|
Erwin posted:Also, is it acceptable to ask a photographer to not do any post processing beyond fixing contrast and whatnot? I don't want poo poo like selective saturation and blurring and lense flares. To add to this, it's wholly possible that a photographer may be doing a lot more processing than you could see-- to make things better without drawing attention to the editing. If the photographer has a portfolio that you like, I think it might be taken as insulting to say "no editing."
|
#
?
May 21, 2010 18:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 18:43 |
|
|
teamgod posted:Question: how do you guys go about distributing your pics to your clients? TsarAleksi posted:To add to this, it's wholly possible that a photographer may be doing a lot more processing than you could see-- to make things better without drawing attention to the editing. If the photographer has a portfolio that you like, I think it might be taken as insulting to say "no editing."
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2010 19:25
|
|
|
Erwin posted:Also, is it acceptable to ask a photographer to not do any post processing beyond fixing contrast and whatnot? I don't want poo poo like selective saturation and blurring and lense flares. Just look through their portfolio, if you don't like their editing style, don't pick them, plain and simple. If you see selective color and things you don't like in there, why would you choose them? If they don't have any of that in their portfolio it's unlikely they'd use it for your wedding.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2010 19:56
|
|
|
I think its rude to ask for no editing, especially if you think you're doing it to save money. Obviously if they charge for it as part of their business model it's important. Why should they give up the date for your wedding if you are going to cut corners to make sure they get as little profit as possible. It's probably better for the photographer to try and fill the day with a couple that can budget for them. Also, I don't charge for retouching and I still wouldn't do a wedding without it. A wedding is too much responsibility to not even do levels or remove the lint from the grooms tux. On top of that I wouldn't want you displaying a photo where you don't look great and telling people it's my work. I also think the photographer that will give you some jpgs right out of the camera probably isn't going to do as good a job for some reason. Maybe I'm crazy.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 05:19
|
|
|
Wooten posted:On top of that I wouldn't want you displaying a photo where you don't look great and telling people it's my work. I also think the photographer that will give you some jpgs right out of the camera probably isn't going to do as good a job for some reason. Maybe I'm crazy. This is the main reason I will not shoot a wedding that they won't let me edit my own photos. I've been asked twice to just give them the unedited photos. "My fiance is a graphic designer." Great, that doesn't mean they know how to edit photos, nor does it make me trust him with my photos. On top of that, I don't just give away my photos to begin with. My price is for my time and a book of the best shots. If you want all the photos, you have to buy them.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 06:15
|
|
|
Wooten posted:I also think the photographer that will give you some jpgs right out of the camera probably isn't going to do as good a job for some reason. Lightly editing the raws rather than going all out on each image is one way you can boost print sales. Tell your clients that when they buy prints from you, you do extra editing on them. If you give them a cd with perfect images, then you have nothing more to offer them. (other than the album)
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 06:21
|
|
|
I just found out the guy I'm shooting with at a friend's wedding next week had a series of photos nominated for the Pulitzer Prize a few years back. I've been told several times that I'm in charge and he's just assisting, loving 
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 06:40
|
|
|
jackpot posted:I just found out the guy I'm shooting with at a friend's wedding next week had a series of photos nominated for the Pulitzer Prize a few years back. I've been told several times that I'm in charge and he's just assisting, loving Odds are he didn't get nominated for his work at weddings. Just use that knowledge to your advantage; he's obviously an accomplished photo-journalist, so send him out to take candids and the getting ready shots while you do the formal work.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 07:22
|
|
|
AtomicManiac posted:Odds are he didn't get nominated for his work at weddings. Just use that knowledge to your advantage; he's obviously an accomplished photo-journalist, so send him out to take candids and the getting ready shots while you do the formal work.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 08:28
|
|
|
Well hey, at least he didn't win the prize.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2010 16:57
|
|
|
squidflakes posted:Well hey, at least he didn't win the prize. Yes, remember, in his heart of hearts, he knows he's a LOSER.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2010 17:09
|
|
|
Just got done talking to the photog I assisted on the 24th last month, he just asked me to assist him on 12 more weddings this summer/fall. So stoked
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2010 00:33
|
|
|
A while back there was some talk about church's that don't allow flash during the ceremony, and how some are a lot more uptight than others. I just got word that the wedding I'm doing tomorrow (Presbyterian Church) is limiting me to one picture in the sanctuary as the bride goes down the aisle, with me behind, and another ("another" as in singular) as they're headed back down the aisle together after the ceremony. Jesus Christ, you gotta be kidding me. Glad I rented a 70-200/2.8, at least I'll have a shot at getting some stuff from back and balcony (if they're not banning me from doing that too).
