dave_wilson1 Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Marc: "What I do miss are discriminating clients..." There ya' go! Says a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmphoto Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 <p>…probably spent about 15 rolls of 36. I used Fuji NPH (400), which I can still look back on the quality of that film and get chills...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcsaint Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 This may be a bit off topic, but I remember a (possibly apocryphal) story of a local wedding photographer who would show the proofs while wearing white gloves. He would show the bride and groom one of the proofs and ask them if they wanted to buy it. If they said no, he would tear the print up and throw it in the trash, then pick up the next print. "Do you want this one?" Don't know how this sales method worked for him..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
savagesax Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Marc St, I've heard the same story! It's probably true! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Luttmann Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Bob, interesting comment about medium format film you made. Medium format is available from many companies for color and b&w...no problem getting them at all. As to labs, I find it odd that given you say you live in the LA area, you haven't heard of the most popular film lab for wedding pro in North America....Richard Photo Lab. It appears the issue with film is more what people don't know about it as opposed to a problem with film itself, or labs to process it. Film is easy. Shoot it. Drop it off. Download the scans. Little to no time spent staring at monitor. A number of years ago when I switched back to film, I cut my post processing time down by about 80% to 90%. Saved me a lot of money in the long run. Why anyone would spend a mountain of time post processing and using filters to try and make their digital files look like film is beyond me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve m smith Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 <blockquote> <p>Film is easy. Shoot it. Drop it off. Download the scans. Little to no time spent staring at monitor. A number of years ago when I switched back to film, I cut my post processing time down by about 80% to 90%. Saved me a lot of money in the long run. Why anyone would spend a mountain of time post processing and using filters to try and make their digital files look like film is beyond me.</p> </blockquote> <p>My thoughts exactly. I'm not a wedding photographer, but I have done a few weddings for friends. Usually with an RB67. Films sent off for processing, proofs returned from the lab with re-ordering numbers on the back, No post processing - in fact, no computer time at all!!<br> <br />Just as my father used to do it from the 1950s to the 1980s.</p> <p>For those who want the products other than the traditional photo album and need digital files, just download. None of the hours of post processing which some people say they do.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Taylor Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 <p>It was hell kid, lemme tell ya.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_wilson1 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Processing locally is a definite problem in NJ. It's hard to find and very expensive in quantity. Years ago I had a set lab that did fantastic printing. I could easily drive there, drop off my work, tell them what I needed, bam, done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig_shearman1 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 <p>"This may be a bit off topic, but I remember a (possibly apocryphal) story of a local wedding photographer who would show the proofs while wearing white gloves. He would show the bride and groom one of the proofs and ask them if they wanted to buy it. If they said no, he would tear the print up and throw it in the trash, then pick up the next print. "Do you want this one?" Don't know how this sales method worked for him....."<br /><br />Monte Zucker, the late king of wedding photographers, did this for real. I heard him describe it at a local PPA meeting once. Certainly others copied the idea from him. He also encouraged people to buy square format enlargements, partly because square frames were hard to find. Then he sold them the frames. :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelmowery Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 <p>Well Sonny, When i was a young whipper snapper we shot with the film cameras and we did not have the luxuries of a view finder like you young kids have today. We had know what we were doing and we did not learn as we shot and chimped along. Hell everybody is a photographer today it seems. Just buy a camera and get some business cards and your on your way. LOL I am kidding but there is some truth to that. Film sucked compared to what digital is today. It is much easier as far as pushing a button and getting a picture but it still requires talent and skill to produce great images. That is one thing you can't take away from a Pro. I have seen more luck than skill and to be honest it is all about presentation and selling yourself than it is about experience. Put a bow tie on and some red shoes and you will make it. Just Be happy your not shooting film.</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