photoreu

Reedy Photo Process is a lab here in St Petersburg, FL. I use them regularly and highly reccomend them.

Between those two lenses I would pick the 85 simply because of build and image quality.

 

However... if it's going to be one of your only lenses I'd choose to go with the 50. The 85 is going to be pretty long on your XT... the 50 will be more versatile.

Was just using it Sunday at a wedding. Good little lens, and cheap. If you can spare the extra money, go ahead and get the 1.4 version. Better build quality, USM, and better boke.

You can create a flash slideshow with ACDsee7. It is super easy and the program is only $50. You can also create it as an .exe file, a .scr file (screensaver), and I think one other but I cant remember right now... It's also a really good program for going through lots of images. I use it for my initial edit before moving over to photoshop.

Hey Chris I was there too! I should have looked you up while I was in your neck of the woods... I agree with everything you said... great camera.. wish it was a little bit faster.. but other than that, really liked it.

http://www.atncentral.com

 

There are a number of film borders here, for free.

My 16-35 is very, very sharp. In fact, sharper and contrastier than the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS I borrow from time to time. I think it's a quality control issue. I've seen 70-200's that are awesome but the one I borrow just isnt that great. My 16-35 is as sharp as my 50 in the center... but there is a noticeable decrease towards the corners.

For sports I would use either a 1DmkII or 20D hands down. I'd never shoot with plans to crop later... what a post processing nightmare that would be. Plus there are budget considerations. You could get 2 1DmkII's for the price of 1 1DsmkII. Or you could buy a longer lens. A good lab should be able to get you 40" prints from your 10D, btw. They might not be razor sharp.. but this is sports, not studio portraiture.. right?

This exact same thing happened to me with this lens. I tried "breaking it in" and all the methods above. It never worked. If I tried to shoot at f/3.5 it would lock up the camera. If I tried anything else it would usually overexpose/cause other problems. I sent mine in and it was repaired under warranty. I'd look to send it back to canon as quickly as you can... maybe you can find a EU service center that wont be so expensive to ship to.

I would never bring a backdrop: too much time and as already mentioned, cuts into the memories. If I'm presented with a very very ugly altar, I'll sometimes try to persuade the group to go outside or wait until the reception to get the formals (not always easy to do). If not I just shoot what I've got to work with. They picked the church.. they know what it looks like.

 

I did have one bride once that ordered a 16x20 but wanted a different background... so I came up with this shot. She loved it, and got it ordered it on canvas... not really my style, but to each his own...<div></div>

Hey Todd,

 

Chin up man! You can do it! Get your prices up! You are sooo worth it!

I've never shot a group that big, but...

 

1.) Try to shoot from above

2.) Command everyone's attention and work quickly

3.) Tell them they need to be able to see your lens or you cant see them.. make sure they get this and keep their attention on you.

4.) Use the longest focal length possible while still keeping everyone comfortably in the frame, to avoid distortion (front row looks like giants, back looks puny).

 

hope this helps...

even though they aren't photographers they should be able to do simple math... everyone knows what a 4x6 looks like... double that and you get an 8x12. That means you have to cut off 2 inches. Or just sell them an 8x12 :)

Coworker and friend saw some pictures I had on my desk...

 

him: "hey, those are nice, do you think you could do our wedding pictures?"

 

me: "uh, sure, ok."

 

I had no idea what I was getting myself into at the time... but good thing we made the arrangements about 18 months before the wedding date because I used all of that time to really study and learn all I could. I already loved photography.. but this helped me to realize that I could actually make a living doing it. Now I'm well on my way to quitting my job and going out on my own.

I'd go with the 10-22 and 70-200IS. The 10-22 will give you a much more dramatic field of view than the 16-35 and the 70-200IS is awesome! The only reason I have the 16-35 instead of the 10-22 is because the 10-22 is EF-S, and I use the lenses on my film cameras as well as planning on getting a 1Dmk? sometime down the road... didnt see it as a wise investment.

I've often seen those little black rectangles...

