You're kind of awful and mean for no reason.
umm... read: evil club AND mean. and for the record, amen esb.
She's awful and mean for OUR ENJOYMENT.
Awful and mean for no reason? No, there's a reason. Self esteem. This woman has very little.
So brave - writing an anonymous comment. So what you're doing here is called 'an ad hominem' attack. That means you're trying to negate the argument by attacking the person instead of the argument itself. Disagreement is fine. What you've written followed, by hiding behind an anon handle is total bullshit on so many levels. Why not just defend engagement sessions instead and keep your personal attacks out of it? That will definitely make you seem like less of an asshole. For the record, ESB is pretty explicit about the fact that one of the blog's functions is a snarky comment on the ridiculousness of the wedding industry. That certainly doesn't imply that she has low self esteem.
You're the shit, Sharon! Why do people think it's so wrong to be critical? Seriously. Blows my mind. We're all supposed to have the same positive opinion about everything on the internet?
It's not about defending engagement sessions, Sharon. I'm completely indifferent on the topic. It's the irony and hate filled behind ESB's comment that's irritating. Who the fuck cares what color her dress is? Or her shoes. It comes off as petty jealousy. And it leaves a bad taste.
I shouldn't have called you mean and evil. I'm sorry. Btw, I'm only responsible for the first comment. The other anon is another anon.
Anon 5:39/6:03 (you're the same anon, right?). You're totally entitled to your opinion, I just think name calling doesn't support the disagreement you have with what ESB is saying. A lively discourse is better than throwing insults back and forth. Totally big of you to apologize. The other anon's comment about her self esteem also got me. It just doesn't have a place here. If she doesn't like what ESB says, then fine. Address that. Don't throw her character into the ring. Personal attacks do nothing for discourse and ultimately make the commenter look bad.
AH HA! I though exactly the same thing. I totally agree. If you're awful and mean, then I guess I am too and I don't care either!
Hahahaha, so glad there is someone out there to call out all the over-the-top wedding junk.
She says it like it is.
My theory is that photographers are colluding with the couples to style them more like wedding shoots so more people (accidentally) look at them. EVERY single engagement shoot I've been unfortunate enough to come across the past few months has featured a lady wearing a white/pale wedding-y dress.I can't imagine anyone wanting to post their own engagement pictures other than a few people who crave internet attention, so I'm guessing that photographers submit them just to advertise their services, especially newbies that don't have a lot of weddings (although Jose Villa doesn't fit that category). As NO ONE wants to look at random pictures of strangers being romantic in contrived scenarios, I think blogs are posting ones that look more like weddings to trick people into being interested.Anyway, this has mildly annoyed me, and I am glad that someone else is all "WTF, why are people buying three wedding dresses for their engagement photos, and why is everyone doing this?"
what I love is that she had TWO dresses at her actual wedding AND this other bridal looking dress for the engagement sesh. Maybe she was one of those brides that ended up buying three dresses and couldn't return them so just decided to wear them all!?
If you click through to the link you can see she also has a white flowy pantsuit in the engagement shoot. Four bridally outfits. Ca-razy. Although, maybe the second dress in the wedding photos is the same as the dress above?
I will point out that as a photographer, engagement sessions in general are -awesome- because it's like a test run before the wedding. As photographers, we learn your habits in front of a camera, like excessive blinking. It has also helped put camera-shy couples at ease on the wedding day because they've gone through the engagement session and knows what to expect from the photographer.But agreed on the engagement sessions that look like wedding sessions - very confusing.
We did an "engagement session" with our photographer because it came "free" with the booking. At first I was opposed, utterly, because of ... um ... "engagement sessions" like the one in question here. However our photog just does a 60 minute "get to know you" where she figures out how to photograph you, what you like, what you don't like, what works, what fails. I am so glad we did it because we will be that much more comfortable at the wedding in t-minus 24 days. However I will say. I did not wear white, did not purchase new shoes, did not look bridal, did not pass go. Our pictures sure as hell wouldn't pass for anything wedding-y to say the least.Keep on fighting the good fight, ESB!
I'm also 'huh? whatever' to engagement sessions but it's part of the package with my photographer. And she explained she likes to do it for the exact reasons you said. So I'm warming up to the idea. And I'll probably just wear a casual outfit of dress I feel cute in. But I will put my foot down on props and shit. I asked my photographer to print out some photos from the session so that we can display it at our wedding so I think that will be nice.Have fun at your wedding!
