As a food reviewer, when posting food photos, some photography enthusiasts may criticize me: the composition and lighting of these food photos are far from "up to standard." In fact, it’s not just me. Recently, in some public accounts, photos taken by food critics have been criticized by photography enthusiasts. But, is the delicious theme of food critics really "food photography"?
People who are into photography basically know the importance of photography. Works without light and composition may not be called "photographs", but can only be called "photographs". However, is the delicious theme of food critics really just "food photography"?
Photography pays attention to lighting, and light is the soul of photography. Without a good-looking food photo, it will indeed lack a little bit of appeal. But I personally think that the main focus of a food reviewer should be food, then reviews, and finally photography! In other words, it can be said that the most important purpose of a food critic is to taste the food, followed by comments and photography. This is not to say that reviews and photography are not important, but relatively speaking, it is more important to taste the food for the first time. Eat it while it's hot, that's how you respect the chef!
Some people may have some prejudices against "beautiful food". They read some refreshing texts, watch some Japanese advertisements, and order a cup of latte art mocha in a bourgeois cafe in the corner of the city or a French restaurant. A Provence stew is considered haute. But this just "looks high-end". There are also people who like to pose for 10 minutes with a giant digital display in front of a barbecued pork bun in a restaurant. They even "invented" using chopsticks to pick up the steamed bun with both ends and force out the core to show the "fullness". "This way of taking pictures is to "deceive" people by making the photos look good. Yes, this first impression does look very beautiful. However, when customers and friends come to see the real thing, it is not what it looks like in the photo, nor is it the taste mentioned in the food review. Do such food reviews still have meaning? Does such a gourmet work still have meaning? It makes people think, as a food critic, is food photography really so important? ——The dishes are already cold!
A food reviewer who is into photography once posted this on his official account:
“There are many photographers in my circle of friends, including very famous artists. Of course, most of them are self-defined wild artists. I don’t know when the private room became popular. Teenagers with fierce eyes and full of hormones like to take the camera and join in. But behind the camera, the erect genitals form the "image" of the photo. "Storytelling". The elderly mage holding a ring flash and a young photographer, despised the incomplete frame, and the Germans despised the Japanese. Three minutes of taking photos on site, two hours of editing at home, exporting the photos, skin polishing, liquefaction, bright eyes, Slimming the waist and lifting the breasts make all kinds of "poison, virtue, master, and learning" come to your face..."
All of this seems to be done in one go, with templates and templates. routine. But the more I watch it, the more I feel disgusted sometimes. Just like the commercial model of wedding photos, the photos of every couple are the same, just like the work with a different head... Food should have its own characteristics, and have a unique "commentary insight" through language and text That's enough to attract people. This does not mean that every food critic must provide photography with super perfect lighting layout, and all must be the same. Of course, this does not mean that it is not good to provide perfect food photography, but in front of tasting food and commenting on food, food photography does not seem so important.
As a "food critic", I personally feel that the relationship between "food critic" and "food photographer" should be distinguished. In the former, when the hot food is put on the table, the first reaction should be the reaction of the smell and vision linked to the taste nerve. When smelling and tasting, there are already corresponding descriptive words in the brain. This is The true first reaction of a food critic is worthy of the chef, worthy of the food, and worthy of the title of food critic. After all, it is not simply a commercial promotion of photos, but a "delicious" one through language and text paired with photos. Promotion; while the latter is commercial, it requires thinking about the composition and lighting, and only needs to think about how to promote the "photos" it takes. Throughout the food reviews, only two common words "delicious" are used to confuse readers. . Only the former can be a food critic; the latter can only be a food photographer, a food photographer who cannot match the professional commenting attitude of a "food critic".