OH EMMM GEEE
You want to talk about my biggest fucking pet peeve of this industry? Branding.
It's not bad enough every swinging dick (and, cooch, there's a lot around me) with a camera suddenly thinks they are a portrait studio, they do these huge, obnoxious 99% opaque, white fucking logos. I think the last one that gave me forrest whitacre eye was a decent head and shoulders of a bride and groom highlighting their rings. But at least thirty or forty percent of the image was the snappers' logo.
I don't put
any branding on the things I do. It's stupid of me; there are good reasons. Pro houses have done them all throughout film history. But I can't destroy an otherwise interesting and thought - provoking image with my name. I'm not important - that slice of life I captured, is. If you wanna find out who took that, look at the exif data, or ask someone.
I am in NO WAY comparing my efforts, but it is exactly the same as if there was a 20% logo on the Mona Lisa, or a big 'limited edition by' on
the Thinker.
NOT saying this applies to you or your example. Just... it bugs me. I might be the only one.