igor_osatuke

Restaurant Server (Female), Ukraine (the closest to Tokyo I've made so far :-)<div></div>

WWW.spankbush.com

Phil,

Honestly I'd have taken the 24mm in a heartbeat if it were black. Grrrrrrr!

Kurt,

These photos are good. You did a fine job. Especially considering it was a small wedding with not much going on (or so it seems). However, your clients had different expectations. It is a tricky sitution when they say they do not like the commercial stuff. (But then b&w pj weddings are fast becoming the hot commercial stuff as well a sales catch phrase). Maybe they meant overposed cliched(sp?) photos. Anyway, here's what I learned in my wedding school of hard knocks:

 

1. Do not mess with formal shots; Pose them well, light them well, focus carefully, avoid camera shake. If you can position them artfully-great. If you can't then make sure the heads do not overlap, and the background is clean. They are the ones that get bought for the people in them.

 

2. Try to anticipate what the client wants. This does not mean a total sellout to the client but tastes do differ and you have to cover your bases. You want to get paid after all. If in doubt shoot more of the same from different angles, choose the best shots. Film's still cheap, and digital is a total extacy for that.

 

 

3. Compose carefully and leave room for cropping. The clients will want different size photos to fill in empty frames around the house. If you shoot too tightly there maybe no room to crop properly. I know this goes against this full-frame-with-black-border religion. But this is commercial work and the client rules. Cover your bases.

 

 

4. Shoot on color film. I had several clients who wanted a color print of a black and white photo. "Um... sorry, it is on black and white film" No biggie but sometimes the client's mind changes, and it is nice to have a back up. Modern color neg films make wonderful tradiditonal bw prints, scan better than BW films because Digital Ice3 does not work on BW which saves a lot of time on retouching.

 

 

5. If not much is going on shoot the people; guests, realtives, kids (but make sure they belong to the right people or nobody will want those photos). Try to glorify the event and the surroundings.

 

6. Again, try to figure out the client's taste and expectation. I have a standard list of shots that I give to the client. It covers most events of a wedding. I ask the client to edit it however they wish. Then it becomes the script for your work and very helpful cheat sheet. Make sure they understand that it is only an outline and some shots may not happen for various reasons some of which are beoynd your powers.

 

 

Basically you have to marry your style to the client's expectations. It may sound like whoring oneself but it is not (or is it? Well... if it pays the bills...Ah, whatever). If the results are too far off the client's expectations then there may be a problem and a cut in pay, bad publicity, etc. This still leaves a lot of room for personal expression. I just prefer to play it safe, shoot more and have a lot to choose from. It's worked for me so far. Since it is important to get paid after the assignment these are some things to remember.

 

Another thing to keep in mind is that the photographer is often the cheapest item on the expense list; clothes, food, drinks etc total much much more. And we are there to capture the extravagance, the chic of the event (true or imaginary) And also how much fun it was for everyboy present. If done well, they'll love your work. Appease their vanity. So far all this worked for me.

 

 

Going back to you your wedding: I liked your photos a lot. Some of them are simply great, and others thought so too. My guess is your clients expected more formal shots, more glamor, and maybe less avantgarde (judging from their remark about cutting the heads off). It is OK to cut people's heads off and shoot their backs as long as you also have a photo with their heads and fronts. Also they probably expected more photos of guests and relatives. Judging by the size of the wedding all happy greetings might have taken three minutes but then this the time to shoot a lot of film. Those are very emotional moments and a lot is going on at the same time. People love those photos.

 

Your photos have a style and they do look good. You can make up to your clients by offering them a free 8x10, 11x14 or something like that if you feel like it. Most people would settle for that. But since you did not charge a lot, and there are at least 13 great shots for the album I think you have done your part of the contract.

 

I'd say perfect your style and shoot, shoot, shoot. I think you are on the right track. Hope you'll find this helpful. Apologies for a lenghty post.

Best,

Igor

 

Kharkov, Ukraine. August 2003

Action<div></div>

Not Leica, everything else is for real.<div></div>

Let's show'em America... And they did.<div></div>

Got my Noctilux about two weeks ago. Put it on the camera thinking I need to pick it up more often to get used its weight. After seeing this lens the Nocti looks and feels anorexic.