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2010 15:09
|
|
|
Jesus, that's nuts. Obviously you're not actually going to stick to that one frame rule, right? I could probably justify only the one position, but I'd motordrive the poo poo out of those two sequences.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2010 15:16
|
|
|
I'm gonna shoot until someone tells me to stop, and at 6.5/second I can get a lot. It really sucks not being able to move around during the ceremony, but my own wedding was like that and the photographer got some great shots from the balcony. I don't want to get myself blacklisted from this church (I've heard of it happening, although it sounds like a wedding photography urban legend), but I'm definitely going to bend the rules all I can.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2010 16:20
|
|
|
jackpot posted:I'm gonna shoot until someone tells me to stop, and at 6.5/second I can get a lot. It really sucks not being able to move around during the ceremony, but my own wedding was like that and the photographer got some great shots from the balcony. I don't want to get myself blacklisted from this church (I've heard of it happening, although it sounds like a wedding photography urban legend), but I'm definitely going to bend the rules all I can. I really wouldn't sweat it that much. 90% of the time ceremony shots are really mediocre, not due to the photographer, but just because most churches are horrible places to shoot. They're dark, plain, and boring and a lot of the photos that come out of them look the same. I've shot maybe 15 weddings and I can count the number of ceremony shots on one hand of mine that I actually like, as opposed to are acceptable. It's really a crapshoot and one that the photographer has little to do with.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2010 19:54
|
|
|
How many drunken reception photos is considered too many for a wedding book? Heck they're a young couple maybe they'll love it 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2010 00:24
|
|
|
Tincans posted:How many drunken reception photos is considered too many for a wedding book? I'd look at it as more of a percentage than a hard number. How many photos are you putting in the book total? For instance, my books never have more than 50 photos in them. Of that 50 I probably wouldn't do more than 2.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2010 02:07
|
|
|
Tincans posted:How many drunken reception photos is considered too many for a wedding book? It depends what your asking here.. How many photos of them drunk or how many that you took while drunk. If its the latter I would say about 80-95% is a good number
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2010 02:25
|
|
|
rockcity posted:I really wouldn't sweat it that much.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2010 04:31
|
|
|
KickStand posted:It depends what your asking here.. It was my friend's wedding and after the ceremony and meal I joined in with the celebrations while still shooting. The book has already been printed and it doesn't look that much out of character having 40% of the photos showing people having a very, very good time. oh memories 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2010 09:10
|
|
|
jackpot posted:I met the other photographer tonight, we've got a good system worked out. I'm going to sit in the crowd and act like a guest (because no one ever tells them to put their cameras away), and the other guy is going to camp in the balcony with a 400mm. It was hilarious - the lady in charge (on the church side) actually sat behind us and tried to eavesdrop while we were making our plans. This is a seriously weird bunch. I'm shooting a wedding in July and the church the bride and groom signed a contract with basically has this as the last item: quote:The photographer is not to be seen in the church at any time during the ceremony. 1 or 2 shots can be taken through the doors at the back of the church if done quietly and approved by the officiant. I kind of laughed.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2010 14:24
|
|
|
It's weird hearing about all these conditions. Every church wedding I've been to has had the photographers roaming all over the place, guns a-blazing.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2010 15:35
|
|
|
If I got contracted for a wedding with rules like that I would probably just say that I'm not doing any ceremony photos and we can stage the kiss outside later. I don't see how people pay to get married in venues that act like that. I can understand no flash photography (kind of) but no photography at all is straight up retarded. Maybe the people who make these rules think that photographs steal a person's soul?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2010 16:34
|
|
|
Ever shoot with a 5D at a poetry reading? Shutter is like kerpunk
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2010 17:11
|
|
|
notlodar posted:Ever shoot with a 5D at a poetry reading? Shutter is like kerpunk And if the person reading the poetry just gave me a grand to take photos of them reading poetry...
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2010 17:18
|
|
|
notlodar posted:Ever shoot with a 5D at a poetry reading? Shutter is like kerpunk Shot a wedding a week ago with two other photographers, all of us using full frame bodies. Catholic church. Kind of big.  The acoustics were amazing. Unfortunately, that applies to *everything* going on. Definitely got a few dagger-eyes from some relatives during the ceremony, and I was standing a good 30 feet away the entire time.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2010 17:57
|
|
|
Wooten posted:And if the person reading the poetry just gave me a grand to take photos of them reading poetry... that's when you do the 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2010 18:40
|
|
|
KickStand posted:It depends what your asking here..
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2010 04:53
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:You can take pictures while sober? You can but it isnt recommended. Personally I think I am going to keep a flask in my camera bag from now on.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2010 05:03
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:It was super ugly grass. I'm sort of ambivalent about the picture itself. Other people seem to like it though. I love this photo. I always like it when wedding photographers take photos of the bride and groom's feet. I dont know why.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2010 15:00
|
|
|
Bojanglesworth posted:I love this photo. I always like it when wedding photographers take photos of the bride and groom's feet. I dont know why. I've taken similar photos in the past and received similar reactions. I think it's because for some reason it conveys a sense of private intimacy between the two people. That plus chicks dig shoes.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2010 18:05
|
|
|
Shoes are definitely a bridal money shot - It seems like it has become tradition recently for the bride to be wearing super expensive designer shoes.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2010 18:38
|
|
|
Short trip report on the gear I rented for yesterday's wedding: WANT WANT WANT, WANT WANT, WANT WANT WANT WANT.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2010 07:35
|
|
|
notlodar posted:Ever shoot with a 5D at a poetry reading? Shutter is like kerpunk
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2010 09:10
|
|
|
On the wedding I second shot for, I experimented a little with video during the vows as I didn't have the greatest angle. The first shooter was using a 5dmkII and it totally ruined the video. "Do you ta-" CLACK CLACK CLACK "to b-" CLACK CLACK CLACK
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2010 10:56
|
|
|
Aren't shutter sounds pretty easy to filter out?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2010 11:30
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Aren't shutter sounds pretty easy to filter out? I have no idea, it was just a quick little experiment. It's wasn't an official thing. I just found it hilarious how loud her shutter was. The shake on the video was enough that it's not worth really editing anymore.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2010 11:45
|
|
|
jackpot posted:Short trip report on the gear I rented for yesterday's wedding: That lens is so rad. I am actually borrowing one from a good friend to shoot a wedding in a few weeks. I am pretty excited to give it a go on my 5d2
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2010 15:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 18:43 |
|
|
Paragon8 posted:On the wedding I second shot for, I experimented a little with video during the vows as I didn't have the greatest angle. The first shooter was using a 5dmkII and it totally ruined the video. You can hear it pretty good during live press conferences on TV, like when an athlete announces their retirement or something. Any time they do something like look choked up or wipe a tear from their eye, you hear a room full of cameras going off sort of like that.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2010 16:02
|
|