AMATEURS SHOULD LEAVE PHOTOGRAPHY TO THE PRO'S (OR THE TALENTED)

Many billboards and magazine ad photos these days are done so lousily that when I see them I usually wonder why they didn't fire the photographer, or sued the ad company, for taking such ugly photos. For example, lighting is all wrong, shadows are where they shouldn't be, flash burns are so obvious, subject's eyes reflect what they shouldn't, colors are wrong, contrast are wrong, models pose is funny and unbalanced, composition is so bad I can't help but laugh, even the post-editing layout is not right for the medium of the ad, like a magazine layout used on billboards, or newspaper layout used in magazines. The worst thing is I've also noticed that more and more of these half-baked ugly ads are coming out.

After seriously meditating on this phenomena, I have come to 2 conclusions! First, almost any Tom, Dick and Harry these days can afford a pro or semi-pro level camera, and because of this they become so-called experts. With the financial crunch these days even giant companies need to save, and instead of hiring professionals they decide that they can write the ads and take the photos themselves, so they do, resulting in really lousy photographs and shameful grammar. Unfortunately, not everyone has the talent to see that the photo's are ugly and the grammar terrible, thus resulting in using a mistake in the first place. Second, when it comes to art, the artist is always right and the client is always wrong. This is not food service, this is soul! Imagine da Vinci adjusting his painting because Mona Lisa isn't happy about it. Imagine Solomon Saprids changing his bronze statues because some executive thinks it's too unreal. Did Amorsolo or Juan Luna have bosses who told them what to do? Well, sadly, there are a lot of unknown artists these days who are really good but try too much to please their customers resulting in mediocre or bad work, that's why when they die nobody knows them, and they are most commonly called "photographer's reliever" or "copy-cat painter".

Ladies and gentlemen, when an artist presents his masterpiece take it as it is, you are paying him for his art, and he is not paying you for your opinions. If you don't like his art, change artists!

WHY I DON'T LIKE STUDIO PHOTOGRAPHY

I don't like studio photography! Don't get me wrong, some of the best photographs are taken in a studio, and this is because studio's are a very controlled environment where you can produce perfect pictures all year round. Studio's are perfect for products, but for people I sort of both agree and disagree.

I'm sure many of you have something so share about irritating experiences with studios. Take some of my experiences as an example, about 5 years ago my father-in-law told everyone of us to meet at a famous studio inside a mall for a scheduled family portrait. We posed for less than a dozen shots, left, and a few days later picked up about 1 bond paper and 4 small wallet sized pictures. He placed it on a mantle in their home and there it stays even today. Anyway, 2 years later our son was born, and because of him being the first male "apo" on my wife's side, my father-in-law again told us to meet at the same studio, and again we did the deed, and after framing the picture a few days later and putting it on the same mantlepiece next to the older photo, one thing became obvious, the background was exactly the same. It was as if we had 2 pictures, done at the same time, but with all of us wearing different clothes, and of course added a child.

Don't you just wonder why many famous photographers have studios in their names, but the ones really taking the photographs are their employees? Sometimes I have doubts when the clerk who signs us in and collects our money is also the one who takes our photograph. Most of the time the results come out ok, but not all the time, and then it's too late because you've already spent your money on a bad deal and there's no turning back. Only once did I experience the actual owner of the studio taking the pictures, but that was only once, all my other experiences are either the clerk or a hired photographer takes the pictures.

I never understood why you have to pick only a few poses even if you paid for more. For example, there is this studio where when you pay for 5 printed pictures, but you get to choose only 2 poses, and your choice should be among only 5 photos taken of you. What if all 5 photos suck? What's up with the limit when it's digital anyway and won't cost anymore even if they took 1000 photos! Why the limit of only 2 poses for 5 pictures? Why not 5 poses for 5 pictures? Is that too difficult to do? Talking to studio personnel are like talking to machines where flexibility is virtually nil. I mean, I thought artists were more human than anyone else? Why do their studios treat us so in-humanly?

Another thing I don't understand is, why don't studios give us the digital files, or negatives for that matter? Didn't we just pay for them? What's the selfishness for? If they're greedy nobody will come back for a second round, unless absolutely necessary, like when updating passport or visa pictures, but never again for personal shots.