wedding shooters poll

[Not4wood]

Originally Posted by nikonjedi

I am kind of excited. I am going out with a professional this Saturday to assist while he shoots a wedding. Not a large one, but It'll get my feet wet. Hopefully, they'll allow me to tag along a few more times. They believe that the experience that you get "riding shotgun" with a pro is far greater than instruction or reading a manual.

In any event, I have a partner. The goal is to start this off as a "weekend" or secondary endeavor while gaining experience and seeking to market, build clientele and perfect our craft and find our niche until one day, potentially making this the primary source of income.

NJ

NJ,

Congratulations, this is probably the best thing that can happen. The most interesting thing you should be aware of is the Photographers Mistakes that you will Notice. If he makes too many, you've learnt your lesson and you should part your ways. If the photographer is that bad make sure his bad rep doesn't go onto you as well. You can learn from this photographer but you also have to keep in mind, that this photographer doesn't necesarrily mean he is someone to learn from either.

Many years after I had given up on Weddings, I had been a Manager of a small Photo Studio in Manhattan. One of my workers had a contact and had heard about me from my worker. He wanted to go into Weddings with me and wanted me to tag along with him to feel me out. I mentioned to my worker to let his friend know, that I will be going to feel him out. I was an experienced and Trained Wedding Photographer and wont work with just anybody. My workers eyebrows went up, and said his friend was a major player. I had said to tell his friend who my mentor was, and that I wont work with just anybody. To make a long story even longer LOL. The wind up was the Gentleman couldn't handle one drunk at the Wedding. We were eating food and a table we had to shoot was always missing one person. The photographer turned around grabbed his camera and said he will be right back. He looked so sad and forloned when he returned. I had asked him what happened and said one of the guests was drunk and didn't want to stand up because of the mirror to one side. I said and your an experienced Wedding Photographer? Give me your camera and I will show you how its done. The funny thing was, after I had spoken to the "Drunk" and mentioned that the Bride had asked us to Photograph your table and you, turn around and look at the Bride. She is having a good time laughing and carrying on. Do you want me to go over there and ruin her day? Two very large gentlemen at the next table had heard me, got up and grabbed the drunk under each arm and said "Uncle" your getting up no matter what. I was asked to take the shot and the Drunk was told, do this quietly or after the shot were taking you outside. It was the funniest moment I've ever witnessed at a Wedding. The Photographer that I was with was just shaking his head and repeating, I've never seen anything like that. In my answer to him was how long he was a Wedding Photographer and laughed at him. I obviously didn't want to work with some one who gave up so easily and missing a shot that the paying customer had requested.

Keep an open mind, learn as much as you can and never give up.

[Not4wood]

I can honestly say, since I no longer do weddings I wont take your survey and ruin the numbers. But, if I was going to get back into Weddings I would give a few Web Quality Images and if she wanted better then I would charge for those.

I am almost positive, but I have to ask anyway since I am really new to Digital Photography. All of those Shooting Weddings are shooting in Raw I hope?

[chaz345]

Originally Posted by Not4wood

All of those Shooting Weddings are shooting in Raw I hope?

Why?

While I certainly believe in producing the best possible quality of work, there are limits. RAW has the potential to produce a better overall quality but that better quality is usually never going to be noticed by anyone other than another photographer. IOW it is a significant amount of extra work(if one is going to actually realize the potential of RAW) for an increase in quality that the vast majority of the buying public will never even notice. Well shot JPEGs will produce prints that are for all intents and purposes indistinguishable from RAW, although I would say that at full size, on a computer screen under close examination, the RAW will probably look better.

[FedererPhoto]

For my wedding, I wanted the digital files. So, I provide them to my clients. Every time I think about my clients, I put myself back in time (4 months) into their shoes. If I wanted it, they get it.

[Not4wood]

Originally Posted by chaz345

Why?

While I certainly believe in producing the best possible quality of work, there are limits. RAW has the potential to produce a better overall quality but that better quality is usually never going to be noticed by anyone other than another photographer. IOW it is a significant amount of extra work(if one is going to actually realize the potential of RAW) for an increase in quality that the vast majority of the buying public will never even notice. Well shot JPEGs will produce prints that are for all intents and purposes indistinguishable from RAW, although I would say that at full size, on a computer screen under close examination, the RAW will probably look better.

