Outrage isn't the right word.
Its an outrage that there's 650,000 homeless people in the US, its an outrage that the British government bailed out British banks to the tune of £1.1 trillion. Its just funny that the US olympic team had some bad photos took. maybe it reflects the wages the photographers got? I can only presume.
the U.S has had pretty bad taste these days -- bombing mourners at funerals, killing any male over 18 with drones, illegal wars.
These photos seem to reflect that bad taste. Be sloppy, stick an American flag in the picture and it's all good.
It's a good example the difference between studio shooting and field shooting. The person who shot them has been a "Photographer of the Year" and has amazing photos in the field. I must note, he is not from the US.
The pics in the second link don't look too bad.... Any publicity is better than no publicity, maybe the US feel the need to have a scandal to add some extra hype for their team.
I don't really see them as an "outrage" as there is plenty of things in life to actually express outrage over that involve injustice, extreme poverty, suffering etc. However, I was struck by their less than stellar quality and the complete lack of connection the photographer seemed to have with his subjects. A few were also just poorly lit and badly composed. But an "outrage" no!
Not sure what the problem is here. I think the photography here proves that these are just athletes, and not models or super star actors, which the US produces many of both. The shots seem pretty honest to me. I'm not a fan of sticking make-up on our footballers (all codes), netballers, gymnasts and tennis players to make them more appealing to some non-sporting demographic. If they perform and win gold, then they have done their job.
Hmmmm .... at fiirst glance I might agree with Jason ( @bobfoto ) but looking a little closer at the picture of the gymnist down on the ground with the flag behind me makes me think otherwise because the tears in the paper under him could have been cleaned up with photoshop but weren't. The same with the other gymnist. I'd say they are poorly photographed and not at all cleaned up. Why? I'd like to know the reason behind that. Are these final pictures or just part of the mix?
Someone above mentioned he's known for outdoor shooting. Hmm ... maybe he's of the SOOC mentality and doesn't know anything about studio photography or editing.
This is a once-in-a-lifetime event for 99% of these people. They deserve to be shown more favorable for their work to get to this place. CBS made the decision to publish them so, they should be held accountable as they made the decision to show them. I would hope these are the outtakes and not the final product from the photographer.
@dmortega I agree. They're not absolutely terrible but definitely weren't examined closely. I find it odd too that you can see the edges of the background paper, and all the rips and scuffs at the bottom, like in this image:
However I do like the offbeatness of some of them - the distorted perspective makes this guy's biceps/triceps/deltoids look huge!! (And his legs look tiny xD)
Ha. I meant the slickness of the athletes. Joe seems to have the same image of athletes as I do. At the moment of truth they are in fact very fragile. Just that is what I can see in the way they photographed in this studio environment.
@mastermek@dmortega@bobfoto@chewyteeth@vase@jennverr@38mm@kellc It's not Americans that are labeling it an "outrage." I actually don't know of anyone who cares about the photos. The only community that is discussing these photos is the photography community and we all know how artists can be, whether we agree with them or not. I don't think the outrage is 'American.'
It also makes sense for this discussion to be on 365 since it is a photography community and once upon a time, we used to be able to have discussions and give opinions about photos, but whatever.
@cfitzgerald "It also makes sense for this discussion to be on 365 since it is a photography community and once upon a time, we used to be able to have discussions and give opinions about photos, but whatever. "
Thank you. I really did not mean for this to turn into an anti-American thread or to say that this is some sort of "outrage" (perhaps not the best use of the word) on the same level of homelessness or war or whatever... it's a photo site, and that's exactly why I posted them... to discuss the photography!
I totally agree, as a photography subject, it's definitely a hot topic. I think I stated my opinion on the photography aspect just fine.
What piqued my interest was has nothing to do with politics but labeling these pictures as 'very american'. I was curious as to what that means to the photography world. This photographer is not american so what is it about the photos that makes anyone think american made?
