# Fauxtographer Ruins Olympic photos.



## RLPhoto (Jul 2, 2012)

This is Awful. :'(

http://solsticevisuals.com/post/26229830602/outrage-over-the-photographs-of-the-united-states


----------



## peederj (Jul 2, 2012)

The German ones they link to in comparison were worse! Blown out highlights, jaundiced skin tones, srsly?

It's a recession I suppose they'll argue? We can't have it appear we are splashing lots of money glorifying mere athletes with competent portraitists while there are people out of work?


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 2, 2012)

peederj said:


> The German ones they link to in comparison were worse! Blown out highlights, jaundiced skin tones, srsly?
> 
> It's a recession I suppose they'll argue? We can't have it appear we are splashing lots of money glorifying mere athletes with competent portraitists while there are people out of work?



The german ones were pretty safe, but the US ones were just... bad.


----------



## DanoPhoto (Jul 2, 2012)

guess you get what you pay for....  

not very impressive.


----------



## wickidwombat (Jul 3, 2012)

ROFL that is terrible tis like a trainwreck, I cant look away!

his white seamless paper is a bit tatty

now why would they not have just got a real pro like joe mcnally to do this
I mean this is what a guy like him does, I doubt there is anyone on the planet that
could do a better job of this sort of shoot than joe


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 3, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> ROFL that is terrible tis like a trainwreck, I cant look away!
> 
> his white seamless paper is a bit tatty
> 
> ...



Agreed, This is laudable of fauxtography.

I could have done better with a rebel, 50mm, and a couple of whiteboards.


----------



## wickidwombat (Jul 3, 2012)

RLPhoto said:
 

> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > ROFL that is terrible tis like a trainwreck, I cant look away!
> ...



I think if strapped a camera to my arse and wasnt looking I could have done better than that


----------



## The_Arsonist (Jul 3, 2012)

Makes me wonder if this was one of those "we can't pay you, but think of the exposure you'll get!" type of jobs.


----------



## captainkanji (Jul 3, 2012)

Wow! Those pics are horrid (especially the Phelps one). I'm no expert, having owned a DSLR for a mere 4 months, but I'm pretty sure even I could do better than that with a 7d. I expect perfection from an Olympic photographer. This is why they are called "professional." OMG the one with track and field star Merritt, seriously. I guess low expectations have moved into photography. These horrid photos have motivated me to kick serious @$$ with every pic I take.

edit: wow, check out Kevin Jairaj's photos of the team
http://www.uspresswire.com/search/fulltext/jairaj%20summit/page1


----------



## cbphoto (Jul 3, 2012)

whew! Those pics are horrible!


----------



## wickidwombat (Jul 3, 2012)

There is nothing redeeming in any shot 
I think he has managed to nail the least flattering composition of every single person
the lighting is woeful
background paper oh god its wrinkled ripped you can see every mark on it and gelling is less than amaturish
poor lens selections causing strange distortions funny cropping of limbs etc horrid posing of subjects

I feel sorry for the athletes really, is the economy so bad that the us government couldn't afford to hire a real photographer?


----------



## distant.star (Jul 3, 2012)

.

I don't see the problem. They'll look great on Facebook!


----------



## Hill Benson (Jul 3, 2012)

It looks like a lot of those pics were rushed to me. The results don't appear to be of someone who is comfortable and experienced in that area of studio photography. Whoever picked that photographer most likely could have made a better choice. It's not *what* you know, it's *who* you know.


----------



## picturesbyme (Jul 3, 2012)

Unbelievable. The guy and whoever authorized this should be punished. Severely.
Even a half decent photog like me could have done better and there are tens of thousands waaay better ones in the country. This is just sad....


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 3, 2012)

After reading all the comments about the people who know they could dotter, why did they not post their images to show us? 

We do not know under what circumstances the images were taken. He certainly seems to have a lot of prominent images, including photographer of the year in 2009. 

