The New London Look

Something that fits well and feels like you matters more than any specific item. Tailored pieces, denim, knitwear, layering, colour and bold patterns can all look great and add personality. Keep the focus on you rather than the clothing, so skip logos worn for their own sake and busy graphic prints, unless they're part of a well-designed piece or you've restyled them. Hoodies and costumes aren't part of these sessions, and sportswear only works when it's clearly styled.

Hoodies and costumes aren't part of these sessions. Sportswear isn't in the outfit guide, so only bring it if it's clearly styled, not just put together. A logo worn for its own sake, a slogan tee, or very fine stripes and tiny checks also tend to work against you on camera.

Yes. TFP (Time for Print/Portfolio) sessions like this one don't include a stylist or wardrobe on set, you source and bring your own outfits. That's part of the exercise, thinking through what you'd want to be seen in says something real about your own sense of style, which is exactly what a portfolio is meant to show.

Something simple and well-fitted alongside something with a bit more personality tends to cover the most ground for a first portfolio. One clean, minimal look photographs versatile, while a second look with more texture, colour, or edge shows range. You don't need designer pieces or a huge wardrobe, two well-chosen outfits will always outperform four rushed ones.

Wear what's well made and well designed, designer or not. What doesn't work is a logo worn for the sake of it: a plain T-shirt with a big brand name across it shows the label, not you. A logo that's part of a well-designed piece is fine, like a pattern knitted into a jumper or a small mark on a jacket. Heavily branded pieces can work when the style calls for it, like a vintage racing jacket in an alternative look, but not in clean or street styles. And a logo or graphic tee can work if you've restyled it, cropped or cut into a vest.

Patterns, yes, bold or busy patterns can look great and add real character to an image. A logo is fine when it's part of a well-designed piece or a small mark on a jacket. A big logo worn for its own sake pulls focus onto the clothing rather than you, and can create licensing complications if an image is ever used commercially. That's really the whole distinction, not patterns versus plain, but whether something's competing with you for attention.

Editorial styling leans into mood, concept, and a stronger point of view, the kind of images you'd expect in a magazine spread, often bolder or more directional. Commercial styling is cleaner and more universally wearable, built to show how a product, brand, or look could realistically be sold. Neither is "better", they photograph and read differently, and a portfolio with a mix of both shows more range than committing to just one.

Two, decided and described in advance rather than a growing pile of options to choose between on the day. Two well-considered outfits, each with real thought behind it, gives more usable variety than three or four rushed ones, and keeps the day itself focused rather than spent debating wardrobe.

It matters, but simple and natural generally photographs better than heavy or elaborate, agencies and photographers alike tend to want to see the actual person rather than a finished beauty look. Clean skin, groomed brows, and hair that's you go a long way, no professional styling is required or provided for a session like this, so whatever you're comfortable doing yourself is the right amount.

Whatever matches the outfit and how you'll be moving, a full-body or walking shot needs shoes that hold up to scrutiny, while a close, cropped shot may never show them at all. Comfort is worth prioritising for anything outdoors or on your feet for a while, an ill-fitting shoe becomes obvious in posture and expression far more than people expect.