@mastermek --- Are you referring to the shine they have when you say slickness? When I think american, I think of big screen movies, all flash and glamour as apposed to watching foreign films. American movies are glitz and glamour and so is much of the photography I see in advertising.
I wouldn't say these photos represent anything like that. The athletes do seem like regular people but I still think these pictures didn't do them any justice.
ooops this thread seems to have gone off piste. I still think outrage, whoever chose that word, is very wrong. It's just pictures dudes, I dunno what the person talking about drones was thinking??!
This could be a 'scandal'....I guess that word is more wide open, there's degrees of scale within the term scandal. Outrage is more serious. But its good to discuss these things.
I know why the American card gets played all the time, theres a dichotomy of how America views itself and how it is viewed from overseas, and this being a British website it's technically overseas, yet Americans uploading are entitled to be very positive about daily events, so the two sides have to co-exist. This is not the place to get nationalistic though, lets share the love.
:)
First thought was 'Oh dear' but then seeing the ripped up paper and odd shadows, unflattering poses and distorted images from being right up close to the subject (presumably) started to get more appealing. They are a bit funky - definitely not flattering and an odd choice when you're trying to portray physical perfection about to go into action in the Olympic arena - but unusual. Either that or he accidentally sent them his 'Out-takes and unedited' folder!!
Meanwhile our Olympic athletes have been getting their kit off for Cosmo - including the GB hockey team (though thankfully NOT my son's teacher) and one of our local gymnasts - beware - nudity in this link!!! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2155492/Olympic-gymnast-Louis-Smith-gets-kit-charity.html
very off choice of shots and the photographer should not be paid much for these. I think most amateurs could and would do better.
the second link of shots seemed far better.
mind you i give up with the whole olympic thing, its cost the country so much money, it seems crazy when the uk is so far in debt. i'm appalled by what they're opening ceremony plans are, a green field and sheep. wtf??! - typicallly british - lmfao x its typical crap effort lol
@dmortega - I see your point Dorrena, and I agree. Some of these "errors" like the paper and the shadows just seem too obvious to me, that they appear intended. I guess only the photographer can answer that. The US Olympic team would have a Media Advisor I would guess and I would say that they would have approved the shots prior to release to CBS. Someone along the line must have thought they represented their team well enough?
I do like the photo of Michael Phelps, this man is a Superstar of the pool and the shot of him looks like some kind of geeky guy from next door, definitely not the world record beating machine in the water... Recently there was a news article here about the South African Paralympian who has qualified for the able-bodied games as well and his photo shoot made him look to be unstoppable - perhaps the US team should have hired that guy?
did you hear its costing 16 billion, they already blew the budget limitations, aparently they'd put £89 million aside for security and the actual figure already is £553 million how can they spend so much on security guards? and how can they get it so wrong? The people in charge of these things want shooting!!
What I read is that the photographer was doing a little political protest of the 'plasticized' way athletes and in particular, the assumed perfection(by Americans) of the American Olympic team.
Personally I think he could have done it differently, this way, every one is simply focused on how 'bad' the images are.
Another question that comes to mind at this point is would you, as a photographer, use your photography/images to make a political statement? This could be something like this current Olympic one or something as local as protesting a municipal bylaw.
http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-33747_162-10012296-11.html
Not sure if the picture is going to show up...if you look, you can see a camera in the background! Honestly, don't you need credentials to become a photographer for CBS?
@cfitzgerald I made no mention of Americans or anyone else in my remarks! I was merely reacting to the title of the thread as it mentions the word outrage and I did read the links and the discussion that ensued. There was outrage over the photos and I was merely commenting on my take on the photos - that they were oft poorly lit and showed little connection with the athletes (with quite awkward poses). Nothing to do with the nationality of anyone in my remarks. I will stand by my comments though - an outrage - no - just not stellar photos - unless of course they were a pisstake and I don't actually think so!
There's no way to sugarcoat it. Those photos are dreadful.