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Joe+Klamar+&qpvt=Joe+Klamar+&FORM=IGRE


----------



## KyleSTL (Jul 3, 2012)

Agreed with everyone else. The outrage over the photographs is not in any way an over-reaction. They are some of the most poorly composed studio shots I've ever seen. Clearly the photographer does not know how to look at the whole frame and know what is included and excluded. The wide angle shots are clearly the result of inexperience.



captainkanji said:


> Wow! Those pics are horrid (especially the Phelps one). I'm no expert, having owned a DSLR for a mere 4 months, but I'm pretty sure even I could do better than that with a 7d. I expect perfection from an Olympic photographer. This is why they are called "professional." OMG the one with track and field star Merritt, seriously. I guess low expectations have moved into photography. These horrid photos have motivated me to kick serious @$$ with every pic I take.
> 
> edit: wow, check out Kevin Jairaj's photos of the team
> http://www.uspresswire.com/search/fulltext/jairaj%20summit/page1



Kevin did pretty good with the exception of lens choice for the headshots with the glittered background. What was he using? 35mm? The noses looks outrageous. Should have been 85mm or 135mm prime to keep composition and background compression the same throughout.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 3, 2012)

Before everyone gets too carried away, I'd like to know the full story. 

The description sounds like this was a cattle call with a bunch of photographers each given a few minutes to shoot the athletes. (Can you say: Popular Photography "Model Shoot") Not defending this particular photographer, but I'd like to know more about the set up and who on the Olympics Committee decided a "shoot off" was a good idea.

At least with the "model shoot" the models know something about what they are doing. Here, you have athletes (not professional models) at a cattle call, most of whom look like they don't' want to be there. Criticize the photographer if you want, but I say the blame lies with the Olympic Committee. 

Irony is, if they wanted something edgy and creative, they probably could have gotten people like Ryan McGinley, Stephen Shore, William Eggleston or Lee Friedlander to create some true art with the athletes. Now, those would be interesting.


----------



## Chewy734 (Jul 3, 2012)

Is this for real?  It's appallingly bad.


----------



## picturesbyme (Jul 3, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> After reading all the comments about the people who know they could dotter, why did they not post their images to show us?
> 
> We do not know under what circumstances the images were taken. He certainly seems to have a lot of prominent images, including photographer of the year in 2009.
> 
> http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Joe+Klamar+&qpvt=Joe+Klamar+&FORM=IGRE



Sorry but there is NO excuse for this.
Shooting a crazy amount of snapshots (and not learning from it) or having connections are not going to make him a good photographer. 
Don't know how he got the award but if he's pro he should't give these out of his hands. 

Agree. A gallery or website should be advised to register on the forum.
I was hoping that this post http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=6114.0 will help to get to know people's work but this is a gear/rumor page after all...


----------



## Wideopen (Jul 3, 2012)

That was awful.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 3, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> After reading all the comments about the people who know they could dotter, why did they not post their images to show us?
> 
> We do not know under what circumstances the images were taken. He certainly seems to have a lot of prominent images, including photographer of the year in 2009.
> 
> http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Joe+Klamar+&qpvt=Joe+Klamar+&FORM=IGRE



Your only as good as your last shoot. Unfortunately, this is going to be hard for him to live down.


----------



## captainkanji (Jul 3, 2012)

I looked through bing images and it looks to me like he specializes in sports/action and red carpet shoots. I don't think portraits are his forte. I kinda feel bad for the guy, but then again, he gets paid to do this. I'm just a schmuck with a camera, so no one cares that I suck


----------



## dafrank (Jul 3, 2012)

After looking at the link to his work, it appears that the photographer was merely out of his element, or even out of his depth, and should not have been given this assignment. Granted, I don't know the precise circumstances behind the shoot, but the best of these images just seem to be "undeveloped" and the rest just plain not good enough in general. I really, really hate to be so critical, especially if the shooter is suffering from inexperience and its attendand lack of knowledge of how to pull off such material, but the results do speak for themselves - mediocre to poor.

I just feel plain sorry for the photographer and embarassed for the person from the Olympic organization who misappropriated this opportunity to create some competent material. My guess is that should he eventually learn how to shoot in a style consistant with this assignment, the photographer will be forever haunted by this highly public failure; this is a personal tragedy for him, and a not very good representation of our best athletes for the world to see. Pity, pity, pity.  :-[

Regards,
David


----------



## AprilForever (Jul 3, 2012)

These remind me of the corny refuse one finds on lame photo-edu-inspiration sites... "Now show the edge of the flag/white for realism. Make sure you have a hole in your backdrop; this adds a gritttier feel. Also, what swimmer doesn't want to be photographed looking like the cover of a cheap and sleazy magazine? Use ultrawide on gymnasts; nothing gives an in-your-face action feel like ultrawide distortion on an otherwise attractive female athlete. When you light the subject, keep their eyes dark to add a feeling of tension." And so on.. this is why I never go one those websites anymore...

