Unpopular opinion: blurry pet photos are way better than studio shots

My buddy spent $150 on a pro photo shoot for his golden retriever last month and got 40 pictures of the dog looking bored, where I caught mine mid-yawn at 3am on my phone and it's got 10x the personality. Am I wrong for thinking candids beat anything staged?

2 comments

2 Comments

faithg266d ago

Yeah, "caught mine mid-yawn at 3am" is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. That's the real stuff. My grandma's cat photos are all blurry phone shots from across the room and they show his actual weird personality, like him staring at a wall or trying to eat a plant. A studio setup would just get him sitting there looking confused. I've got a whole gallery on my phone of my dog mid-sneeze or jumping for a treat and those are the ones people actually react to, not the one where I made her sit still for two minutes. Your buddy's dog might look nice in those 40 pictures but you'll remember that yawn forever. Candids just hit different.

the_michael5d ago

Haha ngl you're totally right. The blurry shot of my cat trying to eat a plastic bag at 2am gets more likes than the one where I actually waited for good lighting and her looking at the camera. It's like the chaos just makes them more real or something. I've got a picture of my dog with her tongue stuck halfway out and one eye half closed, and people bring it up months later like it's some kind of masterpiece. Candids are just the best, man.