Selective Desaturation why so HOSTILE?

Blurmore

So this is a well worn argument, I agree. This weekend I heard a humorous story about someone's potential client who had a shot she LOVED that was selectively desaturated. It happened to be from one of 2 studios she was shopping, she showed it to the photographer that didn't take it, and the photographer proceeded to tear it up as "That is SO 80's" and really beat it down...and it was that client's favorite shot! Guess who got the booking? I will be the first to admit that the fad quality of SD is undeniable, but can anything that your clients LOVE be bad? From what I gather they neither know nor care that it is fad. Just to be obnoxious...I'll post some.



Requested on shot list, client was very satisfied.



Requested by bride to incorporate tie, flowers and shoes, she loved it.





I certainly don't do them for every client, just the ones that like them. Personally I see textures as just as fadish, but I do them too...because clients LIKE THEM! So let me have it, tell me ALL your reasons for this being so wrong and deserving of mock and scorn.

tenoverthenose

Blurmore wrote: »

... but can anything that your clients LOVE be bad?

I'm going to answer this simply question with a yes. Clients can ask you to do bad things.

We are creative individuals that must always push forward and break new ground. I believe very strongly that most creative individuals are doing their best work when they are passionately creating something new. Looking backwards and copying (not just in this case, but plenty of others) is failing our creativity.

From your clients standpoint, they have certain expectations. Clients such as this have the expectation of selective color. Have you asked why they like that? Beyond the fact that it is a novelty, I'd venture a guess that they haven't seen anything yet that made them say "wow, that's amazing - I'd never thought of that!" or "that's beautiful and I've never seen anything like it!" Part of what we as creative professionals need to do is exceed their expectations - create something new for them that captures the same feelings they have about selective coloring in a new way.

Of course many times over, clients may prefer what has been done before and what they have seen. They fail to trust the photographer to fully execute his/her creative vision. In that case, I'd get new clients.

Blurmore

tenoverthenose wrote: »

I'm going to answer this simply question with a yes. Clients can ask you to do bad things.

We are creative individuals that must always push forward and break new ground. I believe very strongly that most creative individuals are doing their best work when they are passionately creating something new. Looking backwards and copying (not just in this case, but plenty of others) is failing our creativity.

From your clients standpoint, they have certain expectations. Clients such as this have the expectation of selective color. Have you asked why they like that? Beyond the fact that it is a novelty, I'd venture a guess that they haven't seen anything yet that made them say "wow, that's amazing - I'd never thought of that!" or "that's beautiful and I've never seen anything like it!" Part of what we as creative professionals need to do is exceed their expectations - create something new for them that captures the same feelings they have about selective coloring in a new way.

Of course many times over, clients may prefer what has been done before and what they have seen. They fail to trust the photographer to fully execute his/her creative vision. In that case, I'd get new clients.

Thank you for not responding directly to the matter of the merits (or lack there of) of SD but the client expectation piece. Right NOW! in the NOW! What is making people go WOW! is textures, and to a lesser extent throwback processing, my point is that it is ALL fad...and none deserves more credit than the other. I've stated many times that I do not consider myself an artist nor what I create as art, but I am a student of art history and I enjoy art. I think this is a very warholian debate, Warhol's appropriation and flash nature makes him a polarizing artist. My point is that human taste, desire, and appreciation are disconnected from process and artistic merit. Someone understanding the PROCESS of the Mao prints, or the soup cans does not make them like them (or not like them). People like what they like, and as far as the wow factor goes, for those who have never taken Wacom to lasso tool and worked with masking layers...this IS still wow. I agree about pushing forward, but just because a fad has been done to death, kicked and dragged through the dirt, and used as a device in an 7x Oscar Award winning Holocaust epic, it does not make people like it any less.

Qarik

Personally I don't think selective color is all that bad. I have seena a LOT of bad examples though but that has to do with the taste level of the the photog. I think if any number of good photogs on this board were FORCED to do it on few shots, they would turn out okay. The ones you posted are okay..the sock one is pretty good. I wouldn't mind doing it for client if they asked. It won't show up on my portfolio though.

kyeezie

I think one thing is that most people don't do it well and add nothing to the picture and brings away from the focus of the picture. But sometimes it is done and looks cool. I agree, if a client asked me to do it, I would to please them but wouldn't have it in my portfolio. I would have it available in case another bride wants something like that. I really like the first one, I think it is cool!

angevin1

Sorry, I can't be of much help in this whole argument. My argument is for pleasing a customer as well as I can.

Tenoverthenose is right of course, creative vision and all that is where we go. But, I can say pleasing customers only makes sense since they are paying.

