Formals

[Christie Photo]

Cindy you crack my up. I think Aubrey and I need to renew our vows so we can hire you to do some "funky date photos" :mrgreen:

I don't think I know what "funky date photos" are. Does it require afro haircuts and bellbottoms with wide belts?

 

[elsaspet]

LOL. No Pete, but that would be ultra cool!!!!!!
It usually does have some measure of Urban Acid in there though. Hehe.

 

[markc]

Yeah, for me, formals are posed, and obviously so. That's why they are "formal". It doesn't have to do with the clothing or where they are taken. In the old days, that's the only way they could do it, since the exposures were so long. Formals don't look natural, and that's fine for what they are. They just aren't my taste.

 

[mysteryscribe]

YOu did not need to apolgize. It was a simple misunderstanding and I'm sorry.

I have a little story about being called unprofessional if you will allow me. When I first stated I had a rule. I bought and carried enough film for what I contracted to do and two more rolls which I usually shot on candid stuff. This is 120 and I wasn't exactly rich at the time.

I went to the wedding shot all the "formals" and all the reception. I shot my last two exposures on the limo pulling out around ten. About that time the bride's mother walked up and said, "I would like for you to shoot a picture of my mother and me."

"I'm sorry I don't have any more film. The wedding is over and I shot my last frame on the limo."

"What kind of photographer are you. It is very unprofessional of you to not bring enough film."

"I brought enough film for the job I contracted for, I just didn't bring enough for what I didn't contract to do." The only reason I felt so brave was, I already had her money.

Over thirty years I have been accused of that a half dozen times and it's almost always when I can't shoot the extra pictures they want for some reason. Or I was outside having a cigaretter when some guest thought I should be inside watching them do the electric slide.

Just coming at it from different directions is all. Sorry again that I offended you.

For mark: You are right at one time you only got a hand full of wedding pictures but that was long before even my time. When I did it, I did it because it was what people paid for, if you refused to shoot the traditional pictures you didn't work. At the end people swore they didn't want them but I still spent twenty to thirty minutes in the church after as the list of shots the didn't want grew and grew as the brides and the families kept adding to them. It's why I always just planned to go ahead and shoot them. I never had anyone complain about the twenty minutes it took me to do it.

But again that was then this is now.

I still think the comments I made were valid. I did not mean them to to be taken personally by anyone at all, but in my experience they are valid. You almost have to shoot at least some formal shots.

As for other people, they have other experiences I am sure and their opinions are also valid. However it is hard for anyone of us to comment from anything but our own experiences.

I always enjoy discussions here whether I agree or disagree but i respect eveyones opinion. One more time I am sorry Cindy I meant no disrespect. Just an old man with a totally different set of experiences.

 

[elsaspet]

All is good Mysterscribe. (Hug). I appreciate you taking the time to tell me about the "why".
I must say however, if you've only gotten a handful of nuts in the last 30 years, you are way ahead of the game!
I HATE dealing with MOB in most cases. They call me looking for "just one more photo" of Aunt Harriet or whoever. What they forget, IMHO is that this is the kid's wedding.
Just a few weeks ago, I got one of these requests, but of more photos of Mom and Dad dancing. I'd already given them a handful of them. I individually process each photo, so I cull the very best, and really work them up.....so not feeling like going back to RAW files and dealing with the whole thing all over again, I said, "Nope. That' all there is". She thanked me, and told me she was very happy with the photos.....but went on to inform me that the day after the wedding, Dad had a heart attack and might not make it, so the photos I'd taken were the last ones. I can't tell you how bad that made me feel to not have gone back for a few more.
On the other hand, I would have never had that attitude in the first place had wedding guests an soforth had not abused my wedding time with the b&g in the past. I've had one flower girls mom call me at 10 pm at night to ask if I could go back and touch up a small scar on the kiddos arm. It's crazy sometimes. And I could go on and on about the crazy requests I get from brides.....some of which I have posted on this forum.
In short I guess what I am trying to say is I think there are always going to be some nuts out there who expect much more than we should ever be expected to deliver. At the same time, it's implosible for me to sit down and process the 10,000 + images that I take during an average 8 hour wedding between the shots that I and my assistants take. Unless it's an off month, I have only 7 days (and sometimes less if it's a two wedding weekend) to crank out 500-800 totally retouched photos, a big a$$ photo album, and a slideshow.....trying all the while to whip in some bridals or engagements as well.
It's a hell of a lot of work, which I honestly think most clients don't understand at all. They have this idea that you hit the shutter and the camera just spits out this wonderful image. But that's a whole other deal. Here I am, highjacking my own thread. LOL.
Again, I appreciate your words, and your reasoning. But at the same time, I don't think we should change the way we work to stave off the occassional nutcase.
Hugs to you.
Cindy

 

[Christie Photo]

...process the 10,000 + images that I take during an average 8 hour wedding between the shots that I and my assistants take.

:stun:


I shot film for more than 25 years. When I stopped (about 3 years ago) it was costing me $1 every time I tripped the shutter. I had to become very "efficient" in shooting. Now I'm having a hard time breaking out of my old mindset. I don't think I COULD make 500 exposures at a single wedding. Maybe I need therepy.

Now, I have to ask.... why not make 1000 exposures and edit down to 800? That would be 1/10 the work, both at the wedding and the computer.

 

[mysteryscribe]

Absolutely right. every photographer has to draw the line somewhere. Where we draw it is just a matter of how we set up our business and our experiences with it.

And the worst comments are the ones you never hear lol. When she is talking to her girl friend at work. "Can you believe he wore a field jacket to MY wedding." That wasn't me by the way but a comment my wife brought home about another wedding.

Well good luck to you and have fun. And remember this about the stress, I had five wives over that time period. Probably not a record, but way too many.