Chaz,
Truthfully, after a shooting session and you are editing your shots your doing it anyway correct? Now with Raw, sometimes your only adding one and actually because your also playing with the White Balance at the same time you might even be removing one editing step. Any errors in shooting, bad exposures or colors Raw can bring them back in so there usuable. Where the JPG might be a good image right off, you wont be able to save the shot as much and make it into a Great Image. Raw has a larger amount of detail/information per pixel then JPG, just look at the size difference between the two exact same shots and if you look closely enough you can play more with the Raw shot.
Unless there is somebody who is paying you to shoot JPG for them, I would actually shoot JPG and Raw but I am now (which is only for about 2 months now) shooting in Raw exclusively.

Now, I am not the expert on Raw vs JPG by far but if you look around and watch you will see that a lot of the people that are really knowledgeable here and are really top notch Photogs, they shoot in Raw and they will be able to give you a much more detailed answer then I.

[Mark McCall]

Originally Posted by chaz345

Well shot JPEGs will produce prints that are for all intents and purposes indistinguishable from RAW, .

I'd agree with that statement.
BUT....
In the uncontrolled invironment of a wedding, using the razor thin exposure latitude of Jpg, it's impossible to nail the exposure every time.
....unless your shooting manual flash, keeping your subject X number of feet in front of you.
My weddings just don't work like that.

The advantages of Raw are huge. It's not more work.

[chaz345]

Originally Posted by Mark McCall

I'd agree with that statement.
BUT....
In the uncontrolled invironment of a wedding, using the razor thin exposure latitude of Jpg, it's impossible to nail the exposure every time.
....unless your shooting manual flash, keeping your subject X number of feet in front of you.
My weddings just don't work like that.

The advantages of Raw are huge. It's not more work.

It is more work because in order to take advantage of RAW's advantages you have to make an exposure decision about every single file. If you are batch processing you are letting software make the decision as to what the right exposure is, which is exactly what happens in the camera. I'd agree that external RAW processing software is marginally better at making those decisions than the camera is but if a shot if far enough off that the camera's software can't save it, the automatic or batch processing settings in external software aren't going to save it either.

[chaz345]

Originally Posted by Not4wood

Chaz,
Truthfully, after a shooting session and you are editing your shots your doing it anyway correct?

Yes but I was not(not shooting weddings anymore) making a manual decision about each and every file. For proofing purposes I was running a batch process for levels and auto color balance and a touch of sharpening and then basically doing a very quick edit to toss the "klunkers" and maybe do a more detailed touch up on critically important images that still needed work.

[Mark McCall]

Originally Posted by chaz345

It is more work because in order to take advantage of RAW's advantages you have to make an exposure decision about every single file.

Not quite.
If you've nailed the exposure, no action is needed in the raw converter regarding density. (exposure).
If they are needed, tweaks can be applied to groups of images, not just one at a time.
Other tweaks such as sharpness, color balance, saturation, contrast, can also be applied to some or all images at once.

Even better, those tweaks can be saved as a preset then automatically applied to any or all images.

Some Raw converters even let you do the same things to Jpgs, BUT...you lose the tonality of the original image because your altering "baked in" data, when changing the exposure after the fact.

Besides...
your taking the most important photographs of a couple's lives.
Why wouldn't you want every option available to you?

I'm not advocating Raw over Jpg. To each his own.
As my Dad used to say..."Use the right tool for the job".

The importance of the event, a fast paced, uncontrolled invironment and mixed lighting sources all tell me that Raw is the better tool for shooting something as important as a wedding.

[Mark McCall]

Originally Posted by flashmedic

how many wedding shooters give away digital images (or include them in packages)? or do you sell them?

About the time this post appeared, I got this month's Texas Professional Photographer Magazine in the mail.
There was an interesting story about this very topic by Doug Box, M. Photog. Cr.
Selling Digital Files Article by Doug Box

[flashmedic]

very good point, Mark...very convincing on his perspective.

it still feels like I'm selling my soul by doing it, but maybe I'm being too reluctant to move forward

[Mark McCall]

Originally Posted by flashmedic

it still feels like I'm selling my soul by doing it, but maybe I'm being too reluctant to move forward

And for good reason.
Keeping your negatives is what we've all been taught, since very early in our careers.
Time's are a changin'.

[flashmedic]

*sarcasm* change!?!?!? we can't change!