Wedding Photography At It's Finest: Up-Close with G.E. Masana by Cheryl Gabiola Galvez

   From the moment you wake up in the morning to when the last guest leaves, you may find yourselves in a state of constant frenzy. Greeting guests, cutting cakes, taking pictures. You won't know what hit you. And at the end of it all, you'll want to be able to look back and relive those memories. Finding a good photographer who not only takes the routine formal shots but also captures those candid moments around you while you're too busy playing bride and groom, takes time and research.

   Well-known New York City wedding art photographer, G.E. Masana, makes it his duty to capture the pure essence of your special day. With no regard to "posed" or "stiff" stances, G.E. exquisitely captures the heart of the moment in an unobtrusive manner. G.E. has photographed the weddings of heads of companies as well as those in the entertainment industry. Given a keen sense of style and his innate ability to creatively document a moment on film, G.E. uniquely transforms wedding photography into a true artform.

   Bliss!™ editor-in-chief, Cheryl Gabiola Galvez, recently spoke with G.E. about what began as an accidental introduction to the field of photography lead to his trademark "photojournalistic" style.

Click Here To View A Sample Of G.E. Masana's Portfolio

	Describe your professional experience. For example, how did you begin your career and how long have you been in business?
	I've been photographing weddings since 1981. I grew up living over a photography studio and being a wedding photographer never entered my mind. Every weekend there would be a long line of limousines parked outside as bridal parties were in the studio getting photographed and I was off doing something else. In 1980, I ran into the owner, and being in between assignments, I photographed a few weddings. I found that I thoroughly enjoyed the experience! It allowed me as an artist to fulfill my creative urges, and I found I could earn a living - and go to a party at the same time. Try to beat that.
	You describe your work as photojournalistic. Can you expand on this?
	"Photojournalism" and "Candids" are quite the buzzwords now, and tossed about by most every photographer. Yet, it really depends on their own definition of what constitutes a candid, which usually comes down to their level of skill or comfort. Will they pose the subjects and make it appear natural, or will they simply fire the camera into a crowd of people, or is there something more to it? I can't agree with those definitions of "candid," so I must think there's something more. For a photograph to really mean something, it's got to capture the definitive moment, it has to say something about the people in the photograph. It has to mean something, evoke something, or advance the storyline. No photographer ever won a Pulitzer for a lame photograph. Have you ever seen the Sunday New York Times wedding announcement section? There's a photographer named Keating who goes to selected weddings and captures a few images of the goings on. I've admired his work for years because he captures the essence of his subjects. It's real. The people aren't mugging for a photo. They're completely unaware of his camera. It's a slice of life we're seeing, a tiny moment frozen in time. When you compare that to a so called candid from the typical wedding photographer, such as the bridal couple stopped during their first dance and told to look at the camera and grin, or posed at their cake holding the knife and staring at the camera, or popping their heads into the limo at the same time... it's a difference that makes all the difference. I use the word "photojournalistic" because people know what that conveys. I' d rather the word "documentary," because that's what it really is. I document the wedding event. I'm depicting what I see happening by way of photographs. I search throughout the whole wedding day taking as many as 1,000 images. What is this detail here? Oh, see how wonderful this looks at this moment in this light. Watch the bride right here. See what dad does at this point? The camera is capturing it all as it unfolds. And it's rather unobtrusive as I'm following the action rather than creating it. By that I mean it seems most photographers would rather interrupt the moment, such as the bride and groom's first dance, and require them to look at the camera and smile, rather than capturing what the bride and groom are already doing. In effect, those photographers are saying that your real moments aren't good enough. But you see, then the real moments are lost and replaced with artificial moments. And those faked moments look... fake. They have the photographer embedded as a part of that moment's memory, so when the bridal couple look at that resulting photo they will remember that is when the photographer stopped them and asked them to smile, rather than remembering "Oh! That's when we were dancing and you held me close and whispered 'I love you' in my ear." Big difference. I photograph the day as it unfolds, so I don't change anything about the wedding. If you recall on Star Trek, they weren't allowed to influence any of the cultures they visited. That was their prime directive. Well, it's like that for me at weddings. It's not my wedding, so who am I to manipulate people away from the natural course of their day and interject my likes and dislikes into it? I already had my wedding day, let them have theirs. I'll end up with images that are unique and special to the couple.
	What makes your photography so unique from the rest?
	In addition to capturing a wide range of moments throughout the day, I think I'm brave and free with my camera. I was an artist before I was a photographer, and I'm still an artist as a photographer. So I use my camera as an artist uses his paint brush. I'm open to creative angles and viewpoints and the whole subject of how may anything be photographed. It need not be the same way every time, and it certainly need not be done as the last photographer may have done it. I've had clients tell me that my images are "powerfully emotional." Part of that is what I'm photographing. The other part is definitely due to how I'm photographing it. The other side of the day is the portraiture: photographs of the bride and groom, their attendants and families. With that, I stay far away from the same old, same old. I don't think the world needs another photo of a bride staring at her bouquet. With too much posing, the photograph looks staged, stiff and again the photographer becomes embedded as part of the memory. So I approach this part of the coverage as a fashion shoot in that it's not really posed at all, but rather, it's people engaged in activities with perhaps a bit of coaching to make sure I get the best look. I'd rather have the bride and groom walk hand in hand and be themselves so I can get moments of them together, more reactively. It makes for a much stronger, more meaningful image. It's not a replay of last week's wedding. It's also more fun for everyone than posing could ever be. You know, I think it's feelings and emotions that I'm really photographing. I use different films for their different characteristics, much as a painter uses different colors on his palette. I also utilize fine art technique for some of the portraiture so that I can create imagery that's totally different than what any other photographer may come up with, just as Richard Avedon is different than Ansel Adams is different than Francesco Scavullo. I have a ton of work up on my site at http://www.gemasana.com so that everyone can see this range I'm able to create out of a wedding day. I've been told that my images deserve to be framed and hanging in a museum. That' s quite an endorsement for fine art photography created at a wedding.
