timberwolf1

The reason I don't need a telephoto lens is because I

will usually be at a distance with a normal lens of about 5-6 feet for portraits.

Because I will be photographing 2 people in portraits mostly: the bride and groom.

This extra person puts me back in distance. And this is what a telephoto does for

portraits: it pushes you back to give a certain look.

<p>

In a single portrait of a person, like a bride, I am usually set back to see her veil, as well

as her face. So, again I am distanced from the subject using a normal lens. No need

for a 85mm lens, in other words.

<p>

I rarely use a 28mm; I

would only really use this lens as a speciality item. I would use a 28mm in a small

dressing room, for example.

<p>

The only other alternative I would suggest for a one-lens choice is a 35mm lens. This is a

basic photojournalistic choice. But it is not a good lens for a portrait of one person. It will

make their midsection look larger.

<p>

The 50mm is the best all-around choice for weddings. All other choices meet specialty

problems at weddings. The 50mm can basically "do it all" if you are alittle careful in your

choices of posing and don't mind a little extra backing-up with your feet.

Do you create images that de-personalize the subject? What approaches do you use?

<p>

An example of a de-personalized image may be photographing someone as a marginal

sillouette, or obscuring their face, or turning their back to the camera, etc.

I have two simple answers for you:

<p>

Package your prints between two pieces of cardboard, then tape them together. It will be

impossible for most anything to damage them in the mail.

<p>

As for the "must have" list: You can give them a piece of paper with the title: "Dream

Sheet". Then, it is on this piece of paper that they place their choices. At the bottom of

this paper, you can place your disclaimer that you actually do not promise that these shots can be

individually accomplished.

<p>

In my contract, I modify it with wording that says that I don't promise what

the final images will look like. The fact that I took the "Dream Sheet" does not

constitute a promise to the Client that I can produce those images.

 

<p>

I am not giving you legal advice.

Merely using technical language to describe your prints may not be enough. It may not stop

them. They can sue anyway, and for any reason they can imagine. So, you may want to make

many smart references to this limitation of your services everywhere in your literature.

 

<p>

 

I do not usually accept a "Image Requirements Sheet" or "Must

Have" sheets from anyone with a return promise of anything. 90% of the time, I never

receive such a sheet from anyone. They don't have to "help" me understand how to photograph a wedding. See an attorney and create solutions before you

have an ulcer, become unhappy, burnt-out and start to curse weddings for your problems.

<p>

Welcome to the real world of serving customers of wedding photography!

<p>

Timber Borcherding timberborcherding

Make a temporary "ceiling" above the flowers with a light disc by Flexfill. You can use a

white card, too. Point your flash upward at this temporary ceiling held above the flowers.

As a result, you will have soft light. It works every time for me. The look of this light is

nearly identical to a softbox in softness.

I'll just add that a "fashion photographer" style added to an engagement announcement is

a positive direction for this kind of picture. And this has been part of my style for years.

But fashion photographers break all kinds of rules to create their styles. A middleground

between "breaking all the rules" and tending to some rules is the photographer's duty to

be found.

 

So, I would find some inspiration in the freedom of the styles of fashion photography.

Just don't make them look so-o-o-o cool that their friends don't recognize them!

I agree, just a normal 50mm lens will do it. You can always use "sneaker zoom". A 70mm setting is not much different than 70mm. Always have a fast sharp 50mm available at weddings. A 50mm lens will also allow you to white tape your distances around the barrel of the lens so that you can use "distances and manual mode" when you have no trust in auto mode. The 50mm will force you to consider distances.

Please give me all the rules you know for making an acceptable engagement

announcement. Include everything you know about publication issues as well. I would

like to combine your comments with my own to make the "ultimate engagement portrait:.

<p>

My own:

<p>

This engagement announcement will be seen by a wide audience. do not want this

audience to find symbols in the picture that will cause their friends to laugh: at the

woman's long nose; at the lips of the couple; at the clenched fist which is too clenched.

Each person still has her dignity, even though they may be casual and playing around.

Later, when the couple sees the picture, the bride-to-be will look at her lips, and every

part of her face and body. She will ask herself if she looks fat. She will ask herself if you

made her look fat. She will look under her chin to see if you hid her double chin. And on

and on it goes when you serve the public. And this is the adaptation that you must make

to serve the public. It is a give and take of rules and conditions. Those rules come from

society, from convention, from style, from fashion. If make clowns out of the bride

and groom, it has to be a special kind of clowning. The audience has to end up adoring

the clowning-around photo. You see, showing a fat body part can spoil the laugh (for

example).

<p>

remember these people are not [my] friends. They are not relatives. do not know

what their thoughts and dreams are.

<p>

 

And these considerations make my job difficult. Breaking

the rules, and 'walking over the net' is the easy part. But first, need to know what and

where are all the rules and where then they apply.

 

<p>

When people own pictures, they tend to find more 'errors' and

defects the longer they look at the picture. And their friends will see things in the picture

that are unmerciful. I know this, and I make a living being concerned about these details.

