student said:This very statement shows how little you know of photography. Your statement shows a very twisted mindset, which appears to me to result from a sense of being sidelined by female models, and perhaps of a certain type of upbringing. Why are people not looking at me? ME! ME!
Know what I mean by losing MANHOOD?
Not how physically tough one is, or the postition one holds in society. Not how rich you are. Or rather how rich your parents are. Not how fanciful your dwelling is. But the attributes of being a MAN. Of self-confidence. Not having to pretend. The surface is just that. Surface. Just because a peacock extends his feathers does not make its "maleness" more "male".
Photography is a form of visual communication, and one communicates what he/she wishes to communicate. One who likes insects will show images of insects. Others may show images of marine life. A photographer does not have to be "balanced" to please anyone.
Cartier Bresson is one of the photography greats. And no. He did not join photoshoots. He did not make pictures of the eyes of sandfly.
But he communicated clearly his vision of the world as he saw it.
He was not balanced.
And GREAT!
Ed.CJ said:Hoho! Don't want to overtake Thailand or cannot overtake Thailand? Hmmm.. Some Singapore Men really ought to look at themselves in the mirror...![]()
catchlights said:No, I don't think so,
maybe a chio bu offer a TFCD for nude shoot will definitely brake a record. :bsmilie:
simon80 said:a broken heart :bheart:
:bsmilie:
Pro Image said:I agree with you on this.....and as you can see he is already full of himself on this thread alone. Is he really a man "MALE MODEL"?:sweat:
Ed.CJ said:Haha! Apples to oranges to durians.... Hmmmmm.. Think twice.
Ed.CJ said:See. A very excellent example of the nature of photographers.![]()
1.)FREE!
2.)NAKED!
3.)WOW!
4.)RUSH!
Ed.CJ said:See. A very excellent example of the nature of photographers.![]()
1.)FREE!
2.)NAKED!
3.)WOW!
4.)RUSH!
that's why i use the word "difficult" instead of "can not" associate male...1911 said:...Your statement "it's just difficult to associate male with aesthetics or beauty" is biased against your own gender (assuming u r a guy); and it is misleading...
Ed.CJ said:Well. I never said i knew much about photography.But i do know the nature of some photographers in here. Not all are bad because i know decent ones still exist. Oh yes! I am not saying photographers who only shoot females are perverts. Only some.. They know who they are. Hmmm.. Maybe some of the people defending themselves strongly and picking on my statements..
Suspicion haunts the guilty mind..
Tuck Loong said:Wow exciting stuff here![]()
These are my comments after working closely with more local male models (not talents) than local female models wannabees and talents.
* Male models/talents are a lot easier to work with. They can often carry the look much better than local female talents/model wannabees. Its a lot easier to style local guys than girls (putting a $5K hugo boss suit on a local guy is a lot easier than to put a $5K lanvin dress on local girl to achieve what the stylist/art director wants)
* Local guys tend to be more humble than their female counterparts. If you can recall the report on the newpaper last week, its really true you get a lot more problems from some local female model wannabees/talents with a Big Head and I know everything attitude. These girls think they have the right to choose the photographer/stylist/makeup/hair people to work with as they have appeared in some advertisements, done some shows/events or joined some pageants. However, most of the creative team are not interested to work with local female talents/model wannabees unless they are paid to do the job.
However, having said that. I think you should just refrain from giving yourself and your agency a bad name. Most local male models/talents are very easy to work with. They do not come across as having attitudes.
Be nice to everyone, some of them just prefer to shoot females. For me, since I retired from photography, I always try my best to help any good hearted guys or gals who came and ask for help. All fresh models with a good attitude deserve a chance to try and succeed .If I was still shooting, I would not have bothered much unless they are my friends as having locals in the portfolio does not attract more fashion jobs for me.
Ed.CJ said:Well. I never said i knew much about photography.
CYRN said:For myself, I dun wan.
Mabbe for you... you cant. :bsmilie:
simon80 said:TFCD is defintely not naked ..
for point 1,2,4 ... is part of singaporean ..
my dear little officer
student said:Despite your claim to "some" measure of intelligence ( quoting your double majors - that is a big deal?), you clearly show you lack quite a bit of intellgence -if not IQ then EQ. Giving you the benefit of the doubt that you might have "some IQ', your intelligence is certainly misapplied.
People here are not the least bothered by your statements. If you do not understand that, the "pickings" are directed at your attitude. The attitude that resulted in those nonsensical egoistic statements you made.
Intelligent? Long way off, boy!
student said:I see.
So do you or do you not know much about photography? I will assume you know little.
Then please! What was that nonsense in post #63 when you declared that " a photographer should be ready to shoot anything?".
So you know little of photography and you want to tell photographers what they should photograph?
Intelligence? Stick to your mathematics and sciences. Stick out your feathers like the peacock. Maybe, just maybe, you might look better.
catchlights said:No, I don't think so,
maybe a chio bu offer a TFCD for nude shoot will definitely brake a record. :bsmilie:
Ed.CJ said:See. A very excellent example of the nature of photographers.![]()
1.)FREE!
2.)NAKED!
3.)WOW!
4.)RUSH!
simon80 said:TFCD is defintely not naked ..
for point 1,2,4 ... is part of singaporean ..
my dear little officer
Ed.CJ said:Generalization is bad.
Ed.CJ said:Haha. Isn't it true? A photographer shoots anything and everything. Clearly understood.
Ed.CJ said:Generalization is bad.