 

[Big Mike]

:stun:

Ya, me too...that is a lot of images.

I recall that someone also said that they use up to 10 gigs of memory for a typical wedding. :stun:

I guess, the 'PJ' style dictates that you take lots and lots of photos because that 'perfect moment' is very fleeting and you want to do all you can to catch it.

In my limited experience, I also tend to think like I did when I was shooting film...Wait for the moment and take one or two exposures at what I think is the best moment. Or try to create the moment...not necessarily with directions but just by being there with the camera (if you know what I mean).

Everyone has their own style and technique...if shooting 10,000 images works for you...more power to you. Who knows, I may well develop my style into something similar if it works for me too.

 

[elsaspet]

LOL Mysteryscribe. You sound like me. My dad says I'm gonna have to buy acreage to be buried next to all my exes.
Pete. I know. I hear ya. But the deal is, my teachers are telling me otherwise. You can't catch that perfectly glistening tear when your camera is not at your eyeball.
Also, knowing personally, that I have to take several thousands of photos on my own, makes me work harder, and look harder for things to shoot. Normally, this is where my better little gems come from. It makes me think about new and different things, because believe me, when you are shooting almost as many frames as the video dude, it gets old after the last umpteenth wedding. I go out an start looking for angles, and cool light and stuff.

 

[Sharkbait]

Ya, me too...that is a lot of images.

I recall that someone also said that they use up to 10 gigs of memory for a typical wedding. :stun:

We carry 22G of memory to every wedding. Of that we typically use anywhere from 13-15G. Of course we're shooting RAW so every time we trip the shutter it's about 10M. A 1G card holds less than 90 frames.

 

[Christie Photo]

Pete. I know. I hear ya. But the deal is, my teachers are telling me otherwise. You can't catch that perfectly glistening tear when your camera is not at your eyeball.

I sure hope I don't sound argumentative. I just want to understand.

I do have the camera up and ready... I'm just not shooting the entire time. I wait for the "tear." I too look for the the nice lighting, the cool angle. But I shoot after I've found it.

I really can't imagine 1000 images at one event. 10K is just completely out of my mind's grasp.

Oh well.

 

[markc]

When I shoot, I don't rely on one shot for each situation. Say someone is standing by the window and the light is catching them just right. I won't just snap one or two; I'll run off a string of them, each a little different. I did this when I shot film, too. Something as simple as a blink can kill a shot, and with SLRs, that's hard to watch for. If it's a really good situation, I may run off a dozen or more. There are many times when I can't do this, and I've gotten great shots when it's been the only one to choose from, but if given the option, I'll take the insurance. To some people this will sound like a shotgun approach, but for me, it's about choices once I get them into the "darkroom". I shoot shallow DOF, so being just slightly off can mess up an image. It sometimes takes quite a few shots to get all of the variables to line up just right. You can end up with some happy surprises or different takes on a theme, too.

 

[AprilRamone]

It's a hell of a lot of work, which I honestly think most clients don't understand at all. They have this idea that you hit the shutter and the camera just spits out this wonderful image. But that's a whole other deal.

Yes! I totally have this potential client who called me and was all worried and up in arms about how the photographer friend of their daughter's backed out of doing her wedding photography. He had originally quoted them $800 and I quoted them $750. They have about 2 weeks to find somebody and then I get this email from the dad trying to get me to lower my price since this is my "first real wedding" and also $70 an hour was a little high.
What? I don't know how he figured that it'd be $70 an hour since the post processing takes me just as much time as the actual time at the wedding and it really will end up being around $25 an hour.
I had to explain to him that the post-processing is a lot of work and that they are also getting a cd with all of the images with permission to print on their own. Also, I never told them that it was my first wedding so I don't know how they got that impression. So annoying!
Ugh...guess we'll see how it goes!

 

[elsaspet]

I sure hope I don't sound argumentative. I just want to understand.

I do have the camera up and ready... I'm just not shooting the entire time. I wait for the "tear." I too look for the the nice lighting, the cool angle. But I shoot after I've found it.

I really can't imagine 1000 images at one event. 10K is just completely out of my mind's grasp.

Oh well.

No, it's something Huy is trying to teach me.... (He's the WPJA photog of the year, and rippingly great). He's been letting me assist him when I have spare time, and basically how he has me working it, is not only keep that camera to the eye, but go low-shoot, make circles around the subject looking for lighting-shooting....keep moving, keep shooting. Look for cool backgrounds, trying different aps...shoot, shoot, shoot.
He's got some wickedly great stuff by doing this.
http://www.f8studio.com/f8/html/viewHuy.html
Now keep in mind, I don't process all this, just the 500 or so top pics. Besides, it's not like I have anything else going on at a wedding....so I keep shooting.
But I hear ya. There are two very separate schools in this subject. One school says just shoot what's great, and the other school is to keep looking, moving, shooting.
It's all good. Nothings wrong if it works, eh?

 

[elsaspet]

When I shoot, I don't rely on one shot for each situation. Say someone is standing by the window and the light is catching them just right. I won't just snap one or two; I'll run off a string of them, each a little different. I did this when I shot film, too. Something as simple as a blink can kill a shot, and with SLRs, that's hard to watch for. If it's a really good situation, I may run off a dozen or more. There are many times when I can't do this, and I've gotten great shots when it's been the only one to choose from, but if given the option, I'll take the insurance. To some people this will sound like a shotgun approach, but for me, it's about choices once I get them into the "darkroom". I shoot shallow DOF, so being just slightly off can mess up an image. It sometimes takes quite a few shots to get all of the variables to line up just right. You can end up with some happy surprises or different takes on a theme, too.

Totally agree Mark!