	I've noticed by looking at your portfolio, that you enjoy capturing both color and black and white photographs. What is the advantage of capturing these special moments in full color? Many wedding couples are complimenting their wedding album with black and white, or even sepia, photographs. How do you determine whether a given formal or candid moment should be shot in black and white film over color?
	There are some photos that bode well in color and others that work better in b&w. Photojournalistic images seem to play better as b&w, simply because the absence of color forces the viewer to discover the inherent drama of the moment, rather than get carried away by the bright blues or reds in the image. Nowadays, I tend to use a mix of both color and b&w, mostly b&w however, since the bulk of my coverage is the day's events. But the bulk of my portraiture is in color because we're usually outdoors for that, and outdoors nature supplies us with beautiful flowers, foliage, skies and wonderful light. I call the wedding books I design my "wedding art" books, since they're designed to be more on the artistic edge than a regular album, and a mix of b&w with splashes of color looks great in those books.
	What kind of mood or feeling do black and white photographs exude and why do you think this type of format is becoming more popular with wedding couples?
	B&W has a classic timeless elegance to it. It's just as the film noir genre evokes a mood in part because of the use of light and dark, which is an important factor of b&w imagery, so it does in photography. When color is not a part of the image, viewers focus more on the story and meaning of the photograph, so it becomes more sensual, more intriguing. I remember mentioning b&w to bridal couples years ago when it wasn't so popular, and it was difficult to convince people to try it. So I think it's current popularity is due to it's exposure in bridal related media, and in that everything old is new again. Besides, b&w is extremely flattering to those photographed!
	Do you find it important to get to know the couple to find out their likes and dislikes? If so, how do you go about doing this?
	I pretty much filter out people in an effort to make sure that those I photograph are those where we're on the same mind track. That may sound a bit harsh, but if someone is looking for something other than what I do, then I feel the results won't be what they expect. First off, when someone calls me, they're going to find out what my photographic style is, if they don't already know. I've got to be free to photograph a wedding according to my sense of judgement in order to deliver the quality that I do, so anyone that's not in tune with that would be more comfortable elsewhere. I resigned myself long ago that I can't photograph everyone's wedding anyway, so I should only photograph those events that really work well with my style.
	Moreover, do you feel it helpful to know beforehand the details of a wedding? For example, will the ceremony be held indoors or outdoors or will there be any ethnic customs incorporated into the ceremony?
	I once read that great athletes visualize their game before it starts, and that it helps their performance throughout. I find the same is true about photographing weddings. I already know the couple, the kind of wedding their having, the kind of place they're having it at and what kind of day it's going to be. So I get a feel, a pre-visualization, of what the images may look like. And I find that acts as a sort of groove to slip into that really works well for me. Anything more than that acts as a "heads up" so I know anything special I should be on the watch for.
	The photographer is responsible for capturing the essence of the wedding day. What should the wedding couple expect from you as their official "memory maker?"
	Every week when I get proofs back from the labs, I get excited about the new images I've captured. It's like giving birth to beautiful babies every week. I've been putting quite a few of them up on my web site. Over the course of time, I've seen what I get out of every conceivable type of wedding day. And over the past eighteen years, I've seen what other photographers come up with. Although I know some photographers in this industry that I think are just great, they're few and far between. For the most part I'm absolutely convinced that what I can do is extremely special and wonderful. I've had so many other photographers throughout the years step up to me and introduce themselves just to tell me that they admire my work, and I've had so many requests to have my images published, that I know what my peers think of me. Because they're not in the business, bridal couples haven't followed my work for years. It's all new to them, so it's quite interesting to be continually "discovered". Perhaps that accounts for my growing popularity in New York City. But the bottom line is if the bridal couple is looking for something artistic, something different and very documentary and special, I know that' s exactly what I can deliver. My wife and my mom already think I'm the best around, but as for me, I'll let my body of work speak for itself.
	Many wedding photographers are very stiff and routine-like in the manner in which they photograph. Can you give us an example of any unconventional photograph you took on the wedding day?
	You simply can't take every bride, every week, and put her in the same mold by posing her in "stock pose number 16." Yet, that's the exact approach many photographers use. The wedding day is an event, but they don't treat it as such, photographing a specific routine instead. They depend on the pose to make the picture, rather than the moment, or the action or the reaction. Some of them may achieve superlative technically correct photos, but too stiffly, without life in them. You ever notice that in most images hanging in a photographer's studio the bridal couple aren't smiling? They look grim. And that's because the photographer has them posed like mannequins... they dare not move while the photographer was working on that picture. The life of the photograph can't be posed. It has to be brought to the image by the people in it. What good is a technically correct exposure if there isn't any life to the photo? I'd rather have an over exposed print with a great moment or reaction on it rather than something so stiff and staid that looks like it was shot in a department store photo studio. Photos aren't for today, they're for years from now when you want to look back through time and get a sense again of the feelings and memories of the past. So if you're going to tell people to "Hold it!" or manipulate them into a pose and have them grin a plastic smile, you're going to blow the all of the meaning right out of the image. I want people to live their day in front of the lens. I want pictures that move me. So I think just about every shot I get is, by definition, unconventional. Life is too short, and the wedding day will soon be a blur. So be happy, live large, enjoy the day and I'll capture it.

   Bliss!™ would like to thank G.E. Masana for sharing his unique style in photographing one of the most cherished events of a couple's life.

SOURCES:

G.E. Masana
http://www.gemasana.com