Hill Country Wedding | Dripping Springs | Style Me Pretty TX :)

[Maggedy]

Published on SMP Texas yesterday but that doesn't mean I can't improve! CC is appreciated. Second shooting for Mint Photography.


1.

1.1

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

 

[Raian-san]

Show off lol Jp. Nice set and congrats on smp feature.

Like 8,11,16

 

[Maggedy]

Show off lol Jp. Nice set and congrats on smp feature.

Like 8,11,16

Thanks! In all seriousness, all I did was second shoot. I'd say 40% of the images in the feature are mine, but I posted several here that weren't included hoping for some critique on them. I am starting to work with lots of photogs in Texas that get published frequently, and I just want to be able to give them better and better stuff to pick from. Know what I mean?

 

[Overread]

Maggedy - first good luck with the shooting and with working in the industry with other pros

You might find that if you want good critique its best to post one maybe two photos at a time so that people can focus upon them specifically; a lot of images tends to put people off giving critique as to do any justice tends to require a lot of time. You might also find the critique link in my signature helps give you some ideas as to how to construct a post to best present yourself to get some critique on your work.

Also, since you are second shooting, make sure that you're retaining the rights to display the photos that you are taking. I know that many times a second shooter won't own copyright or distribution rights over photos taken, so its something to check your contract for (I'm not going to say that either way is "best" just to make sure that you know which side of the line you stand upon - last thing you want is to come into a conflict for posting photos online).

 

[Robin_Usagani]

Maggedy - first good luck with the shooting and with working in the industry with other pros

You might find that if you want good critique its best to post one maybe two photos at a time so that people can focus upon them specifically; a lot of images tends to put people off giving critique as to do any justice tends to require a lot of time. You might also find the critique link in my signature helps give you some ideas as to how to construct a post to best present yourself to get some critique on your work.

Also, since you are second shooting, make sure that you're retaining the rights to display the photos that you are taking. I know that many times a second shooter won't own copyright or distribution rights over photos taken, so its something to check your contract for (I'm not going to say that either way is "best" just to make sure that you know which side of the line you stand upon - last thing you want is to come into a conflict for posting photos online).

Wedding photographers that "take away" 2nd shooter copyright are lame... There I say it. They are scumbags. There are a few exceptions. Maybe if you are shooting for famous couples and you have an agreement with their photo privacy. I expect the 2nd shooter gets paid significant amount of money though if you take away their copyright.

 

[Robin_Usagani]

I would probably take out #7. It just look obviously they were posing for someone else. GJ on the coverage. Did you guys share the off camera flash? Look like an awful room to shoot wedding .

 

[pixmedic]

Maggedy - first good luck with the shooting and with working in the industry with other pros

You might find that if you want good critique its best to post one maybe two photos at a time so that people can focus upon them specifically; a lot of images tends to put people off giving critique as to do any justice tends to require a lot of time. You might also find the critique link in my signature helps give you some ideas as to how to construct a post to best present yourself to get some critique on your work.

Also, since you are second shooting, make sure that you're retaining the rights to display the photos that you are taking. I know that many times a second shooter won't own copyright or distribution rights over photos taken, so its something to check your contract for (I'm not going to say that either way is "best" just to make sure that you know which side of the line you stand upon - last thing you want is to come into a conflict for posting photos online).

Wedding photographers that "take away" 2nd shooter copyright are lame... There I say it. They are scumbags. There are a few exceptions. Maybe if you are shooting for famous couples and you have an agreement with their photo privacy. I expect the 2nd shooter gets paid significant amount of money though if you take away their copyright.

amen to that brother....
Had ONE second shooter gig where that was an issue. the main photog would allow me to use the photos I took for a physical portfolio, but i was not allowed to post anything online. no extra money.