 

Do they just pass them out at the beginning of the wedding?

 

Can you see through them?

 

...and how do you keep them from falling off all day?

Todd I think you bring up some valid points - and I do agree with you and think there is nothing wrong with what you are doing, it is very kind and generous. As you pointed out, however, it is not a way to earn a living with photography as the sole source of income.

 

To answer your question, though.. I think the difference between a high-end, middle, and lower, unfortunately, is mainly about the $$. Whatever rate you book at will determine what bracket you fall into.

 

This is not always directly related to the quality or products received by the client, but I think it would be the determining factor if we're going to put people into different tiers.

 

Your question is actually conducive to mine, I'm trying to figure out what DOES make a high-end photographer worth the extra money... and while I have a pretty good idea, I'd like to hear what others have to say. I've had the opportunity to meet and work with several higher end (more expensive) photographers in my area. So far, I've seen that they are (in no particular order):

 

1)GENERALLY better photographers. I dont want to start a war, I know there are PLENTY of amateurs that could shoot circles around most pros, but for our purposes here, I'd say a $3000 photographer is, on average, better than a $900 photographer. (More consistent exposure, lighting, better composition, less likelyhood of catastrophic equipment failure - they should have plenty of backup gear, include an experienced, better paid 2nd shooter, etc)

2)More experience - better able to flow with the wedding day rollercoaster

3)More sure of what they need to get and what it will take to make it happen (they'll get the shots)

4)Product. Simply put, nicer albums and display prints.

5)Service - you have to provide waay above average service

6)Personality. Quite honestly I think this might be it. The SINGLE most difining trait of a "high end" photographer. They have this persona that declares "I'm worth it." They are confident (often cocky), fun to be around, and simply someone most young couples would actually enjoy having at their wedding.

 

This is in no way a comprehensive list... just random thoughts off the top of my head. One guy I know was trying to book a 1 hour wedding, he charged the guy $1500 with a high-rez DVD of all the images, no proofs. When the groom objected to the very high price he had to sell the groom on what made him worth it - His artistic vision, his years of experience, and his name. He made a comparison to cars: You could buy a kia or you could buy a BMW. Both get you from point A to point B, one does it with considerably more style, more power, and more luxury than the other - and that is why it is worth the extra expense. The guy booked with him the next day. (And the photos were awesome).

Hey everyone,

 

I'm curious to hear how you'd all respond to this question. What are

your "selling points," what makes you different?

 

Is it your personality? style? unique artistic vision? service?

product?

 

I'm especially curious to hear from those who are in the upper end of

the market. How do you convince someone that they should spend 3-5x

as much on you vs. someone else.

 

I know your work should sell it's self but I've discovered there are

all sorts of clients and different things are important do different

people. I know this is very broad - but let's hear some ideas and

some stories about how you got that contract signed!

I'm with Ken. I've seen this exact thing happen to two different photographers (I was second shooting). The first smiled and said nothing... we continued shooting and made it through a long, miserable event. The second guy I was with bit back. "Can you see through this lens? Do I come to your work and tell you how it's done?" etc etc... he was not happy.. BUT, they apologized and SHUT UP. We finished the event with not one more comment. Some people just have these personalities that make them extremely difficult to work with. What I've learned is that they understand their own language best. You can't let people walk all over you. (You also dont want to start a fistfight at someone's wedding though - I'm not encouraging that.. just need to stand up for yourself sometimes).

Well all I can tell you is how I got started 2nd shooting. I found the guy I liked the most in my area and e-mailed him. He didnt reply. So about a month later I e-mailed him telling him I was serious and to please reply. He called me back about 5 minutes later. We met the next evening, and I shot a wedding with him that Saturday! I think it largely depends on the photographer obviously. The other guy I work with I met at a local pro photogs meeting. I was standing next to him and he mentioned he was looking for a good second shooter (talking to someone else).. so I immediately introduced myself and have been shooting with him ever since.