They may see their distorted noses, their too dark eyes, the uncomfortable way they are

leaning against...whatever. The difference between them and me, is that I rapidly, in

seconds, see all the defects. I don't need anyone to point them out. I have heard all of the

conversations and complaints and suggestions of previous customers. It may sound trivial,

but I remember when a bride criticised me for simply asking her to touch the limb of a

tree: She said later that I made her look like a monkey! Well, I was a new professionial, and

I had lessons to learn then. She made me feel really bad. It hurt.

 

<p>

Serving the public is not 'art photography' wherein can simply do as please.

<p>

 

It only takes a few years of constantly serving the public to find that (as a

photographer) must consider the vanity and (bad) symbols that could be created in

something as harmless as an engagement picture. If you actually saw my engagement

pictures, you would see that I have gone way past traditional portraits. I put a fashioney

slant to it. I added sexiness; we did theatrical things to make the groom look like he was

"eating up the bride" (he was dressed in a top hat). I have put them on the floor.

<p>

 

But although I created something different on the page from all the other engagement

announcements, I keep a discipline of remembering their vanity and need to look good no

matter what I did with their bodies and placements.

<p>

Please give me your rules and thoughts on doing your engagement announcements.

The picture above is the kind of picture that I approve of. A vertical picture will also

display better in a vertical column in the newspaper. A horizontal picture will only be as

wide as is the column. Therefore, the horizontal picture will be tiny compared to all other

pictures on the page.

 

The next consideration is the background. If you submit a dark background picture to the

newspaper, the background will be flat, sort of ugly dark. Newsprint does not show detail

well in dark areas of a black and white photograph.

 

Yes, and this is another "rule" to follow: a good display on the newspaper page.

Professional photographers, some, make a consideration for how it will look actually

printed. I know that I do. Anyone can write me in the future if anyone has any additional

problems or questions on this matter. I am happy to be helpful.

 

Timber Borcherding timberborcherding

Tennis has rules. That net, those lines, the restriction that you must use a certain

regulation type of ball. But these rules and placements creates a scene that an audience

can enjoy of players. <p>

 

In the same way, theatre and broadcasting have rules in camera/scene production. And

these rules are the result of the knowledge of pleasing a wide audience. Advertisers know

"how far they can go", too.

<p>

 

 

 

Later, when the couple sees the picture, the bride-to-be will look at her lips, and every

part of her face and body. She will ask herself if she looks fat. She will ask herself if you

made her look fat. She will look under her chin to see if you hid her double chin.

 

The way it really goes is that when people own pictures, they tend to find more 'errors' and

defects the longer they look at the picture.

 

 

 

<p> If you actually saw my engagement

pictures, you would see that I have gone way past traditional portraits. I put a fashioney

slant to it. I added sexiness; we did theatrical things to make the groom look like he was

"eating up the bride" (he was dressed in a top hat). I have put them on the floor. I just

can't go through all of my ideas of the past.

<p>

I keep a discipline of remembering their vanity and need to look good no

matter what I did with their bodies and placements.

<p>

Timber Borcherding timberborcherding

I would still use some

conservative rules of portraiture for a result: Namely, I would have both of their sets of

eyes open. I would not picture them from their sides so I am looking into their ears,

either; this also exposes the length of their noses. You don't want to show imperfect

kisses.

<p>

I will give you a tip, just as the

Bride and Groom reach the altar for the first time at the beginning of the ceremony, take a

flash picture, just one. The ceremony doesn't start until the Officiator speaks. So, you are

technically obeying the rules. Use a powerful flash if possible. Also, if the Officiator turns

around to grab something, with his back to the audience, you could sneak a flash picture

from the back of the church. He won't know who took the shot, you see.

[Opinion] There is no reason to let the outside light "blow out" anything.

<p>

The one little risky matter, specifically the reflection we [may] get from flash unit when it hits the glass. But from experience, I know that the priest will be standing dead center in the middle. And I know that I will be standing dead center in the middle, too. As a result, the priest will be covering this reflection with his body. Also, if there were a reflection, it will be small, tiny. So, the risk of any reflection here is 1%. If I photograph from the side, the reflection will not appear because of the angle of its reflection: the mirror effect.

<p>

So, what we have left is the outside light. It is totally unacceptable [in my opinion] to allow this light to "blow out" your picture for the standard shots of the ceremony. Now, maybe you could use this "blow out" once for a creative romantic effect for one picture or 2 during the ceremony.<p>

Try fill-in flash in a similar fashion as though you are outside. To find out the "perfect exposure", try a test shot before the wedding. But from experience, I would estimate that the glass filters out 1/2 f stop worth of light power.

<p>

I don't believe in allowing auto mode to make decisions for me. So, I use distances and manual mode. I recommend that your auto mode may be fooled by this strong, very powerful background illumnation, and you should reject auto mode. That leaves you with manual mode, and you can use a flash meter to find out the correct exposure for the distances involved.

<p> Once you have the correct f stop exposure from a flash meter, you need to adjust manually your shutter speed for a correct exposure of the outside light. Then, I would add 1/2 f stop more exposure to allow for the wall glass filtration effect mentioned. how dark/light

<p>

 

 

[You may want to] re-stage the ceremony using your more powerful flash unit at your side.

