Wedding Pictures

Discussion in 'Photography' started by Borked Pseudo Mailed, Aug 11, 2008.

  1. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Guest Guest

    I think that depends a lot on people skills, presumably the photography
    skills are taken for granted and in my case I use flash as little as
    possible unless there are no alternative locations or other technical
    reasons (mixed lighting/colour issues, deep shadows etc). People tend to be
    quite happy just after they have tied the knot so and it's generally light
    hearted and easy going, not at all drained or tired looking.
     
    Guest, Aug 25, 2008
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Vance Guest

    You seem to have a reading comprehension problem, so let's take it
    step by step:
    What I stated was:

    I have not seen the emotional draining that seems to be your
    experience. As far as getting to the party goes:

    By you:
    Actually, it's a very tight operation and little time is wasted.
    Without posting your comment, the lights are already set up for the
    formals if they will be used. We have 1, or sometimes 2 PA's who set
    things up and it's to a formula. If you have the personel, you can do
    things in parallel and no time is used for the setup. While the
    guests are getting to the reception by whatever various paths they
    take, the formals are being taken - say 1/2 hour average - if they are
    having classic formals taken. Then the couple arrives at the
    reception and makes their entrance with ALL the guests there and
    shakey starts worked out (caterers not quite on their marks, as it
    were, things like that), I have already arrived and ready for their
    arrival - no time wasted getting anything ready or set up.

    A very salient point in what I posted that you seem to have completely
    missed is that I don't make these decisions. I am subcontracted and
    am responsible for doing what I do within the framework someone else
    has established. I have a schedule of what shots are needed and I am
    left alone to take care of them.

    The people I shoot for have an average experience of something like 15
    years in the wedding business and have a model that seems to work very
    well. If I was to make wedding photography some sort of focus of my
    business I would adopt their way of working. The customers seem to
    appreciate that things go very smoothly and love the pictures. A very
    big reason that things go smoothly is that much of the whole day has
    been orchestrated by the main photographer. They are very much into
    detail. The bride doesn't arrive or get out of the car without being
    covered because she isn't scheduled to arrive before a photographer is
    there and ready. Everything that can be choreagraphed has been.
    Nothing is left to chance that can be taken care of.

    There is nothing 'amateurish' about it. Is it different from how you
    shoot? Obviously. Are you the 'Gold Standard' of wedding photography
    and how it should be done? That is far less obvious.

    Vance
     
    Vance, Aug 25, 2008
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Exactly. This is the way our studio used to operate (Australia, medium
    to high-end metropolitan weddings shot on MF - in the seventies
    admittedly!) and it worked perfectly well. I also was contracted to do
    the images, so it was also not my decision but I can tell you that I
    know our main direct competitor did it exactly the same way. It would
    seem to me that having the formals before the ceremony adds stress - the
    subjects will be worrying about everything going well. *I* would be
    worried about the needed parties getting there in time... You are
    choosing to constrain yourself to the relatively inflexible ceremony
    start time!

    Afterwards, they are all relaxed and at ease, you can quickly gather the
    parties for the group shots, and then take the bridal party to a nearby
    park or other venue for the rest before going to the reception.

    I would add that every 'Suggested Shot List' I've ever seen indicates
    that the formals are usually taken after the ceremony, eg:
    http://www.storyphoto.com/wedding/photo_ideas2.html
    http://www.pghpeople.com/*wedding_photography/Pittsburgh_Wedding_shot_list.html
    http://www.professionalphotography101.com/Wedding_Photography/wedding_shot_list.html

    I'll grant that the links below acknowledge that the shots "can" be
    taken before the ceremony, but again they are listed AFTER by default -
    why would that be unless it is the more common practice...?
    http://weddings.about.com/od/photographer/a/Photogchecklist.htm
    http://www.dfmphotography.com/wedding_shotlist.shtml
    http://www.realsimple.com/realsimple/web/pdf/books/weddings/shoot_sheet.pdf

    Mr Strat thinks it is ok to get them to arrive earlier than they need to
    for the ceremony? What exactly is the difference?
    Again, this is the same way we used to shoot. After they were done I
    would make a rapid beeline to the reception so as to get there before
    them, quickly take a cake shot or two and often would help organise the
    guests to make the arrival 'work' nicely for the bridal party (and for me!).
    I was initially quite surprised at how often the photographer ended up
    as choreographer of the event - the bridal party and guests alike were
    delighted to have someone to help coordinate proceedings. It was also a
    wonderful way to develop rapport with everyone, eg I would often set
    up a shot loosely and let the other photog's have a quick go before I
    finalised the setup and took mine - this meant happy and highly
    cooperative guests, happy bridal party - which then meant better images!
    Sadly, the 'amateur' remarks are just the way Mr Strat (Randall
    Ainsworth) talks - "My way is the only way", "I'm a professional", etc,
    etc, yet some of the techniques he talks of.. well, make your own mind
    up about his approach. I've also noticed he rigidly states that only
    amateurs use flash in ceremonies. While there is some truth in that,
    there were quite a few ceremonies I shot where not only did the bridal
    party REQUEST flash photography during the ceremony (at appropriate
    moments), but it was also approved and even encouraged by the minister
    or celebrant. Mr Strat would have refused to shoot those, I guess. We,
    however, knew whose wedding it actually *was* and provided the shots
    they wanted if possible. Of course we didn't wander around firing the
    flash at critical moments - and no matter what the bridal party wanted,
    we would discuss the best way to unobtrusively capture the ceremony in
    detail with the celebrant beforehand.

    Anyway, there is room for many approaches - I'm sure Mr Strat's clients
    were deliriously happy...
     
    Mark Thomas, Aug 26, 2008
    #43
  4. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Guest Guest


    I am a pro and I use a 5D mkll and a 1DS with (all Canon) 24-105 IS f4 and
    24-70 f2.8 (general purpose), 17-40 f4 (interiors), 85 f1.8 (low light
    portraits), 50mm 1.4 (portraits and groups), 100 2.8 Macro (portraits and
    close up details) a rarely used 20mm 2.8 (interiors) and a 70-200 2.8
    (portraits and groups).

    You could get away with a mk 1 5D or a film camera (EOS 3) and a 50mm. My
    favourite lenses include the 1.4 50 and the 100mm macro, they are also the
    cheapest lenses I own. A couple of years ago I used the EOS 3 with Kodak
    Portra and a 24-85mm (cheap), I looked at some of those pictures recently
    and they are easily as good as anything produced with the 5D mkll, it's just
    more convenient to use digital, and convenience always wins out over quality
    in the real world (unfortunately).

    Where digital scores well is in the amount of pictures that can be
    harvested. To get paid work don't try to be Ansel Adams and have one sheet
    of film and be so confident that you have the shot that you only take a
    second shot for insurance against accidents in the dark room. He did of
    course have the benefit of photographing scenery which tends to sit still.
    Take lots of pictures, buy some fast 8gb cards put the camera on AI servo
    and continuous shutter to get a good selection of shots. A wedding
    photographer can take 2000-3000 shots at one wedding, this will ensure you
    get everything that the client is paying for, insurance rules.
     
    Guest, Mar 18, 2009
    #44
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.