But, yes, to me it looks like he had his college assistan taking the shots while he played solitaire. Maybe he was paid by the russians to make the USA look like idiots. Either way, were I the olympic committee, I would have him pummeled to death with a 600 f4...


----------



## lopicma (Jul 3, 2012)

I have a feeling the photographer did not have unlimited access to these folks. Probably less than a minute each, because there were 100s of other photographers, all waiting their turn. You get what you can and hope for the best.

One thing for sure, I don't think any of these shots will make to a box of *Wheaties*! LOL


----------



## Axilrod (Jul 3, 2012)

Wow the tears in the white paper look terrible, couldn't he have taken a few minutes to shop those out? It seriously looks like these images are for some comedy publication making a joke out of the olympics. I bet some higher up insisted that they let his inexperienced son take the pictures. There is no way this guy got this gig based on talent.


----------



## picturesbyme (Jul 3, 2012)

I don't see how/where this guy became The Photographer of the Year as one cited but I found that he received an award - picture of the year 2009... 
http://dalje.com/en-bestseller/joe-klamar-wins-picture-of-the-year/278595
.. for a photo he took of Obama... 
http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/gallery/090331/GAL-09Mar31-1812/media/PHO-09Mar31-157031.jpg


----------



## captainkanji (Jul 3, 2012)

Wow. Looks like a guy who got an award for doing absolutely nothing.


----------



## wickidwombat (Jul 4, 2012)

picturesbyme said:


> I don't see how/where this guy became The Photographer of the Year as one cited but I found that he received an award - picture of the year 2009...
> http://dalje.com/en-bestseller/joe-klamar-wins-picture-of-the-year/278595
> .. for a photo he took of Obama...
> http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/gallery/090331/GAL-09Mar31-1812/media/PHO-09Mar31-157031.jpg



WTF? i kept scrolling waiting for the rest of the picture to load until i realised that was it.
:-[


----------



## DanoPhoto (Jul 4, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> WTF? i kept scrolling waiting for the rest of the picture to load until i realised that was it.
> :-[


 
now I know what you meant...picture of the year?


----------



## Z (Jul 4, 2012)

It's very easy to criticise these photos from the armchair. Clearly the photog did not have enough time to make decent looking images and has limited experience on posing people (the 'dive' shot, anyone? ???).

I feel sorry for him for the results of this shoot. He was probably rushed off his feet and stressed by people who have unrealistic expectations when someone more experienced/established (somebody mentioned Joe McNally) would probably have answered back along the lines of _"Hang on... you're not going to get a portrait from me within 60 seconds."_

The photographer probably decided it was better to have tripe than to have nothing. Hopefully he will learn from this assignment and it won't ruin his career too much.


----------



## Razor2012 (Jul 4, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > wickidwombat said:
> ...



Lol, that would make a good SNL skit.


----------



## n0iZe (Jul 4, 2012)

DanoPhoto said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > WTF? i kept scrolling waiting for the rest of the picture to load until i realised that was it.
> ...



I could've done better than this with my iPad 2.
I would even have been able to do an underwater shot with it, which the "photographer" couldn't do with whatever equipment he used.

Really embarrassing.


----------



## wickidwombat (Jul 5, 2012)

Z said:


> It's very easy to criticise these photos from the armchair. Clearly the photog did not have enough time to make decent looking images and has limited experience on posing people (the 'dive' shot, anyone? ???).
> 
> I feel sorry for him for the results of this shoot. He was probably rushed off his feet and stressed by people who have unrealistic expectations when someone more experienced/established (somebody mentioned Joe McNally) would probably have answered back along the lines of _"Hang on... you're not going to get a portrait from me within 60 seconds."_
> 
> The photographer probably decided it was better to have tripe than to have nothing. Hopefully he will learn from this assignment and it won't ruin his career too much.



The athletes could have got better shots of them selves using iphones at arms length making facebook faces

and yes I would think that to present something as important as your national olympic team you may as well send the hat round and drum up enough coin to pay a real proffessional like joe mcnally to do it properly, shoot it all in a stadium.

I would rather have claimed i had a memory card failure and lost all the photos than actually post those on the internet regardless of time constraints


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 6, 2012)

There is a follow-up article here. 

http://m.watoday.com.au/olympics/news-london-2012/finally-the-web-draws-the-line-at-the-worlds-ugliest-photograph-of-michael-phelps-20120706-21l23.html


----------



## Razor2012 (Jul 6, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> There is a follow-up article here.
> 
> http://m.watoday.com.au/olympics/news-london-2012/finally-the-web-draws-the-line-at-the-worlds-ugliest-photograph-of-michael-phelps-20120706-21l23.html



That actually explains quite abit. I'm sure there were alot more 'bad' photos out there that we haven't seen. I do feel for the guy though.


