How much do youall try to go with modern trends in photography or stay with the more proven but somewhat more basic styles.

I'm speaking specifically about the lomo-style look that has come back full-circle in the last year or so. About a year and a half ago I found some photo sites on Holga cameras (similar to Lomo and Diana) and LOVED the vignetted edges, blurs, light leaks, etc. I bought two off ebay.

Now, that style is almost mainstream, I feel (could be wrong). My favorite portrait photographer, Jim Erickson Jim Erickson Portfolio, uses this almost exclusively -- in fact he's started his own business (Fatcat Digital) just to process his images with this look (and other post-production edits).

So, do you all prefer to ride the trend waves, and make everything you're doing now have that look a) because it's trendy and hip, because you really just like it, c) because it's new to you, d) because the nitorix actionscript was only $18?

I still LOVE the look for photos that have an appropriate subject matter/style, but do you feel it's wise to be lomo-ing everything we do?

Looking for the answers to life (and the above questions)

Josh: Great question! I've gone back and forth on this one many times over the years and don't really have a strong opinion one way or another. I would say that it depends on your motive and the situation...

If you are "lomo-ing" everything because your clients really like it and it adds just that much more value to the work you produce for them, I think it's not only perfectly fine, but a very smart thing to do.

If you are doing it because it's hip and everyone else is, but not for any other reason than that, I still think it is an okay or good thing to do. If doing so makes you happy and pushes you creatively, then great!

If you are doing it for no specific reason, though, other than the fact that you have a script and can't think of anything better to do with your index finger then click your mouse on it, then I think you might be approaching when not to use it.

...basically, though I can't really come up with a strong for or against, I'd say there's no problem at all with repetition, trend following or a continual practice of an effect that you know makes your clients happy.

That said, when I really look at photography (which I rarely do anymore), then I tend to expect a reason for everything: lighting, composition, subject matter, angle, choice of lens and camera settings, printing method, display method, etc., etc., etc.

Hope that helps!

Peter, this is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. None of us have that spare time for our index fingers you mentioned, but here's closer to what I was getting at:

I rarely have "clients" so I spend more time looking at photographs to see how they're composed, why a photographer used a particular effect, etc. I don't have any formal training in this, so I spend a good bit of time looking into HOW to do the things I've seen and liked. Basically, ONLY having what I plan and intend in the frame is a part of what I've always seen as "professional" in regards to photography. Control of the camera, the film (until now), the lighting, the subject, etc.

Which leads me to think if the vignetted look is such a fave of photograhers now, why not get lenses, attachments and build this into your photographs? Obviously, the easy answer is that by NOT doing that we each have the ability to add that/control that in post production.

I think the bigger question for me is in regards to following the trends. Does classy/classic trump modern/trendy?

I'm curious

I'd say if you are trying to make a living and "modern/trendy" is in, it's more profitable to give the little feller's what they want.

...do I see my personal work that way though? Not for a moment. However, I haven't done much personal work in the last 5 or so years, probably because I needed to put money in the bank!