They look lovely. Live and let live.
is it time for my (thin) axl impression? let me know when you're ready.
@lauren it is time.
holy shit Lauren, you have me rolling on the motherfucking floor.
coming clean to say that in fact, i have no clue what you are talking about.
I took me a minute: Enjoy!
i like the idea of my (thin) axl just being this thing that breaks up fights, like that guy who ate chips to stop a brawl on the 6 train. though, let's be honest, (zaftig) axl could keep the peace, too.axl, is what i'm saying. and possibly chips?
chips are never a bad idea.
REALLY? took you a minute? i had the SAME reaction as LMO.
I just watched the chip thing. That guy is genius. Way better than Ryan Gosling breaking up fights (okay, I'm lying).
Personally, I have no interest in shelling the money for an engagement session. But if they have the cash and want to take pretty, lovey-dovey photos, then why not?
The shoot seems utterly redundant, but her engagement ring (or who knows, it could be her pre-engagement ring) is opulent and I'm jealous.Hannah
yah, that ring is gorg.
The SHOE SHOT. Oh the shoe shot. That is killing me. Am I the only one whose fiance would never in a million years stand for a professional engagement photo shoot??
mine for sure wouldn't either. and my family and friends may have laughed me out of my pre-wed photoshoot stupor
Indeed. WHY would you take a professional portrait (or, you know, several) of your SHOES? Despite looking at a raft of wedding related ish on the Internet this remains baffling to me.
^ THIS. Same with all the details shots--what are you going to do, hang that photo of your escort cards on the wall??
My boyfriend would most certainly not, and he would laugh at the suggestion. I don't quite see the point of them either, I'd rather spend more money and effort on the day/RINGS/honeymoon.Hannah
Meh. Maybe she feels she looks her best in white, maybe it's just part of the general psyche of being bridal, like how a lot of brides want to wear white to their rehearsal dinners. Commenting on ridiculous wedding excesses in general is fine, but I don't see the point of dogging on this lady in particular.
Why are the real brides on most wedding websites both slender and beautiful. I demand to see weddings of ugly brides with significant back fat and broken teeth. Thank you.
After trying on a dress with an unflattering back 'cut-out' section today, I heartily agree.Hannah
Also, why always Tuscany, Tuscany, Tuscany? Tuscany!
And...apparently I'm in a foul mood this morning. More coffee please.
I just went searching for a shot of her ring and realized I pinned it the other day: HOT.I like the dresses in this engagement session more than her actual wedding dress.Anyway, I'm going on record as not minding all of this. I'm a narcissist, sue me. I think over-choreographed e-sessions can be tiresome (think antique chest of drawers dragged into the woods for a styled faux tea party/boho picnic*) but this is pretty simple and the couple looks beautiful. I actually think it almost makes MORE sense that this shoot looks weddingy than not...seems related to the celebration more. Does that make sense?*We did an engagement session and it was kind of concepty. So I'm a hypocrite.
Obviously the bride is loaded. She had a pattern of fake candles laid out in the grass.When you're rich enough, you get to have four wedding outfits and look beautiful in various photo sessions. It's like that stupid show "Platinum Weddings" where couples spend literally thousands of dollars on napkin rings.Lesson of the story: When you have enough money you're allowed to do seemingly ridiculous things. Or something like that...
Jose Villa took her photos. I bet his cheapest package is $15K (Elizabeth Messina's is).
It also looked like they only had about 20 or so guests. Seems like you'd be saving a lot by only having a few people present.
I can't hate her because she is pretty or because she is wealthy or because her wedding is truly beautiful but i will hate her for buying the Chloe dress I could have bought for my wedding at half price overseas but didn't because I am an idiot.So now I am going to wear a burlap sack. With nice shoes.
I am definitely not speaking for this couple as I don't know them (I agree the dress looks very ceremonial, I'd wear it to my wedding!) but as far as engagement sessions between the people I do know it is such a narcissistic thing... which is fine (to me) if you don't feel the need to share it with everyone (more reasons to post photos of themselves on facebook..bleh) like, 'we get it you're engaged...so in love yada yada.' I want engagement photos, but more because I barely have any pictures of myself and my boyfriend, and that's with being together for 9 years...