which of these two do you think is a better photographer

[Kelvrick]

Originally posted by: Mo0o
Personally I like #2 a lot more. I enjoy the artistic crap that's more abstract. Seems like stylitically #1's portfolio is pretty limited so theres not that many interesting things to look at.

I think #2 gets more interesting pictures, #1 gets better WEDDING pictures. My thoughts is all.


EDIT: Here's who I'm booking for my wedding.
http://edpingol.blogspot.com/

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

*sniffle*

No love for Digital and Video Cameras?

 

[Mo0o]

Originally posted by: Kelvrick

Originally posted by: Mo0o
Personally I like #2 a lot more. I enjoy the artistic crap that's more abstract. Seems like stylitically #1's portfolio is pretty limited so theres not that many interesting things to look at.

I think #2 gets more interesting pictures, #1 gets better WEDDING pictures. My thoughts is all.


EDIT: Here's who I'm booking for my wedding.
http://edpingol.blogspot.com/

Hmm I'm actually not a fan of such heavy color saturation in a lot of those pictures from the link you listed. The angles also kind of make me disoriented. But he's definitely good at taking pics. Enjoy your wedding

 

[BehindEnemyLines]

http://oneperfectmoment.com/blog/pricing-fees/ < pricing
http://www.planetneil.com/tangents/about/ < his techniques (very good tutorial for flash photography)

Seems like this guy is NJ area. I love his wedding photographs. He uses flash without you knowing that flash was used as everything seems so natural. I saw this in the camera forum, but maybe someone knows more about him.

I voted for #1 as the photographs seem more personal.

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
*sniffle*

No love for Digital and Video Cameras?

so what's your opinion, FBB?
I was going to post in the camera forum, but this type of poll thread requires more traffic

 

[mugs]

I prefer #1. #2 is trying too hard, and a lot of his photos look too posed.

 

[mugs]

What price range are you looking in? We used this guy: http://www.zlatkobatistich.com/. He's in NJ. We were really happy with his work.

My wife does wedding photography in NJ too. I could send you a link to her site, but she's not as good as Zlatko.

 

[Kelvrick]

Originally posted by: Mo0o

Originally posted by: Kelvrick

Originally posted by: Mo0o
Personally I like #2 a lot more. I enjoy the artistic crap that's more abstract. Seems like stylitically #1's portfolio is pretty limited so theres not that many interesting things to look at.

I think #2 gets more interesting pictures, #1 gets better WEDDING pictures. My thoughts is all.


EDIT: Here's who I'm booking for my wedding.
http://edpingol.blogspot.com/

Hmm I'm actually not a fan of such heavy color saturation in a lot of those pictures from the link you listed. The angles also kind of make me disoriented. But he's definitely good at taking pics. Enjoy your wedding

I like em.

I should have linked to his wedding section considering this is a wedding topic though.
http://edpingol.blogspot.com/2...and-more-weddings.html

 

[Homerboy]

We used these guys: http://frphoto.com/
They are, simply put, amazing. People fly them all around the world for them to take their wedding photos. Neil and Eron are incredibly great and cool guys too. The "get it".


But to the question at hand, #2 I like A LOT better. #1`, while fine is just that... they are fine. Most of his pictures are pretty common and stuff you'd likely end up with if you gave anyone a digital camera few 64GB SD cards and said "snap away". Some pictures end up being great.

#2 has some "Art" behind his photos and some "Design" to them. Sure he takes some pictures of inanimate objects and odd angles and such, but I enjoy that kind of stuff and is very similar t the guys we used. Honestly THOSE pictures are the ones that everyone that looks at our albums and such that people LOVE.

To each his own though. I'm sticking with #2

 

[irishScott]

Number 1 by far. He captures the moment and people as they are, or as they want to be. Not as some artist would like them to be. Number 2 lays on the art, and while I can respect that, at my wedding I'm pretty sure I'd want memories more than art.

That and some of number 2's pics of the Groom and Co. look like something off of a My Chemical Romance CD case.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: Homerboy
We used these guys: http://frphoto.com/
They are, simply put, amazing. People fly them all around the world for them to take their wedding photos. Neil and Eron are incredibly great and cool guys too. The "get it".