----------



## iaind (Jul 6, 2012)

If the American athletes are despondent after their photo sessions can he do the Chinese Olympic Squad next


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 7, 2012)

The photographer explains his actions here.

http://www.petapixel.com/2012/07/06/photographer-joe-klamar-explains-his-controversial-olympic-portraits/

Preparation is key.


----------



## picturesbyme (Jul 7, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> The photographer explains his actions here.
> 
> http://www.petapixel.com/2012/07/06/photographer-joe-klamar-explains-his-controversial-olympic-portraits/
> 
> Preparation is key.



No. Just making excuses. (should have said that wasn't my day, sorry I messed up)
As one of the comments said it in that article: *"Stop making excuses for this ...!"*

Look at his "red carpet work"... even with the time issue those are just as bad snapshots as these. 
How he got the job or the award for that photo is beyond me...


----------



## dmsphoto (Jul 7, 2012)

I think it is interesting that they keep talking about 100 athletes in 3 days. There are many of us out there that shoot individual/team photos that eclipse that number in an afternoon. He said he had a days notice...so he should have dropped everything, researched and gotten prepared. He wasn't asked to shoot the local baseball league...this was the Olympic team...you drop *everything*...immediately. And take every piece of gear you have. When I go on a shoot for team sports, I am bring 5 strobes (I use 2) and 3 small flashes, 3 bodies and every lens I have in addition to light modifiers, remotes, etc. and I get asked why I bring so much gear to "take a picture"...and my reply is because "it's the gear I don't realize I need till I get there". It is more work lugging that stuff but better to have the gear and be prepared than to make excuses. 

It is easy to sit back and say "I could have done better"...but stop and think about everything involved from the environment to the other photogs, to dealing with the athletes, the stress, among other things. I can only imagine that sick feeling this poor guy has. But I bet you he will never go into a situation unprepared again. That's if this episode doesn't ruin him.


----------



## Kernuak (Jul 7, 2012)

In recent years, there has been an increasing opinion by the masses, that anyone can get shots as good as professionals, if they have the right gear. This has been one of the drivers towards the slashing of budgets by (or for) photo editors. Yes, the recession has played its part, but how many previous recessions have resulted in photo editors trying to do things on the cheap? The digital age has certainly played its part in the exposure of photography, allowing people to take photographs with good gear to an extent that wasn't previously possible, but this has led to a number of myths and misconceptions. Perhaps this incident will act as a wake up call to photo editors and to organisers of such shoots, that the results achieved are important and to get good results, you have to have the proper planning and expertise. You may not have to have formal qualifications to get memorable photographs on a regular basis (as opposed to one-offs), but you certainly need to gain experience through hard work and practice and above all overall talent. Hopefully, it will make those in charge of budgets, that it is in their interests to pay for the level of photography that is needed, you get what you pay for and ultimately quality is what sells. If you have better imagery than your competitor magazines (for example), then provided the content is what the potential customers want, then you have an advantage.


----------



## zim (Jul 7, 2012)

http://blogs.afp.com/correspondent/?post/2012/07/05/Pixels-and-piety%3A-Photographing-Olympic-icons

_Some people posting comments on the Web seemed to get it. “I am not a professional photographer,” ‘jhydrazi’, began somewhat apologetically on reddit.com. “But these images are not bad… In fact, they have a quality that makes them feel real. REAL.”_

hahahahahahahahahahahaha...........

_“This is a whole other millennium,” said another comment, rather dramatically. “We don’t have to accept the airbrushed, Photoshopped concept of beauty any more. Photographers and art directors have done that forever, and lots of us would rather see what actually happened in front of the lens.”_

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.........

I love the interweb

Aparently you're all wrong these are good honest pics, it's the subjects that are ugly


----------



## Kernuak (Jul 7, 2012)

zim said:


> http://blogs.afp.com/correspondent/?post/2012/07/05/Pixels-and-piety%3A-Photographing-Olympic-icons
> 
> _Some people posting comments on the Web seemed to get it. “I am not a professional photographer,” ‘jhydrazi’, began somewhat apologetically on reddit.com. “But these images are not bad… In fact, they have a quality that makes them feel real. REAL.”_
> 
> ...


