OK, I’m calling it, and I call bullshit.
Everyone else can call it whatever they want. But as we fawn over pre-civil war decor, tepees, tents, flowers, and the notion that if we just clicked our ruby red slippers and sucked down a little bit of fresh-squeezed lemonade on our sun-drenched porches, everything would be good again, I will continue to call bullshit. I’m calling this the post-authenticity movement. Because if the very reason that we went back to the simple things was to get back to the basics, then we have lost focus. We’re not getting back to the basics. We’re getting back to materialism fetishized as wagon wheels, straw hats, mason jar cups, and facial hair. A group of plaid-clad brethren knowing that the rest of the people just don’t get it. That may be comfort, but it’s no more authentic than neon lights and steel.
In the wedding world, style shoots are at the heart of the new materialism. They make the message clear that you are your decor. You’re not yourself without the right clothing, the right palette, and the right dress. They are the wholesale distribution of the American wedding reimagined as the Anthropologie. How many of you have been stuck with the princess dress, when you secretly wanted the slinky vintage number that wouldn’t be out of place at your nearest Swamps ‘R’ Us? 9 out of 10 times, style shoots aren’t even photography. They’re technical work bootstrapped on work of stylists. To a florist or a designer, style shoots are part and parcel to their activity. They are the substance of their crafts. But for photographers, it’s a free ride on beautiful decor. You just need to pick up your California Sunbounce, pick a good day, and wait until you get just that hint of flare you want. The striking models will take care of the rest.
Me, personally? I’m tired of praying to the gods of fashion and style. I’m tired of looking for the next big thing. I’m tired of a merry-go-round that keeps me going in circles. These are not standards to live by, they’re not inspiration, and this is not the essence of people. This is not photography.
Editorial used to mean all that stuff we see in magazines that wasn’t advertising. It could be mercilessly tacky, but it could be eloquent and nourishing. That was then. But in this industry, in this time, in these final dying days of print, you say editorial, and you mean Martha Stewart. We all know the look. It’s the result of great work trickling down the neck of the industry, steadily reworked into sound bite-sized visual snacks that the public can chew on over their daily coffee or while waiting at the dentist’s office. And forget about the photographers. They barely matter in that process. The look in the magazines is so homogeneous that you could insert one of hundreds, and no one would be any the wiser. Yeah, there’s still great work out there. There are journals, independent fashion magazines, Fader, New York Magazine. It’s out there. But you find me a bride inspired by Fader, and I’ll find you the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
Now, if you’re a guy who just picked up a shiny, new 5D with your first low aperture lens, and you just got through your first book on how to do wedding photography with some awful title, printed on cheap paper, with low quality reproductions of mediocre shots, then looking at editorial spreads from a bunch of magazines targeted at a bunch of people with no visual literacy whatsoever isn’t going to look all too bad. In fact, it will look quite nice. And that’s just fine. Everyone starts there. Just don’t finish there.
Because if those magazines are the pull and the draw – if that’s the pervasive definition of professional – that means Barnes and Noble is our curator, and that’s no curator I want. If you want editorial, see what Skye Parrot is up to in Dossier. Check out Glen Erler’s work. See what Borthwick or Richardson did. Then check out some portraits from Richard Leahroyd. Go back in time to Avedon or Steichen. Find some documentary work by Krisanne Johnson or Carolyn Drake. Know the Magnum guys. VII. Don’t look at W. Look at the photographer’s works who appear in W. Drop by Atelier Management, and see their crew. But for God’s sake, get away from Martha Stewart and its progeny. Look to those magazines for sales ideas. But inspiration from the local bookstore magazine rack is something wholly different than inspiration from Allard, Graham, Davidson, Maplethorpe, Goldin, and Lorca diCorcia. These are photographers to understand and seek out. If it’s between Barnes and Noble in my head or nothing, I’ll take the lobotomy. I’d rather trust myself.
But here’s the real kicker. If editorial has been thrown off-axis, think about lifestyle. Because, at very least, editorial was about selling articles. And articles were about subjects. Things happening. The world. But lifestyle was about advertising. It wasn’t about a lifestyle. It was about selling a lifestyle. Pictures to fill up stock libraries so you could slap some text over them and make people feel like they belonged without paying the true cost of admission. It was editorial drained of its character. Basically, lifestyle took editorial and made it its bitch.
So here’s what it all comes down to. You take a can, you kick it down history’s staircase, and you see where it falls. You hear the clank, clank, clank, and you find editorial at your doorstep, waiting to come in. But the advertising industry bastardizes it, turns it into lifestyle. Lifestyle takes off, it sells, it resonates, and it tickles our fancy, and pretty soon, everything looks like lifestyle. Magazines even crop up, dedicated to selling us the lifestyle that magazines were the inspiration for in the first place. Then the photographers latch onto this concept and decide that we too, can, in this age of Martha Stewart, produce our own versions of lifestyle to show off how amazing our work is. We call them style shoots.
