Was this photographer wrong?

Claire Pacelli

TPF Noob!
Joined
Dec 16, 2010
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Location
Orlando, Florida
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit


I know they are making light of a pretty serious situation in this video, but it made me wonder, as I have yet to photograph a wedding, isn't the photographer wrong to be walking down the aisle like that, isn't he supposed to just zoom from the back, or am I mistaken?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Different photographers will work in different ways depending up on their style, their product and also upon what the bride and groom want on the day. For some the above would be considered rather invasive to be flashing right at them so close - however it might be that they wanted a certain shot or that the photographer always works in such a manner. The key - as a working pro - is to have a clear outline of your methods and options and to discuss with the bride and groom so that they have an idea of where you'll be at key moments such as the above - and of course what kind of photos you'll capture.

Sometimes it might be worth having a little invasion by the photographer to (have the chance) to get that fantastic shot for the wall - othertimes it will be too invasive and the photographer will have to change their method *


* and then you get the photographers who work a certain way and "only" a certain way. These tend to (but not always) be the kind of photographer who a couple will directly seek the services of rather than simple the kind selected from the affordable list. If you want that photographers special/unique/etc... effect and package you've got to pay the cost and have to partly work things around them as well (though of course not always - its not an exact science and there are always alternate methods
 
* Maybe he was shooting with a prime
* Changing focal length does more than make this smaller or bigger... it changes how space is presented (compression/expansion) as well as how things are composed.
* We don't really know the agreement or style which the photographer was trying to achieve. Some churches will do a "rerun" afterwards to allow photos that would otherwise be disturbing to the whole ceremony. In this case, there would be no reason not to have the photographer right down the isle.
* Finally.. I don't believe there is a wrong or right way.
 
The more you zoom the faster your shutter speed needs to be to stop camera shake because in churches you can be at ISO3200 so it's hard to get fast shutter speeds, so no he was not wrong just a dick head for not remembering what was behind him
 
Some wedding venues do not allow using strobed light during the ceremony and/or restrict where the photographer can shoot from.
 
isn't he supposed to just zoom from the back, or am I mistaken?
Depends on the style, the Q you probably should ask is why take more then 3 frames of the same thing?
I was always taught to shoot with film and albums in mind - if its a garbage shot or there's a chance I'll delete it - why shoot it?
Next, if the pic is unlikely to be in the album, think hard if you want to shoot it. Today with digital, it isn't much different. The only difference is that wasteful shot costs about $0.20-$0.50 cents (vs ~$1.00 for film).
 
It was a combination event. A wedding and a water baptism. The gear though, collateral damage, but I think its covered under homeowners.

Here in NJ you can't be operating a wave runner with anyone in tow unless you have a flag up and a man looking in reverse.

He needed the spotter.
 
I've only been around here for awhile, but I remember seeing this several months ago...still funny/scary/OMG!!!
 
Nothing wrong with his position, with a wide lens he could have had a pretty powerful shot going there.
Like mentioned he's just an ass for not having his bearings.
 
Its a once in a lifetime day and should be captured as best as possible. He might seem intrusive, but if he captures every aspect of the day good for him. After all when the day is over, all they will have to really remember the day will be the photos. Many churches dont allow photos when the vows are being taken and other silly rules. I wonder how many pics were lost after the dunking the memory card took.
 
Next, if the pic is unlikely to be in the album, think hard if you want to shoot it. Today with digital, it isn't much different. The only difference is that wasteful shot costs about $0.20-$0.50 cents (vs ~$1.00 for film).

Im curious where you get the $.20 to $.50 cost for a digital image. For film you had to have some sort of image printed to see it at all. Even a contact sheet which shows little must be printed so there is a cost. For digital its all on the computer and thats free. You only print what you like.
 
I bet that was the most expensive bath that guy ever took.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top