Eric,

I have used one for about a year, enough time to make an opinion. In general I like it, and find it a very useful gadget. It sits on my .85 body (M6ttl). It is of great help with my 90 SAA when shooting portraits, or to quickly catch a second shot. Although it adds some bulk and weight it balances nicely with heavy lenses, in my case the 90 SAA, and Noctilux. And the grip is very useful with those lenses. The batteries last a long time - dozens of rolls. It is noisy and when in use makes the shutter sound louder. It allows you to wind manually too. In that case the sound of film advance becomes a little louder- the clutch coupling makes two clicks - but the shutter becomes quiet. However, it will put scratches, and eventually grooves on the clutch plate if you use the wind lever to advance film a lot. It does not bother me, but its good to know it in advance. 200 bucks? Incredibly little money for it. I think it safe to assume that you can always sell it and get all if not more money back in case you don't like it. My two cents.

Very refreshing indeed. Not the type of photos I'd take, and that made his portfolio very attractive to go through. Looks like he really enjoys photography, and -acually- has time to do his own stuff. I envy him. Thanks for sharing Patrick.

90 SAA<div></div>

Hi Travis,

This image really has a lot of potential . My only technical comment will be the tonal range of the image you posted. I think the highlights need more tone, and the face of the person on the left could use some dodging of the highlights to make it stand out against the background. Using Levels controls I would open up midtones (top middle slider moved to the left) and decrease highlights (bottom right slider moved to the left) . Usually this would give you some room to play with your shadows density (top left slider). Or you could make another scan and do similar adjustments using scanner controls. That way you will start with a more manageable scan in Photoshop. But hey, this is a great street sceene. Keep up your work. I am still haunted by your photo with the one legged guy.

Gerry,

Fuji HPH, NPZ and Kodak Portra 400NC are excellent films for people photos. I found that Fuji handles mixed light better than Kodak. Still try to avoid mixing fluorescent with any other kind of light. I always overexpose color neg film by 2/3 stop i.e. rate 400 film at 250. It is especially important for dark skinned people. If not exposed enough grain becomes too apparent in shadow areas. Looks ugly. Color neg films handle overexposure very well, underexposure on the other hand looks bad, no matter what film manufacturers say.

 

Also most one hour and similar labs print on high contrast paper because they are geared to make solid looking prints from underxposed negatives shot by zoom point and shoot cameras. Also not all of them have fixed channels for professional Fuji and Kodak films. They may have a problem printing from a properly exposed negative, funny as it sounds. So try to find a good lab that can handle a properly exposed negative and print it while preserving both highlights and shadows, unless you do your own digital prining of course.

 

To sum it up:

1. Use "professional" film

2. Overexppose by 2/3 stop.

3. Avoid mixing fluorescent with daylight or tungsten

4. Find a good lab

 

 

Hope this helps.

Have fun,

Igor

Thank God the glass is stong<div></div>

Piano practice (from behind)

Thanks for sharing Jim. It is good to know it.

Alec,

I have not tried the NJ facility but used DAG Camera. He charged me $80 for a Nikkor 90 1.5 LTM , and $75+S&H for Hektor 135 4.5 . It took him about three months to CLA the Nikkor that was in a pretty bad shape. When I go the lens back it was nice and clean but did not focus properly. After a short while oil showed on the aperure blades. I sent it back, and also included the Hektor with that shipment. Got both lenses back in three weeks. All was perfect this time, except for another $85.00 bill for the Nikkor. I did not pay that of course because it was a mistake. If I remember it right Leica charges appr.$130 per lens. But I have heard rumours on this forum that they redirect the equipment to third party shops (Golden Touch? DAG?). True or not I have no idea. Despite the glitches I am pleased with DAG, even though I expected everything to go smoother.

Cheers

This new Rollei deal makes Leica look like a bargain.

Patrik,

I think craving a second body is a respectable enough justification for bying it:-) I bought a .85 body to go with my .72(both TTLs). What a liberating experinece (an I am talking not only about my checking account). With two bodies you can be more flexible with what films and lenses you use. Leica M is a pack animal; they like each other and work well together.

Good luck!

And lack thereof

I'll be willing to sell my almost new 90SAA for half that right now. Or maybe I should buy a couple more of them at "old" prices? What to do, what to do???

Sorry, not Leica

Dan,

It does not appear that you need more advice, so here you go. Just add a Noctilux, and a Elmar: Collect them all :-)

Sanford,

I remembered another thing regarding inkjets in fine art. I was at some kind of trade show two years ago, and the guest speaker was sharing his art of making fine art. He shot clients' portraits with Fuji S1 (an ancient digital camera), then printed them in black and white on watercolor paper. In doing so he created his "unique signature look". His advice was if the prints do not look artsy enough, lower the resolution of your printer or go to crappier paper. When he said what he was selling those prints for I stopped chuckling right then.