Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmycooper
This thread is closed.
|
Jimmy...From what I read Paul say, he merely asked why a photographer that good wasn't shooting for Playboy.
Looks like they are at magazine level.
As for why a semi-retired guy in Europe didn't "recognize" that photographers work...I have to admit I've never heard of Holly Randall either. I just don't make it my life's work to find out who is shooting magazine stuff in 2011.
But Paul's point that most still photography these days is the "photographer" snapping 300 pics so fast that it's just the girl moving one millimeter at a time from photo to photo is dead right.
I personally won't do that. I REFUSE to take the same pic over and over and over. I try to compose a different picture each time that tells a story.
And I'm just a a piss-ant.
Paul is correct to say WHY would major sites have those kinds of sets of photography (the cameraman just snapping as fast as he can) instead of carefully composed shots?
It's like you could print them out on index card size photo paper, and flip them with your hands and you'd have animation! lol