They take off, fueling an endless parade of blogs, because we all know if you style my pretty, you have styled me right, and we know that’s just what every bride should believe too. So we hook them on the same ride we’re taking, so they too can get a sniff and a snort of the good stuff and feel oh-so-good about something that was never really broken in the first place, which is their wedding. But, now, it is. And they’re broke, but we’re not rich, because it’s the industry that gets the money. And as these pictures proliferate, and they are, admittedly, pretty damned sexy (I mean, come on, let’s face it, they work), that guy or that gal who just got his 5D who is reading those flimsy, thin-paged magazines on low stock paper at the bookstore, sees it. And that photographer, it so happens has some talent. So the work sticks, the word spreads, he or she gets some mention and money, and pretty soon, we find ourselves in an ass-backward situation where the tail is wagging the dog, because the original editorial pictures created by the photographers with original ideas that were commodified by industry after industry and welcomed by the 5D guy, is now our creative inspiration.
But you know what? I’m not saying not to do it. You want to network. Do a style shoot. You want to have some fun. Do a style shoot. You want to get in the blogs. Do it. Do whatever you like. What I’m saying is that style shoots must die, not because they are less, but because they can be more. They should be more. There’s some great style shoots out there, but not enough. Not even close – way too many carbon copies. Style shoots can be the free-form opportunity to explore without constraint. Style shoots must die, and when they re-awaken, because, surely, nothing is going to keep them down, they need to be about the art. The work of photographers with their photography hats on. They need to reflect vision and beliefs. They need to take a stand and say something more than “Me too.” Photography of weddings, not wedding photography. Even the ones with the poofy dress that don’t quite sit with us. Even the ones where we can’t slap a label onto the faces of the bride and groom as a pitch for our look on our blog.
Someone told me he couldn’t stand the bitchy brides – the stressed, addicted, materialistic ones, where it’s all about the perfect day as a procession of decor, pomp, and pageantry. Where the perfect picture is more important than the perfect moment.
Who do you think created that bride?
Britta says
I love this.
Hannah says
fabulous – and true, very true.
Becca Dilley says
Damn. That was perfect. I am starting to feel a sea change about styled shoots. Most shoots aren’t about capturing human interaction at all, and isn’t that this thing that photography can do better than any other medium?
Spencer Lum says
So I’m told that style shoot is 2 words. Correction made!
heather says
I get what you are saying but as a general statement and maybe I am not taking it he right way. I did read it fast. But in general I am tired of this type of arrogant artist mentality where everyone likes to call everyone else a copycat and unoriginal. If someone likes to shoot this type of stuff who cares? Live and let be. Do your thing and stop worrying about everyone else. There isn’t only one type of correct photography. It’s all subjective and beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
LeZandra says
Thank you for this! I never understood the point of the stylized shoots. This does offer a much needed reflection of the industry today.
gina says
how did you know what i’ve been thinking for quite some time now? and i’m a stylist! and a photographer! and have had so many ideas yet to get put together and now i don’t feel like doing many of them…because there are so many of them. they are fun for sure. but call it what it is. it’s not about the ‘person’ or capturing the moment. it’s about a pretty styled shot…hoping that it was done well to begin with.
great great share!
Maegan says
I’m standing up applauding!
ash says
Well done.
completely agree.
Stacey says
I appreciate the passion and vision in which this article was written. From Art, to photography, faith, education, health and so many other reasons there is not one universal truth. This is what I believe. I don’t really even know what a stylized shoot is. But every person views life through a different viewpoint. So even if every wedding photography had the same exact props, couple, style it would all appear different. What is truth. Well, whoever figures that out would reach enlightenment I think. And to clarify, that was not meant to sound snitty. It is what I struggle with also. Great article and I can see the point you are coming from. Thank you.
Joe Federer says
While overall I agree that the day should be about the union of two in love and capturing that real human interaction. I also believe that the wedding is somewhat fantasy – and thus making a few images that are, effectively, a fashion-model fantasy isn’t the end of the world.
Rachel {Finch & Thistle} says
Reading this from an event designer/florist/stylist’s perspective I think this article is right on the money. From our side, styled shoots are a fun way to create an “event” that is, for once, exactly the way we want it – no kowtowing to clients wishes, getting to hand pick the other vendors etc. A styled shoot is a creative tool to highlight our strengths and play with new ideas. But they are a lot of work and they always cost money. I look at them as a necessary component of my advertising budget and hope that they will get picked up by a bridal editor somewhere. If and when they do, it’s always a bit disheartening to see the photographers get top billing knowing that I came up with the concept, organized the contributors, sorted out a venue and spent money on props and flowers. Of course, I couldn’t do the shoot without a good photographer, and I value my relationships with talented photogs tremendously but it would be nice to get a bit more credit!