 

[Robin_Usagani]

I mean I usually get paid $300-$400 to second shoot. I just want to be compensated because it takes away my time from my family. I easily make that from 1 hour family session. I do like 2nd shooting but it is usually 8+ hours! Why do I do it? I do it for the love of wedding photography. I do my best to make my main shooter job easier. Provide him/her with awesome images. Once in a while you just take that ONE amazing shot that is almost impossible to recreate. You just happened to be there at the right time. That would suck if I cant use that photo.

Then again, I respect my main photographers. I dont share the photos until a few weeks after the main shooter post the blog. I dont do a teaser when I 2nd shoot. I dont friend my main shooter's clients on FB (a few exceptions). Hell, I still have 6 weddings where I was 2nd photographers where I have not edit/blog from the last 6 months. I plan to do that soon because winter is slow. My main photographers seem to appreciate that I dont post the photos right away even though we had an agreement that I can post it only a few days after they blog it.

 

[paigew]

beautiful photos! I am from dripping springs

 

[jwbryson1]

I think these are terrific. Love #10.

I'd get rid of the tat on the woman's back in #5 no matter how proud she is of it.

 

[Robin_Usagani]

I think these are terrific. Love #10.

I'd get rid of the tat on the woman's back in #5 no matter how proud she is of it.

? Dude.......

 

[pixmedic]

Thanks! In all seriousness, all I did was second shoot. I'd say 40% of the images in the feature are mine, but I posted several here that weren't included hoping for some critique on them. I am starting to work with lots of photogs in Texas that get published frequently, and I just want to be able to give them better and better stuff to pick from. Know what I mean?

If only about half are your photos, who shot the other half and do you have permission to post them?

 

[Maggedy]

Ok, clarification time I have permission to use any of the images shot for this wedding online, on my blog, on facebook, in my portfolio, or as marketing as long as I mention they were second shot for this company, which I'm always careful to do. I work with them a lot. A couple times a month in some cases. I never friend the brides or tag anyone in social media (not cool). On the SMP feature about 40% of the images are mine, the others are the primary's. But _everything_ posted here was shot by me!

Also, I never post any photos _anywhere_ for any wedding until the primary has delivered their images to the client and blogged their own feature (should they choose to do so). That's why I'm just now asking for some critique on an August wedding. If they don't blog that wedding for whatever reason, I get permission if I want to put it on mine. Usually I have good detail shots and whatnot, and the fact is, continuing to do so keeps getting me more second shooting gigs. I'm very careful to respect the terms of each primary I shoot with. I have 5-6 weddings waiting in the wings that won't be posted anywhere until I know the primary has completed their parts and is ok with me posting.

I worked with someone for a second time this weekend who's sent the images and slideshow from our Oct wedding to her couple, but is phenomenally behind on blogging and she told me to feel free and go ahead and put a feature up on my blog. The wedding is STUNNING. I've been dying to work on it but have held it back, naturally waiting for her post. It all comes down to communication and respect for the primary photographer.

And yes, I know, I posted too many for individual critique. It's so hard to pick. I really loved this one

Good call on the lights. We were sharing the alien bee and the speedlights. DARK room. Wood ceilings. Very tough to light. But I think overall it turned out pretty well.

Thanks all for the comments!

 

[Raian-san]

I agreed with Robin. I don't know how you let the 2nd shooter shoot and not give them the rights to post their photos for their own joy and etc. The reasons why we shoot weddings is because we love it and of course editing and share with others. I always give my 2nd shooter the rights to do what they want with it but of course not making it seem like it's their own wedding. I usually don't post blog, on forums, and etc because photography is not something I fully focus on. I have a private portfolio for clients who wants to see more of my work. That's why I don't mind the photographers to post their photos before me. I just accept wedding photography if the clients asked and really wanted me to cover it along with video so I can give some other people an opportunity to shoot more weddings.

It's good that you have respect for the main photographer, it definitely goes a long way to continue working and gain trust and respect from your peers. Good job Maggedy, keep it up!

 

[jwbryson1]

I think these are terrific. Love #10.

I'd get rid of the tat on the woman's back in #5 no matter how proud she is of it.

? Dude.......

What?! I think it detracts from the photo. You are welcome to disagree.