I can't imagine any *professional* photographer delibertly taking bad photos just to make a political stement. Especially for an such a widely publisized event as the Olympics. Your published work speaks for yourself. Why would anyone want amatuerish looking photos out there dogging them for years and possibly costing them future jobs down the line? If he did indeed try to sabotage this shoot it was a real boneheaded move a stupid a no-win situation. Your potential employers will either a) think you are a lousy photographer or b) they will think you are totally unprofessional for screwing up a high profile job on purpose.
@bobfoto I actually had a huge issue with the phelps image - the hotspot of the light is actually on his chest instead of his face - are we supposed to pay extra attention to his chest? The harsh shadows on the right of the face could probably be construed as interesting but the light drop off on the left of the face... its just poor. Add to this the blue light in the background being quite bright and your attention is stuck somewhere on the left of his chest. Then you see the paper background not covering the back of the image... what? lol
Personally I think the real low here is number 10 where you can see everything in all its aweful glory. I did this in my first shoot and it bugged me so much that i made a point to never do it again
I cant believe these are professional.. I mean besides the obvious issues of lighting, focus, composition
1. The photographer should have seen the paper ripped / scuffed etc and just torn it off and rolled out new bits. I cant believe that he'd not notice
2. If these are truly the image, he should have been able to photoshop them a bit to remove the backdrop problems
@38mm I see no evidence of an infinity cove / curve... its just a white paper backdrop as seen by the folds in the paper / rips / tears / dirtying of it :)
@toast - I mean, "I liked it" in the sense that it really showed Phelps in bad light... I mean this guy is a Superstar,and that shot well, it flatters him not at all.
I would be honoured to photograph a guy like Phelps, but I would make sure that not only the background was draped in the Stars and Stripes but he also.
I said earlier that these guys and girls are athletes and not movie stars, and I still stand by that. I just expected more from the US of A.
@bobfoto yep i get what you mean by that, i just think that photographically they could have portrayed him in that way while still making a decent image :)
@kellc Oops, didn't mean to offend...looking back at your comment I see that. I was just responding to those that responded to the word "outrage." Have a good day!
I am out of this discussion. Have a wonderful day, all!
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
Its an outrage that there's 650,000 homeless people in the US, its an outrage that the British government bailed out British banks to the tune of £1.1 trillion. Its just funny that the US olympic team had some bad photos took. maybe it reflects the wages the photographers got? I can only presume.
These photos seem to reflect that bad taste. Be sloppy, stick an American flag in the picture and it's all good.
Someone above mentioned he's known for outdoor shooting. Hmm ... maybe he's of the SOOC mentality and doesn't know anything about studio photography or editing.
This is a once-in-a-lifetime event for 99% of these people. They deserve to be shown more favorable for their work to get to this place. CBS made the decision to publish them so, they should be held accountable as they made the decision to show them. I would hope these are the outtakes and not the final product from the photographer.
However I do like the offbeatness of some of them - the distorted perspective makes this guy's biceps/triceps/deltoids look huge!! (And his legs look tiny xD)
This has piqued my curiosity. What does this mean?
http://www.czechphotogallery.cz/en/klamar2011.html
It also makes sense for this discussion to be on 365 since it is a photography community and once upon a time, we used to be able to have discussions and give opinions about photos, but whatever.
Thank you. I really did not mean for this to turn into an anti-American thread or to say that this is some sort of "outrage" (perhaps not the best use of the word) on the same level of homelessness or war or whatever... it's a photo site, and that's exactly why I posted them... to discuss the photography!
But some of these photos are truly amateurish.
What piqued my interest was has nothing to do with politics but labeling these pictures as 'very american'. I was curious as to what that means to the photography world. This photographer is not american so what is it about the photos that makes anyone think american made?
@mastermek --- Are you referring to the shine they have when you say slickness? When I think american, I think of big screen movies, all flash and glamour as apposed to watching foreign films. American movies are glitz and glamour and so is much of the photography I see in advertising.