And therein lies the problem. The public have become so used to seeing airbrushed photos, they think that is the only way that decent photos are produced. I've had a few people ask me (or someone where my photos were for sale) what I did to them to get the results. The fact is, call me old fashioned, but I like to get things right in camera as much as possible, rather than spend hours fixing what I got wrong. The heavy manipulation will ultimately damage photography as an art form if we aren't careful. There's nothing wrong with manipulation in the right circumstances, but in my opinion it should be declared and sold as digital art, not photography. There are moves now to declare when portraits have been airbrushed, but it's slow in being adopted from what I can see.


----------



## distant.star (Jul 7, 2012)

.

There may be hope yet.

Wednesday I was shooting the local parade and a remembrance event. I kept bumping heads with another photographer. I didn't know him -- all I knew was he had a Nikon D3 and a lens as long as three Philly cheesesteaks. We were both on the same shots, same POV, etc.

The next day I saw his pictures on the Web site of the local newspaper. They were outstanding. I had no idea that publication actually used a real photographer. After some research I learned he did mostly sports shooting for them, so I'd never seen his work before.

Nice to know at least one newspaper is using a real photographer. Maybe the idea will spread!





Kernuak said:


> In recent years, there has been an increasing opinion by the masses, that anyone can get shots as good as professionals, if they have the right gear. This has been one of the drivers towards the slashing of budgets by (or for) photo editors. Yes, the recession has played its part, but how many previous recessions have resulted in photo editors trying to do things on the cheap? The digital age has certainly played its part in the exposure of photography, allowing people to take photographs with good gear to an extent that wasn't previously possible, but this has led to a number of myths and misconceptions. Perhaps this incident will act as a wake up call to photo editors and to organisers of such shoots, that the results achieved are important and to get good results, you have to have the proper planning and expertise. You may not have to have formal qualifications to get memorable photographs on a regular basis (as opposed to one-offs), but you certainly need to gain experience through hard work and practice and above all overall talent. Hopefully, it will make those in charge of budgets, that it is in their interests to pay for the level of photography that is needed, you get what you pay for and ultimately quality is what sells. If you have better imagery than your competitor magazines (for example), then provided the content is what the potential customers want, then you have an advantage.


----------



## infilm (Jul 7, 2012)

Z said:


> It's very easy to criticise these photos from the armchair. Clearly the photog did not have enough time to make decent looking images and has limited experience on posing people (the 'dive' shot, anyone? ???).
> 
> I feel sorry for him for the results of this shoot. He was probably rushed off his feet and stressed by people who have unrealistic expectations when someone more experienced/established (somebody mentioned Joe McNally) would probably have answered back along the lines of _"Hang on... you're not going to get a portrait from me within 60 seconds."_
> 
> The photographer probably decided it was better to have tripe than to have nothing. Hopefully he will learn from this assignment and it won't ruin his career too much.


Rushed or not, if you are a real pro you create the time to make a good image. I don't agree that this person was rushed at all. This guy just don't know how to create a good portrait. Every image has serious lighting or composition flaws. Very poor.


----------



## FunPhotons (Jul 7, 2012)

Z said:


> It's very easy to criticise these photos from the armchair. Clearly the photog did not have enough time to make decent looking images and has limited experience on posing people (the 'dive' shot, anyone? ???).
> 
> I feel sorry for him for the results of this shoot. He was probably rushed off his feet and stressed by people who have unrealistic expectations when someone more experienced/established ...



Armchair photogs indeed! OK critics, you have five minutes to set up your shoot, what would you do? And enlighten us specifically on how he screwed up.

To the one who could do better with an iPad-show us.


----------



## infilm (Jul 7, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> The photographer explains his actions here.
> 
> http://www.petapixel.com/2012/07/06/photographer-joe-klamar-explains-his-controversial-olympic-portraits/
> 
> Preparation is key.


His own explanation shows a full failure. "I was under the impression that I was going to be photographing athletes on a stage or during press conference where I would take their headshots for our archives,” He knew that he was going to be taking portraits "for archives" and he brought a wide zoom a long zoom a 300 and a flash. Even knowing what he was to shoot he brought the wrong equipment. Poor lens choices and not enough lighting gear.


