christopher hartt dallas Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>Certainly, in this very August group of P-Netters, we all know that "Asking" a price is very different than "Getting" the price. We can "Ask" for anything...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tolik_p. Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>I look at websites on the go, so if there's mo plain HTML site then it's a turn off right there, because I can't view it on like a iPhone. There's a photographer Viktor Zerga from WA, that has just as good pictures (and better in my opinion) and his prices only around $2,000.00 and up. With travel and all, it would still be cheeper to hire him for instance that to pay $10,000.00. And it could be the same with other photographer, not just Viktor; I just used him as an example. All I can say is good luck.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
think27 Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 MODERATOR NOTE: I think everyone should calm down a bit. Candice does very nice work. She is one of those newcomers that has had some great success in a short 4 year period. Clearly one of those that had some raw talent. I believe we helped her with her first wedding in 2004. We should all be very civil with regard to making suggestions about her site. They are, in my opinion valid suggestions.. The suggestion that she make sure she has rights to the music is an important one. But, may I ask that you all please be civilly constructive ;-) Saying things like "so-called professionals", or deriding her for her spelling in a mean spirited or sarcastic way is not necessary. Or, making insuations like: "with borrowed music and a borrowed logo it makes the viewer wonder what else is borrowed :))" is just uncalled for. I think we can all find ways to make suggestions/critiques without ripping someone apart. The music copyright issue is not an opinion as Betty would offer.. It's a legal issue that should be respected. I think we've addressed that subject enough here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betty_lowrey Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>To clarify, I wasn't saying it's my "opinion" that people should just go out and steal music. It is my opinion that people should seek out artists who offer their music for use and go through those channels. I hope that makes sense. I'm aware that laws are not a matter of opinion! : )</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
think27 Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 PS - DID ANYONE READ THIS? Chris Witcomb said: "If I'm not mistaken, it happens from time to time, the website is a ShowIt Site from David Jay. He has deals from bands and labels so that photographers can use their songs on the sites and ShowIt Web slideshows." So - I'm hoping Candice can clear that up. Perhaps Chris is correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scrivyscriv Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>All politics of this thread aside, your images are absolutely superb and very classy. Very emotion filled!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_ridout1 Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>Yep I read it but the site she is using is called "George" and is from Blu Domain......I have the exact template.. although it never went live. I'm keeping it for another idea down the road. Where oh where did Candice go? Thank you all for amusing me during my long editing days in the office.</p> <blockquote> <p>PS - DID ANYONE READ THIS?<br> Chris Witcomb said:<br> "If I'm not mistaken, it happens from time to time, the website is a ShowIt Site from David Jay. He has deals from bands and labels so that photographers can use their songs on the sites and ShowIt Web slideshows."<br> So - I'm hoping Candice can clear that up. Perhaps Chris is correct.</p> </blockquote> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_mankey Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>I like your photographs. The site seems plenty nice. I don't much care what others are arguing about (it is just photo.net). When I shopped for my wedding photographer I was busy looking at the photos. Unless the site design is bad (and that is not the case here) my focus was on the photos.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
think27 Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Thanks Mark... Good to know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christopher hartt dallas Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>Mark M - "It is just photo.net" I don't know if that comment of yours came out exactly as you intended...I mean, this IS P-NET! That's a phrase you can use on another forum with more success ;-)<br /> <br /> The discussion did get sidetracked with the focus taken away from the pictures themselves. IMO, Candice is positioning herself as a top-rank photographer (visa vi' pricing). I don't see that working with many of the images she has on the site. Many are quite nice, but there are also a lot of heavily clipped highlights (over exposure problems), most of the color pictures show a poor WB - many B&W's on the site which eliminate the WB problems, but the WB issue remains. There is a lack of dynamic range due to extensive PS H/S adjustments (also tell-tale algorithm "noise" in the black of tuxes), etc. In short, many images show skillful Photoshopping but tell-tale signs that the original image was not so great.<br /> <br /> A top end wedding photographer should demonstrate excellent technical mastery IMO. Candice' site does that for relatively few images. While there are no hard and fast rules about "style" in wedding photography - and some people even like the overexposed, ltd dynamic range look - the site images of a top wedding photographer shouldn't make anyone wonder if the shooter has a good grasp of technical issues (exposure, lighting, general capture techniques). I don't look at Candice' site and come away convinced of that. Just my opinion. And also, a top-end shooter should have clear evidence (website pics) of high-end venues on their site, and I don't see much of that. IMO, the site is about a photographer with moderate experience and high expectations. But then, I only had 2 weddings in '08 that booked over $15K so that doesn't put me in the high end (very often, at least) crowd either.