I wouldn't say these photos represent anything like that. The athletes do seem like regular people but I still think these pictures didn't do them any justice.
ooops this thread seems to have gone off piste. I still think outrage, whoever chose that word, is very wrong. It's just pictures dudes, I dunno what the person talking about drones was thinking??!
This could be a 'scandal'....I guess that word is more wide open, there's degrees of scale within the term scandal. Outrage is more serious. But its good to discuss these things.
I know why the American card gets played all the time, theres a dichotomy of how America views itself and how it is viewed from overseas, and this being a British website it's technically overseas, yet Americans uploading are entitled to be very positive about daily events, so the two sides have to co-exist. This is not the place to get nationalistic though, lets share the love.
:)
Meanwhile our Olympic athletes have been getting their kit off for Cosmo - including the GB hockey team (though thankfully NOT my son's teacher) and one of our local gymnasts - beware - nudity in this link!!! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2155492/Olympic-gymnast-Louis-Smith-gets-kit-charity.html
the second link of shots seemed far better.
mind you i give up with the whole olympic thing, its cost the country so much money, it seems crazy when the uk is so far in debt. i'm appalled by what they're opening ceremony plans are, a green field and sheep. wtf??! - typicallly british - lmfao x its typical crap effort lol
I do like the photo of Michael Phelps, this man is a Superstar of the pool and the shot of him looks like some kind of geeky guy from next door, definitely not the world record beating machine in the water... Recently there was a news article here about the South African Paralympian who has qualified for the able-bodied games as well and his photo shoot made him look to be unstoppable - perhaps the US team should have hired that guy?
did you hear its costing 16 billion, they already blew the budget limitations, aparently they'd put £89 million aside for security and the actual figure already is £553 million how can they spend so much on security guards? and how can they get it so wrong? The people in charge of these things want shooting!!
Personally I think he could have done it differently, this way, every one is simply focused on how 'bad' the images are.
Another question that comes to mind at this point is would you, as a photographer, use your photography/images to make a political statement? This could be something like this current Olympic one or something as local as protesting a municipal bylaw.
Not sure if the picture is going to show up...if you look, you can see a camera in the background! Honestly, don't you need credentials to become a photographer for CBS?
I can't imagine any *professional* photographer delibertly taking bad photos just to make a political stement. Especially for an such a widely publisized event as the Olympics. Your published work speaks for yourself. Why would anyone want amatuerish looking photos out there dogging them for years and possibly costing them future jobs down the line? If he did indeed try to sabotage this shoot it was a real boneheaded move a stupid a no-win situation. Your potential employers will either a) think you are a lousy photographer or b) they will think you are totally unprofessional for screwing up a high profile job on purpose.
@bobfoto I actually had a huge issue with the phelps image - the hotspot of the light is actually on his chest instead of his face - are we supposed to pay extra attention to his chest? The harsh shadows on the right of the face could probably be construed as interesting but the light drop off on the left of the face... its just poor. Add to this the blue light in the background being quite bright and your attention is stuck somewhere on the left of his chest. Then you see the paper background not covering the back of the image... what? lol
Personally I think the real low here is number 10 where you can see everything in all its aweful glory. I did this in my first shoot and it bugged me so much that i made a point to never do it again
I cant believe these are professional.. I mean besides the obvious issues of lighting, focus, composition
1. The photographer should have seen the paper ripped / scuffed etc and just torn it off and rolled out new bits. I cant believe that he'd not notice
2. If these are truly the image, he should have been able to photoshop them a bit to remove the backdrop problems
@38mm I see no evidence of an infinity cove / curve... its just a white paper backdrop as seen by the folds in the paper / rips / tears / dirtying of it :)
I would be honoured to photograph a guy like Phelps, but I would make sure that not only the background was draped in the Stars and Stripes but he also.
I said earlier that these guys and girls are athletes and not movie stars, and I still stand by that. I just expected more from the US of A.
I am out of this discussion. Have a wonderful day, all!