 

I will say though, that if you're not really interested in a career as a photographer, to do as was suggested. Photograph things you're interested in, have fun! You dont want to ruin your hobby by doing something with it you dont like just so you can make a few bucks. Kids sports I think is a good idea. From what I've heard though you'll be hard pressed to sell prints unless you can print them right there. So get yourself a little portable cart/computer/printer setup.. shoot away.. you'll have a crowd gathered with people ordering prints right away I'm sure. You'd of course have to do it the right way and clear it with the league or organizer of the event.. plus be set up as a legitimate business. But anyway, have fun with it! Maybe get a solid set of work together with a certain theme, whatever that may be, and then look into listing it with a stock agency. There's lots of ways to make money with photography. Oh and as far as photographers not taking you seriously. Dont be dishonest by why not leave out the part time thing? Although, I'd think most photographers would be happy to hear that because that'd mean you arent future competition! :)

Missed your last post. You are right. There are photographers who are BIG jerks. Just do your best to ignore them and move on. There are more nice photographers out there than mean ones. Surround yourself with happy people and be happy :)

What Pawel said. Photo.net is a great place. Apology accepted, no harm no foul. Sometimes it can be hard to judge what a person is like based on a post in a forum. I'm sure you didnt have any malicious intnet. Seriously though, look into second shooting for a local photog. You can actually make decent money doing this (enough to fund gear purchases anyway) although pay does vary widely depending on who you work for. I work full time, have 2 kids, and still manage to 2nd shoot an average of about 3 weddings a month.. (and a few on my own). At least you're thinking up ideas and trying to make something happen for yourself. A lot of people dont even get that far.

Is it simply telling you the card is full or is it saying something else?

 

Things like ISO speed and subject matter all drastically affect file sizes (as well as actually selecting a different file size of course). I dont think you could get 800 shots onto a 2gig card unless you've accidentally switched over to a smaller jpg size. 400 or 500 sounds more like it...

David,

 

Overall? Very bad idea. Sorry.. but it would never fly w/ 90% of the pro photographers out there (my estimate). All the photographers I know have it in the contract that they will be the sole photographer. Most pro photographers I know are very helpful and nice people, great to work with, and good at what they do. I don't understand why you think you couldnt 2nd shoot part time... All that's usually involved is a Saturday's worth of shooting.

 

AND... You certainly can't expect to come into a wedding photographers forum, bash the profession, and then hope to get lots of helpful replies.

 

Your analogy is as bad as your idea. Sorry.

 

Hope you have your flame suit on.

 

Reuben

"If you screw up, than you screw up and it becomes a big learning lesson and the only one at fault is the person who didn't hire someone with more experience"

 

Sorry but I completely dissagree with this. Most clients don't know all that goes into wedding photography. It's pretty easy to convince someone you're an awesome photographer with nice landscapes and pretty pictures of flowers. If you've been shooting these kind of pictures for 5 years and they look great, it doesnt really mean much if you've never shot a wedding or used an off camera flash. It's the photographer's resposibility to be honest about their experience (which I beleive Lauren was). The problem is, a lot of new photographers "dont know what they dont know." I'm sure that was true for everyone here at some point.

 

Anyway, not trying to be discouraging. I'm certainly not a newbie hater (I'm pretty new also). But you really need to have a solid understanding of the technical side of photography, let alone the logistics of shooting a wedding. I'd also reccommend assisting to learn these skills. If the wedding is this August, you better get busy studying! Contact a bunch of local photographers in the area and find out if any of them need a free assistant next month.

 

Ok and to answer your question, the little pop up flash is weak, very close to the lens axis (red eye, possible shadows from bigger lenses/hoods) and generally just a really bad idea. You also more than likely wont have a good low light AF assist without an accessory flash, which means it may be hard to focus in low light (not sure what camera you're using). So definitely get a good flash. That was also the first new peice of equipment I bought before doing a wedding. I dont like using it much.. but it's a necessity in certain situations.

 

You've got a month to learn and I think you can do it! Just keep studying and see if you can tag along for a few weddings. Prepare all you can!