They don't look amazing at all. Their shots look like #2's shots... too artsy and they fail to capture the moment.

 

[Homerboy]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: Homerboy
We used these guys: http://frphoto.com/
They are, simply put, amazing. People fly them all around the world for them to take their wedding photos. Neil and Eron are incredibly great and cool guys too. The "get it".

They don't look amazing at all. Their shots look like #2's shots... too artsy and they fail to capture the moment.

LOL I just typed that #2 is like the guys we used. Trust me... they capture the moment perfectly.

 

[Miramonti]

One and two are both excellent photographers, but my feeling after viewing wedding galleries from both is that with photographer one, the shots are about the people, and with photographer two, the shots are about photographer two...

 

[TuxDave]

#2 is very very artistic but definitely not what I would want out of a wedding photo. #1 is for me.

 

[Legendary]

#2 given specific instructions could be fantastic. he has an eye but doesn't have a personal feel, needs to be told how to think about the event

 

[Freshgeardude]

voted one because his name is awesome.

 

[theprodigalrebel]

#2. I'm sure he chose the more 'artsy' pics for his website; he probably does remember to include plenty of heads in the other thousand pictures he probably snaps at the event. Besides, friends and family members can provide you with all the shots you'd need of 'moments'. #2 brings a little touch of Hollywood-like to the collection.

I bet the dude could even make me look attractive in a picture.

 

[joe678]

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: teatime0315

Originally posted by: pontifex
Also, what are the prices?

I'm going to guess around 4k.
Anyway... I choose #1. I don't think you could go wrong with either one. Both seem very good at what they do.

yep. both are around 4k for their base package and around 5k with one album. but Luke is cutting us a big discount for the 5k package

i like 1 better a little lighter and happier than 2

just out of curiousity how big is the discount, considering most photographers are freelancers i would imagine there is room for negotiation?

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: joe678

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: teatime0315

Originally posted by: pontifex
Also, what are the prices?

I'm going to guess around 4k.
Anyway... I choose #1. I don't think you could go wrong with either one. Both seem very good at what they do.

yep. both are around 4k for their base package and around 5k with one album. but Luke is cutting us a big discount for the 5k package

i like 1 better a little lighter and happier than 2

just out of curiousity how big is the discount, considering most photographers are freelancers i would imagine there is room for negotiation?

#2 is $1200 more than #1 for equivalent packages (wedding shot, engagement session, album, one enlargement). #2 isnt budging from his price at all. #1 offered the discount on his own. #1 is also giving a 11x13 album, #2 will give a 8x10 album

 

[imported_Lothar]

Go with whoever is cheaper.

 

[Pegun]

one based on photography, two based on his web site.

 

[Mr Pickles]

Go with #1. #2 made me listen to shitty music and I had to click on the images in the gallery instead of #1 scrolling for me.

Actually. I'd go with #1 because the last thing that you want is a photographer that's getting too freaky artsy with your pictures. Granted, you want great shots, but there is an "invisibility" factor that's important. With the shots #2 has on his website I can see him walking in front of and stopping the bride and person giving her away to take a 2 minute photoshoot.

 

[ivan2]

go with 1. #2 hardly has anything useable for a wedding album. although he's damn good with the photoshop.

 

[joe678]

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: joe678

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: teatime0315

Originally posted by: pontifex
Also, what are the prices?

I'm going to guess around 4k.
Anyway... I choose #1. I don't think you could go wrong with either one. Both seem very good at what they do.

yep. both are around 4k for their base package and around 5k with one album. but Luke is cutting us a big discount for the 5k package

i like 1 better a little lighter and happier than 2

just out of curiousity how big is the discount, considering most photographers are freelancers i would imagine there is room for negotiation?

#2 is $1200 more than #1 for equivalent packages (wedding shot, engagement session, album, one enlargement). #2 isnt budging from his price at all. #1 offered the discount on his own. #1 is also giving a 11x13 album, #2 will give a 8x10 album

noticed #1 was in albany that might add to his fee if ur in nj

 

[Gand1]

Both are quite good. I think the big difference is #2 goes waaay out of the box as opposed to #1 out of the box standard photog stuff.