I have created and worked diligently on my motion graphics/videos, and neither clients or models seem to get video at all, yet they watch/download/fan/link/share those things continuously. My best guess is, it takes years for new creative thoughts to take hold. I think some folks just cannot see themselves a certain way, until they've seen others that same way....vis the tipping point!

And as for your selective colorization, I think they're fabulous. The Sock and Sandal one is particularly funny...and Fun was what the occasion was about that day!

ian408

Who am I to criticize what a client wants?

tenoverthenose

And I should add that I have lost paying jobs before because I told couples that I won't do selective coloring. I have also passed on jobs because I didn't think the clients would give me enough freedom - if I don't like the vibe that I am getting from a client my calendar may mysteriously & suddenly be full.

The fact is that I don't want to create photographs like everyone else and I am excited that not everyone likes my work

ian408

When a client wants to hire you, they do it for your creativity (at least I hope that is a reason). And even though I said I wouldn't criticize a client request doesn't mean i would not offer something different.

Sometimes when a client asks for something, they do so because that's what they know. Figuring out what they really want might give you back that freedom.

Lastly, it is totally fair and reasonable to reject a client for 'creative difference'.

Blurmore

tenoverthenose wrote: »

And I should add that I have lost paying jobs before because I told couples that I won't do selective coloring. I have also passed on jobs because I didn't think the clients would give me enough freedom - if I don't like the vibe that I am getting from a client my calendar may mysteriously & suddenly be full.

The fact is that I don't want to create photographs like everyone else and I am excited that not everyone likes my work

I respect that...and my calendar does the same for brides that set off the crazy/needy alarms, and the entitled/delusional alarms. Photographers should book clients that are a good fit, whether that be personality or style. I'm more inclined to avoid a client due to personality differences than artistic ones.

The fact is that I don't want to create photographs like everyone else and I am excited that not everyone likes my work

I agree TOTALLY, I look at someone NOT liking my work even strongly as confirmation that I have a unique style.

mmmatt

I explain to my people at contract time how I do my processing... minimal facial smoothing, -0- body manipulation but tweaking colors and exposure on every keeper. I then explain that I take MY favorites from the set and edit them at MY own personal whim. "Whatever suites my creative eye at the time" are the exact words I use. The typical response to that is wide eyes, wider smiles and they say "Great!". As many of you surely know I am all over the board with my processing styles and I change things up a lot. That is what my clients want/expect from me. Even if I am mostly using actions I am mixing, blending and manipulating them to my tastes. I think I am mostly with Ten on this one. Ten's creativity doesn't come from his processing though... well, not in my eyes. I try to match my processing to the photo and sometimes shoot something with a processing style in mind. I think Ten excels at that more than I or most and that is a constant lesson I take from his work.

I'm not slighting anyone's, especially Jason's creativity though. I'm just saying. As for the actual effect of selective color, I personally don't likr it and the only request I have ever gotten for it was from my sister. Christmas in FL with the family wearing red Santa hats. She printed and sent out a hundred or so. Eee gads! I felt icky...

matt

*edit* shot list? Really Jason? Isn't that asking for trouble?

mpriest13

I think if the client asks for it..you give it to them. Don't put it in your portfolio if you don't like it. It really isn't that big of a deal....

Matthew Saville

Two different arguments
This discussion has two separate aspects that need to be considered separately. One is acceptable in my opinion from a business standpoint, although questionable from an artistic standpoint. The other is downright shameful, and in my opinion the more frequent.

Reason #1.) You do it because it will make you money, and you don't mind doing whatever the client asks.
Business is business, and hey if you're just trying to make money and pay your bills, then by all means go right ahead! Who are we to turn down good money based on something as arbitrary and subjective as "artistic principle"...

Besides, we can always pursue our artistic passions in our free time, as a hobby. People make it seem like we're selling our artistic soul if we bend to a clients' will. I call it paying rent.

Personally however, thankfully I was able to start "refusing" to do partial B&W like five years ago... I use quotes because I never actually had to refuse a request, I simply put effort into doing business only with clients who wanted exactly what I preferred to deliver.

However, maybe others live in areas that are a few years behind, no offense, so I can understand there might be greater resistance and it might still be a good idea to do those things, when the client asks...

Like I said it's just a business decision.


Reason #2.) You do it because your pictures are abysmal and you've decided to try and polish a turd.
Here, in my opinion, is the more common reason people use Photoshop effects like selective coloring. Instead of revisiting their camera technique, lighting, posing, etc. ...they turn to Photoshop to try and save their boring, lifeless pictures.

Selective B&W is especially guilty in this case, because it so clearly declares "Hey viewer! In case you were wondering what part of this boring picture you're supposed to look at, I've colored it in for you! Look HERE!"

Also, other Photoshop effects can often be just as guilty and I see boring pictures with soft focus, textures etc. all the time.


