Some Thoughts

I have always preferred to shoot with wide angles, a habit I picked up when I was still working with the newspapers. I guess at one point or another, many "romantic" photojournalists are mesmerised by the eccentricity, dedication, courage and vision of the great war photographer Robert Capa, whose most famous quote is arguably "If your photos are not good enough. you are not close enough".

When used wisely and skillfully, the wide angle lenses are a joy to work with. They draw viewers closer to the subjects in an intimate way which telephotos can't, and makes viewers feel for the subjects more. In my personal humble opinion, it's easier to shoot with a mid-tele zoom, open it to f2 or f1.8 and focus just on the subject itself with the backdrop thrown out of focus. It's such a prevalent practice in wedding photography now that people actually associate professionally-taken photos with those taken with a fast tele (the subject sharp sharp, and the backdrop blur blur).

However, I must admit that I am many times guilty of shooting that kind of pics because it's an easier way out for me, when I run out of ideas. Just please the crowd, give them what they want and everyone will be happy. Yeah...but sometimes I am not happy. I feel that I wasn't strong enough to stand on my ground firmly and deliver something that I personally believe in.

That's why I love Carlo Carletti's photos so much. So classic, so old-school, and none of those f1.8-shallow depth of field-magazine-prevalent kind of wedding photos. I want to work towards that style, and I think the photographer in Singapore who seems to be shooting a lot with wide angles is Ruey Loon (36frames). (correct me if I am wrong).

Way to go.