all my jewelry is crap'
 
I still believe these images are intentional.
Take a look at a trained concert pianist. They would struggle to play a piece they know inside out wrongly.
Les Dawson was a master at this though and had to work hard at hitting the wrong notes at the right time. This is why i feel these were intentional. Thy guy knows how to shoot and can produce some great work, understands composition and light and how to focus a camera. For him to just turn out shoddy work as the op coined it would have been if anything difficult and deliberate. He would have naturally avoided bad backgrounds, he would have made the most of the situation naturally.
And as for the missed post process stage comments, how much do you think you can actually repair an image in photo shop lol!
 
Im seriously beginning to think we have just missed his point here. Klamar is at worst a competent and capable photographer, at best an award winner - these are not the mistakes of either of those personalities.
 
donutagain said:
if only they'd gone to you in the first place ,,
Click to expand...

Me, you, anyone else but this guy out seems!

Oh...and the guys that like these terrible photos, they may even try to replicate it...which is good because there'll be more work for people that will do a good job.

And before you say it...yes, like me :)

Now unleash the attack!!!
 
ohhhh the snobbery in this thread :) awsome read.

I really like them, the only ones i dont really go for are the ones where he plonked them down in front of the flag and tried to make them look like standard portraits. I just love the style and look of the rest. The roughness of the backgrounds and environment contrast really well with the professionalism of the subjects essentially. This isnt portraiture, its photo journalism in a studio.

Would people criticise Don McCullin for not processing his images? Come on, open your minds a little.

Now unleash the attack!!!
Click to expand...
So you are just making comments in order to stoke flames? well done.
 
Last edited:
Simon photo said:
I still believe these images are intentional.
Take a look at a trained concert pianist. They would struggle to play a piece they know inside out wrongly.
Les Dawson was a master at this though and had to work hard at hitting the wrong notes at the right time. This is why i feel these were intentional. Thy guy knows how to shoot and can produce some great work, understands composition and light and how to focus a camera. For him to just turn out shoddy work as the op coined it would have been if anything difficult and deliberate. He would have naturally avoided bad backgrounds, he would have made the most of the situation naturally.
And as for the missed post process stage comments, how much do you think you can actually repair an image in photo shop lol!
Click to expand...

You seem to be terribly hung up on the photographers intention. Does a bad picture suddenly become a good picture if it's what the photographer intended? If Cheryl Cole intends her records to sound crap, does that them good?

I'd say it doesn't. I stand by my comment that they're bad pictures. Badly composed, badly lit and badly finished. That's not "attacking" the photographer. It's just saying I don't like these pictures. If the photographer is happy with them, then that's great, I'm happy for him, but I still don't like them. Is that really so wrong?
 
My honest opinion is that the images in question are a big old two fingered salute to convention
Like i said the guy can and does shoot good stuff and these don't fit in.
So the two fingered salute to the norm reads to me like this.
They all have elements of normal generic sports portraits but all are flawed in some way.
Gel lighting on the backgrounds poor composition. Standard pose, ripped backdrop, low key images with poor lighting.
And the fact that he hasn't made a public statement yet probably means he's having a good old chuckle to himself.
 
Iris said:
Im seriously beginning to think we have just missed his point here. Klamar is at worst a competent and capable photographer, at best an award winner - these are not the mistakes of either of those personalities.
Click to expand...

Come on, I take bad shots every photoshoot, you only see the good ones I've spent time editing.

What if I was hired to do a rush job and in my contract I was told to hand over the images straight after and some of my bad shots were published? I wouldn't look too great either because I still "made the shot" but because it wasn't edited, the bad shot sticks out like a sort thumb.

In my opinion, had someone spent time editing these he could have avoided such bad criticism...but obviously not.

Maybe he is a good photographer I don't know, although it appears so from reading this post. However, that doesn't mean every shot a good photographer takes is going to be good.

Joe McNally said out of 250 shots, a client may like 25% and not all of your shoots will be good, some you will test etc...maybe these were testers, handed over and published...who knows, but they are still bad shots whatever the excuse / story.
 
you only see the good ones I've spent time editing.
Click to expand...

had someone spent time editing these he could have avoided such bad criticism
Click to expand...

so either youre incapable of taking a good photo or you dont think photos are good unless theyve been processed?
 
Simon photo said:
Take a look at Chris bucks portrait of billy Bob thornton
http://www.aphotoeditor.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/billy_bob_thornton_chris_buck-275x350.jpg
A great image in my opinion but if you want to pick holes then really its not perfect but that doesn't mean much. Lets see what the backdrop police say about this lol
Click to expand...

I don't think it's about backgrounds, it's missed focus, uneven exposure and ugly shadows for me. Like I said earlier, if he had taken the Photojournalist route then he wouldn't have posed them. He told the subject where to stand. It may not have been a 'proper' photo shoot, but as a Photojournalist one would think he knows how to get a good portrait in difficult light. :shrug:

Simon photo said:
Who knows! I know what i get from the images and im happy with that, if other people can't see what i see its not anyone's fault, its not right or wrong.
Click to expand...

Do you approach every poor shot with such an open mind, or is it reserved for professionals who unexpectedly got something wrong, or 'may' me being arty? :shrug:

Simon photo said:
When damien hurst pickled his shark
And when Tracy emin made her bed ...........

rightly or wrongly they still made an impact
Click to expand...

After their initial work, those two were expected to deliver challenging work, a person who is a Photojournalist is expected to get a pretty good image in almost any situation.

Maybe he has chosen to go down the art route, and this has certainly had some impact. :eek: :LOL:



And just to point out again, the image in the link showing the image of the woman in front of the flag is not be the same Photographer, and was intended to show what the 'normal' image of Athletes (particularly American I think ;)) look like.
 