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christopher hartt dallas Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>Btw - both of my '08 high-end weddings were "off the menu" special requests. One in L.A., one in Orange County.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooltpmd Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p><strong>Duck!!!</strong></p> <p>This has been a fricking bloodbath.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas_hardy1 Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p> <blockquote> <p >Certainly, in this very August group of P-Netters, we all know that "Asking" a price is very different than "Getting" the price. We can "Ask" for anything...</p> </blockquote> <br /> <br /> You have not because you ask not. Stop thinking so small. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christopher hartt dallas Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>Good point Thomas. I agree. After following this discussion and coupled with a few requests I've had, I'm rethinking my price structure now...and a beret...don't high-end photographers need to wear a beret or is it a fedora?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shannonholm Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>it's irritatingly slow to load. i didn't get past picture #4. but what i saw looked decent. good luck with 5 figures.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_ridout1 Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <blockquote> <p>rethinking my price structure now...and a beret...don't high-end photographers need to wear a beret or is it a fedora?</p> </blockquote> <p>Nope....it's a bucket :) ....wear a bucket and you'll have something to throw up in.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joann Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>Candice, Your photos are beautiful. There is so much criticism about flash sites with music that you would think it was not good practice to use flash and music. Out of curiosity, I looked at each photographer's site on this list:<br> http://www.popphoto.com/americanphotofeatures/5260/top-10-wedding-photographers-2008.html<br> Most were Flash. But only one played music when opening the site.<br> It was interesting to me how large the images were being presented -- like yours.<br> Each of these sites is beautifully orchestrated, whether static html or flash driven. I'm sure when yours is done and all of the kinks are worked out, it will reflect your five figure asking price :)<br> Please, make sure you get a license for your music, if you still want to use it. Another place to find good music to license is triplescoopmusic.com, oh, and readbeardmusic.com<br> Wishing you well,<br> Jo Ann</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Howard Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>Coming to the party very, very late...hehehe.</p> <p>The wikipedia entry for Chanel has a section about the Chanel logo and counterfeiting. Seems they are aggressively going after people who use the Chanel logo on counterfeit goods. It also talks about when the double C was first trademarked, etc.</p> <p>Also, I couldn't get past the site opener, because it insists I allow pop ups, which I wouldn't do for the queen herself. I don't care for the two pictures on that page, though, looks like the timing was off a little on both.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jennifer_s3 Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>what are "digets"?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_barts2 Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>This thread makes me wonder if the real Candice Cunningham had her computer hacked, and someone's having "fun" with her passwords, vandalizing her web site and posting stuff as her to photo.net.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick_rothwell Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>David - I was wondering if she's still part of the conversation. And the English appears to be a second language. We may have been punked?</p> <p>Still, I think there's been a fairly decent exchange of info, ideas, and opinions...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manuel barrera houston, Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>I watched quite a bit of the slide show, too long, images are nice. Hope you get the price you are asking and have many people asking and paying.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
savagesax Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>Jennifer, I think 5 widgets equal 1 diget. Not sure though.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_hovland Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>Candace lives in Ventura County, California.<br> There's a lot of money there- TV and movie stars building houses up the coast to Santa Barbara, where a lot of rich people have houses.<br> Some of those people will spend 5 figures without blinking, even if it's not a destination wedding.<br> Photographers need to pay less attention to their package prices and more attention to their customers' ability to pay. Some have $1,000, some $40,000. <br> Don't leave money laying on the table.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 <p>You need to hire a copy writer for your marketing materials. The number of typos and misspellings is very unprofessional and really detracts from your "branding" efforts.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now