----------



## infilm (Jul 7, 2012)

dmsphoto said:


> I think it is interesting that they keep talking about 100 athletes in 3 days. There are many of us out there that shoot individual/team photos that eclipse that number in an afternoon. He said he had a days notice...so he should have dropped everything, researched and gotten prepared. He wasn't asked to shoot the local baseball league...this was the Olympic team...you drop *everything*...immediately. And take every piece of gear you have. When I go on a shoot for team sports, I am bring 5 strobes (I use 2) and 3 small flashes, 3 bodies and every lens I have in addition to light modifiers, remotes, etc. and I get asked why I bring so much gear to "take a picture"...and my reply is because "it's the gear I don't realize I need till I get there". It is more work lugging that stuff but better to have the gear and be prepared than to make excuses.
> 
> It is easy to sit back and say "I could have done better"...but stop and think about everything involved from the environment to the other photogs, to dealing with the athletes, the stress, among other things. I can only imagine that sick feeling this poor guy has. But I bet you he will never go into a situation unprepared again. That's if this episode doesn't ruin him.


 +1 to you


----------



## Kernuak (Jul 7, 2012)

distant.star said:


> .
> 
> There may be hope yet.
> 
> ...


It's good to know that some publications are using good photographers, instead of trying to pay peanuts on microstock sites to get the images they are looking for or paying someone with little or no experience.


----------



## picturesbyme (Jul 7, 2012)

Kernuak said:


> It's good to know that some publications are using good photographers, instead of trying to pay peanuts on microstock sites to get the images they are looking for or paying someone with little or no experience.



Yes, that's nice but just to be in the clear, most microstock sites have awesome photos. 
On the other hand I don't agree with the 25 cents / image price either but that's another thing...


----------



## Kernuak (Jul 7, 2012)

picturesbyme said:


> Kernuak said:
> 
> 
> > It's good to know that some publications are using good photographers, instead of trying to pay peanuts on microstock sites to get the images they are looking for or paying someone with little or no experience.
> ...


I wouldn't disagree with that, after all, they have some of the most stringent QA. However, it is a reflection of modern culture, that people seem to want something for nothing and amateur photographers, while many are of a very high standard, as high or higher than many pros, they don't have the same business acumen, which affects not just them, but the industry as a whole. This invites the exploitation and I disagree with large multi-million corporations getting high quality images for peanuts. When they run a high profile ad campaign using a string of 25 cent images and make millions from that campaign, there is somethin wrong somewhere. We all have to accept it, but we don't have to like it.


----------



## And-Rew (Jul 8, 2012)

However you look at these images, they are not what you would expect for a national Olympic team.
The UK Olympic team photos pretty much look stunning, and if the team performs as well as the images look, the UK may even get some gold medals!


----------



## wickidwombat (Jul 9, 2012)

FunPhotons said:


> Z said:
> 
> 
> > It's very easy to criticise these photos from the armchair. Clearly the photog did not have enough time to make decent looking images and has limited experience on posing people (the 'dive' shot, anyone? ???).
> ...



ok given the equipment he says he had
and only 1 speedlight this is how i would have set up

first i would have not bothereed with that ripped and shredded white paper
I would have decided that every shot would be a low key rim lit shot at least then the whole lot would look like a coherant series

easily set that up in 5 mins

found the darkest corner of the room and setup accordingly with the 1 speedlight fireing way from the athlete and angled just enough for the spill light to give a nice side rimlight but still picking up features so more of a sidelight but angels away so the full flash isnt lighting the subject up too much, easy to adjust untill its just right then you get everyone to stand in the same spot

i would have scrounged up some black card or something to help shape the light to avoid spill

probably be shooting at f16 just shoot the flash on manual and have the models pose to look a little more substantial and imposing probably shooting from below their eyeline get a few different safe poses done and not bothered with all the silly poses. I would probably have only bothered shooting with the 70-200 out of the lenses he had although I take a 50mm prime everywhere i go so in reality if it was me i would have had that lens with me and would have just shot that

i'm assuming he had a full frame camera, if he only had a crop then the 17-35 would have been the weapon of choice but used at the long end I'm also guessing he was shooting nikon

I think the pictures clearly indicate he has no experience with posing people, let alone shooting any kind of studio setup. The compositions are woefull and the lighting is god awefull any first year photography student could do a significantly better job with the gear and time he had


----------



## Daniel Flather (Jul 12, 2012)

If we knew the whole story, opinions would change.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 13, 2012)

Daniel Flather said:


> If we knew the whole story, opinions would change.



+1


----------