Phil Young said:
Come on, I take bad shots every photoshoot, you only see the good ones I've spent time editing.

What if I was hired to do a rush job and in my contract I was told to hand over the images straight after and some of my bad shots were published? I wouldn't look too great either because I still "made the shot" but because it wasn't edited, the bad shot sticks out like a sort thumb.

In my opinion, had someone spent time editing these he could have avoided such bad criticism...but obviously not.

Maybe he is a good photographer I don't know, although it appears so from reading this post. However, that doesn't mean every shot a good photographer takes is going to be good.

Joe McNally said out of 250 shots, a client may like 25% and not all of your shoots will be good, some you will test etc...maybe these were testers, handed over and published...who knows, but they are still bad shots whatever the excuse / story.
Click to expand...

Bad shots every shoot yes, edited keepers yes, but do you think the images in this series are capable of being edited to an "industry" standard should there ever be one?
 
redhed17 said:
And just to point out again, the image in the link showing the image of the woman in front of the flag is not be the same Photographer, and was intended to show what the 'normal' image of Athletes (particularly American I think ;)) look like.
Click to expand...

yes.. and it's not exactly a great example of how it 'should' look either. The flag looks like it's been in the kitchen drawer for 6 months.

i can't believe people are still banging on about the backgrounds / exposure / lighting / posing / lack of PP.... you can't honestly think that he's tried to get perfect pictures and failed miserably? Can you? :shrug:
 
Phil Young said:
Me, you, anyone else but this guy out seems!

Oh...and the guys that like these terrible photos, they may even try to replicate it...which is good because there'll be more work for people that will do a good job.

And before you say it...yes, like me :)

Now unleash the attack!!!
Click to expand...

but hypothetically there are 1,000 photographers probably within a 1 hour drive of where you're photographing your client, it's just luck/reputation that you got the job. With photographs like these, which aren't the 'norm' there's every chance a client may specifically wish for that style, and as the only professional photographer in the world able to deliver amateur-esque results time and time again (a true amateur would never be able to shoot the same bad photo twice) you'll get flown accross the world on an all expenses paid trip

just look at Terry Richardson, the guy is known for flatly lit, shockingly posed images, but before that he shot wonderfully lit flattering photos for vogue, but he didn't get famous because he was just doing the same as everyone else, he developed his style and that's his trademark, he gets booked to shoot that way, just like I get paid to shoot my way, people come to me when ABCphotography and XYZphotography are giving them boring photos, they come to me when they want one of the few professional photographers with a fine art sensibility


to the amateur photographers and the weekend warriors, the technically perfect image is somehow king- but when you shoot all day every day you can learn to shoot that way in a week, and bang out technically perfect images every single time, they're not special or sacred anymore, they're just normal- it's the off kilter shots that are interesting, it's the 'just got out of bed' look that's difficult to master compared to just slicking your hair back with some gel

but yes also it's all about the client- I photograph artists, and my clients don't want to always look like smiling politicians or actors headshots.
 
Last edited:
mrjames said:
but hypothetically there are 1,000 photographers probably within a 1 hour drive of where you're photographing your client, it's just luck/reputation that you got the job. With photographs like these, which aren't the 'norm' there's every chance a client may specifically wish for that style, and as the only professional photographer in the world able to deliver amateur-esque results time and time again (a true amateur would never be able to shoot the same bad photo twice) you'll get flown accross the world on an all expenses paid trip

just look at Terry Richardson, the guy is known for flatly lit, shockingly posed images, but before that he shot wonderfully lit flattering photos for vogue, but he didn't get famous because he was just doing the same as everyone else, he developed his style and that's his trademark, he gets booked to shoot that way, just like I get paid to shoot my way, people come to me when ABCphotography and XYZphotography are giving them boring photos, they come to me when they want one of the few professional photographers with a fine art sensibility

to the amateur photographers and the weekend warriors, the technically perfect image is somehow king- but when you shoot all day every day you can bang out technically perfect images every single time, they're not special or sacred anymore, they're just normal- it's the off kilter shots that are interesting

but yes also it's all about the client- I photograph artists, and my clients don't want to always look like smiling politicians or actors headshots.
Click to expand...

FINALLY SOMEONE ON MY WAVELENGTH
 
Simon photo said:
Bad shots every shoot yes, edited keepers yes, but do you think the images in this series are capable of being edited to an "industry" standard should there ever be one?
Click to expand...

I didn't say that and never have. I said they would be better (obviously) in turn sparing him "as much" criticism.

They aren't good shots and don't belong on a billboard advertising your countries greatest athletes.
 
essexash said:
so either youre incapable of taking a good photo or you dont think photos are good unless theyve been processed?
Click to expand...

Yes that's right, I can't take a good photo and only rely on Photoshop.

...that conclusion definitely deserves a bonk on the head...how did you come to that?

Photos are not good "enough" coming off camera no, not in my opinion. Every shots should look it's best, again, in my opinion.

Basically if you look fine when you roll out of bed great, but i'm sure most of us look better after a shower, shave, and a bit of hair styling...that's all you're doing with a photo - making it look better.

I'm sure your boss / clients would prefer you to look presentable same as a paying client would like an image to look it's best.

The fact that I personally am not.satisfied with a shot until it's processed is my personal opinion and my standards / attention to detail.

But the fact STILL remains....whatever my standards are....these are bad shots! They are not technically good...is that an opinion maybe, but I don't believe the rules or standards have been met to make these good shots.
 
Simon photo said:
I still believe these images are intentional.
Take a look at a trained concert pianist. They would struggle to play a piece they know inside out wrongly.
Click to expand...

No, they really wouldn't. I play a few instruments and after practicing pieces for long enough you can play it without having to think about it.
However, if you ask me to deliberately get it wrong I can do - very easily.


tsh, armchair musicians....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top