While Blurmore has an eye and his pictures would probably stand on their own two feet, I think we can all admit that most of the time, the opposite is the case. If you think otherwise, you may have a screw loose.


In my opinion, this is what usually gets overlooked whenever the discussion is brought up. We can talk about business decisions all day long, but the bottom line is that USUALLY people use Photoshop effects for the wrong reasons because they're just a beginner and they're experimenting. Experimenting is GOOD, just don't do it in a professional situation.

It is my humble opinion that at least 90% of the time an image should be able to WOW a viewer even from the back of the camera, or at least with minimal contrast / exposure boosting. (A basic RAW workflow...) If it doesn't, you may need to take better pictures. Even photographers such as Scott Robert Lim who rely heavily on Photoshop to create their art will tell you that the original image is the foundation upon which you build, and if the foundation is no good then you're only putting a band-aid on a gunshot wound.

And again, living here in Southern California I've been fortunate enough to be able to make the business decision to make my images as timeless as possible. Correct colors, clear and crisp, and contrasty B&W's with a zone-like attention to highlights and shadows. No carelessly blown highlights, no faded cross-processing, etc. Like I said, I'm just LUCKY to be able to make this my style, and succeed at it where I am. (Of course I do shoot all around the country from time to time as well...)

Yes, every now and then I will EXPERIMENT with a new fad when I catch wind of it, but only because the geek in me is curious, or because I need to make a buck. ;-)


Respectfully,
=Matt=

Blurmore

Matthew Saville wrote: »

Yes, every now and then I will EXPERIMENT with a new fad when I catch wind of it, but only because the geek in me is curious, or because I need to make a buck. ;-)


Respectfully,
=Matt=

Thanks for a carefully thought out response. Personally I love coloring in coloring books with my kids, and I'd really rather NOT do it with my Wacom. As I said before, I don't do it just to do it, I offer three "digitally enhanced photographs" in my packages. These can include textures, selective desaturation, or complete retouching. When we discuss what the enhanced photos will be, unless they express interest in selective desaturation, I don't do it. If they say they hate it (which a couple have) of course I don't do it. Occasionally a bride will ask off-handedly (like she has been told before how stupid it is) if I do it and when I say yes...I can tell that before she was told how stupid and cheesy it was, she liked it. I also agree that regional trends are at play, many, many times that I see you respond Matt...I have to remind myself that you are in the Republic of California. I'm not ashamed to say (in fact proud), I shoot a lot of hard working, teachers, nurses, blue collar, and quirky people's weddings and their tastes are definitely different than the society weddings I second on in the District. I'm not saying one is better than the other, and at the end of the day both want what they want, and they both want to look good. Thanks again for your response Matt.

Blurmore

mmmatt wrote: »

*edit* shot list? Really Jason? Isn't that asking for trouble?

I will work from a shot list, remember I work as a sub-contractor too, I have no issue with 99% of shot lists I get, the other 1% I hope for the best. For my own weddings I go over the shot list and make sure that expectations are managed, and I've told the companies I sub-contract for that they need to manage their client's expectations so far as shot lists are concerned as well. Shots lists of EXACTLY who they want in each formal are extremely valuable, shot lists that come out of magazines "groom and groomsman looking at watches" I tell people up front that I'm not a photo-roboto.

mmmatt

Blurmore wrote: »

I will work from a shot list, remember I work as a sub-contractor too, I have no issue with 99% of shot lists I get, the other 1% I hope for the best. For my own weddings I go over the shot list and make sure that expectations are managed, and I've told the companies I sub-contract for that they need to manage their client's expectations so far as shot lists are concerned as well. Shots lists of EXACTLY who they want in each formal are extremely valuable, shot lists that come out of magazines "groom and groomsman looking at watches" I tell people up front that I'm not a photo-roboto.

I just don't want a shotlist to guide my chee. I wander about aimlessly for the better part of the day. I walk into a shoot almost completely unrehearsed mentally and stumble into and through my shot ideas. I always get a little nervous being completely without a plan, but I have learned that shooting without a plan allows me to be more open to new ideas that otherwise would have never found their way into my head. For me it was about controlling my anxiety and letting go a little bit... faith in myself and that sort of thing. Sure I replicate shots of my own and others, but when I go into a shoot thinking specifically what I am going to shoot I feel I fail myself.

None of that works if I have a shot list whether it be mine or my brides. I encourage brides to make a list of family formals they want but tell them they need to designate a person to put groups together since I don't know the people and will be busy shooting.

That's my personal thing with a shot list, and there is also the potential legal issues/hard feelings if you miss one of those shots. I guess I just thought that most photogs were against shot lists. Writing this my threadjack alarm was going off, but it probably does coincide with the main theme of the thread. I think it is the level of creative control you are willing or able to give up.

Matt