Spencer Lum says
Very interesting and great points! Thanks for sharing. I don’t usually get to hear how it feels from the designer/florist/stylist’s perspective, so hearing that was good.
Kristi Wright says
Great article! What I see to be the larger issue with styled shoots is that they are leading to the expectation that nothing but styled wedding will do. These weddings with details that overshadow everything else is almost all you see on wedding blogs these days. Sometimes photography quality doesn’t seem to be important based on what gets put out there.
95% of the weddings most people I know photograph would never make it on to a wedding blog and it has nothing to do with the quality of work but more with the lack of details wedding blogs seem to want. I get that’s what they are selling. I just wish they would at least showcase the connection of the couple or the moments that are special. While the color palette is important what about the meaning of the wedding? Two people/two families coming together for a lifetime (one hopes) – certainly that deserves to be seen. So happy for the site momentjunkie.com to be out there (FYI I have no personal connection to this site) where details are not the focus.
Spencer Lum says
That is so right on, Kristi! I absolutely agree with everything you just said.
Lara White says
Great points. Photographers actually USED to be paid for these, but the industry has become so desperate for any sort of recognition they are willing to pay out of pocket to provide wedding magazines and blogs with their editorial materials without any guarantees for publication. I don’t get that thinking, it’s taking paying photography jobs away and really just another example of the professional photography industry cannibalizing itself.
Spencer Lum says
Great point, and so true.
Andy Gaines says
Thank You!
Only just found this site (Don’t know how I have missed it until now…)
But thank you! So much sense and wise words spoken.
Cheers.
Spencer Lum says
I much appreciate it, and glad you found it!
Kelly says
Just found this site. You know those blogs that once you find them, you go back and read the entire archive? This is one of those sites for me. Thank you!
Spencer Lum says
Awesome! 🙂
Christy Peterson says
Okay, I have been trying to grasp what exactly a stylized shoot is for while now. Basically, a ton of props with an off the wall theme usually set in a field ;)?
What is a stylized wedding? Am I guessing it’s when they have a little fun and incoorporate their talents, skills, hobbies? I haven’t heard of those before.
I see your point, but tend to agree with Heather.
Spencer Lum says
Well, I could just be a really arrogant, cocky bastard. 😉 Some would certainly agree. But really, it’s not about what any one person should do to me. I had friends who did them. I don’t hate them for it. The question is about what the trend stood for, how it affected the industry, and what values it espoused. Because, innocent or not, actions have an effect, whether it be good or bad, and everyone has a right to get behind them or oppose them. As for styled shoots, well, I don’t agree with those values. It’s fine if you feel otherwise, but, I think it’s worth asking and the challenge is worth making. Isn’t that how it works, after all? You say something, I say something, and we all figure it out?
Christy Peterson says
Well, I am still trying to wrap my mind around exactly what stylized wedding photography is. Am I right about regular stylized shots? Do you have a minute to point me to a stylized wedding session? I googled it and didn’t really see anything besides props of a table and chair with lanterns in a tree. On the whole, from what I’ve seen, I don’t really care for stylized shots, but, obvioulsy, the people in the pictures like them.
Spencer Lum says
I think you have it right. They’re just shots of a bunch of decorations (most commonly at a barn or in a field) with some models in them. On its own, it is all well and good – naturally, there’s nothing wrong with shooting a bunch of decorations and models – but as can happen with trends, things were reaching epic proportions about a year back. With so much of the industry focused on details and one very specific way of shooting them, it seemed that the idea of focusing on people and creative shooting was lost.
Jofoto says
What a great article, I’m slowly regaining direction after vying in the wrong direction. I want more soul in my pictures and I think clients really do also, they’re just smothered with materialism and utter meaningless wedding themes. I’d settle for a bride in love anyday
Cynthi says
It’s pretty annoying when I’m photographing a wedding that is so clearly just a glorified party to honor the bride. Did you forgot that the whole reason you’re doing this is to pledge your life and love to someone?
Kevin Lam says
Thank you Spencer. You couldn’t have said it any better. I keep re-visiting this article to remind myself of what is very wrong and at the same time what is so right with our industry.
Spencer Lum says
Thanks Kevin – been awhile since I’ve read this, myself! Glad to hear that.
betts says
Thanks for your marvelous posting! I genuinely enjoyed reading it, you can be a great author.I will make sure to bookmark your blog and will come back sometime soon. I want to encourage that you continue your great posts, have a nice weekend!
home says
ormahrueotqtfkstrispghgptplloryjezrnfglvyfsspcxpbectysuhx
telfar bag says
The hardware on this bag is so industrial. It’s perfect for a utilitarian outfit.