I use my personality to solve this situation. That's right: personality. I realize these

beams are going to trap reflected light. So, I maneuver the people to face me in a

direction that would run along the beams. The beams will then not trap light. What I do is

to quickly explain to the people chatting that I need a photograph. Then I stand in a

position that will force them to turn towards me for the picture. I use bounce light and a

white card on my Norman 200b flash for a perfect shot. If the room is too loud for

communication, I rub their hands or side of their arm with my hands for 2 seconds to get

their attention. I touch each person. This works better than those intellectual words

oftentimes. It nicely "breaks into" their conversation with a caring manner. Also, because

they have probably seen me do this manipulation 10 times before I got to them, they are

sort of 'primed' to face me. There are no social problems. Just touch their hands gently

and it will all work for you.

 

Forget about using natural light if you can bounce from this ceiling with a white card

behind your flash unit to fill-in. You can get a white card from TAP plastics in about 4x8"

size and rubber band it to your unit.

 

This method is the most riskless method available to you. Using natural light is a risk on

each person because you really don't know how this light will look on each person's face

before you take it. As you sit in your chair at this moment, do you know how the lighting

will look on each person's face whereever he stands in the room? With bounce flash, you

know what the light will look like: no risk.

 

I would use Portra 400NC for you simply because you can use less flash power. I would

use ASA 100, but I have all the flash power anyone could want.

 

Using a Stroboframe with a verta-flip inside it to flip your camera under your flash is really

the best tool here. I have discontinued R7's and they are the best. So, I would buy a

Stroboframe from the auctions (Stroboframe is temporarily out of business or in

receivership last time I heard, they are owned by Tiffen).

The reason for flashes on TWO SIDES is because the couple will likely be facing one

another with the officiator in the back. This presents the couple to the audience. If you

have only one flash to the side, then either the bride or the groom will get more light from

the one side; and one person will have a darker face as a result. You want them equal! E-

q-u-a-l-i-t-y !

 

And these 2 flashes could be positioned possibly, your choice, slightly in back of the

couple. This will give that old Hollywood face sculpturing look with lit cheekbones, sort of

like a picture in my portfolio called: "Rembrandt Bride". But you will need help and

stands or 2 monopods with guests hold them, I suppose. And still there is alittle risk that

you might not position them correctly not having modeling lights to see by.

You ask about strategy; you ask about film and 'pushing it'.

 

Your strategy is a risk laden choice. I wouldn't be pushed into a risking taking 'zone' on a wedding unless I had a back-up set of photos that were taken with flash. Clients can be demanding, and not know the danger they are leading themselves and you into.

 

The gently moving ship, the lack of room, the twilight (I guess) conditions are too, too difficult to guarantee results that attain a professional level. I would take control of this situation by presenting the risks; and give a solution of a few flash shots with a try at natural light shots.

 

Pushing your film one stop is really nothing to give you any confidence over. Do you know where the horizon will be in relation to their faces? No. You really don't know what the exposure value will be under these conditions, do you! Well I don't either. I need more data. What you have here isn't sufficient. I need you to do an incident meter reading at the same time of day adjusted for summer dates. And figure the ceremony will start 20 minutes late, too.

 

A sound strategy is to get permission to use alittle flash here and there. Tell them you need this back-up procedure to insure they will have any pictures at all.

 

Pushing film will cost you alittle something in the dark tuxedos in terms of detail. Is this really what you want? I don't think so.

 

I personally would use some slave flashes from the two sides. They can be held by some guests or some assistants. They would be held alittle high, too. Think of old Hollywood movies with contrasty lighting on streets. By doing this, you will retain some feeling that it is a night situation.

 

Exposures for incandescent bulbs and candles are f5.6 at 1/30th sec. at ASA 100 in case you have any bulbs or candles to preserve. Maybe using only 50ws or a GN of about 55 or likely 90 may be enough for your slave units. This is a Vivitar 283/285 on 1/2 power. This is an educated estimate without knowing true distances. You'll need a flashmeter to hone it to perfection.

 

It would be nice and easy to believe that all it is is a film selection. And even nicer to believe that you only need one more f stop for success. And you can believe it; but I don't.

For advertising purposes? Where money is 'on the line'? Re-stage them later. You probably only need 2-3 dancers to represent this event in advertising. The dancers will likely be very honoured to be in advertising, too. It is something to place in their own portfolio. This is how I would approach this, given that it is a professional situation.

 

Rather than to give you some risky advice on how you can use fast film and fast lenses with the contrasty lighting made for something other than successful advertising photography, I am telling you to shape this to professional photography specifications rather than to take risks that your reputation will be trampled over and kicked into high air [Contextual pun; if such a thing exists; it does now.].

A normal 50mm focal length lens is my choice for the Bride and Groom portrait. For the 5-10 group, I chose a normal length lens. For the 10-20 group, I chose a 50mm normal lens, or a 35mm setting on your 17-35mm zoom.

 

The reason for the slight wide angle, is that I will gain 1/2 f stop in efficiency from my flash due to the mating of coverage angles between the flash and the slight wide angle. I can use 1/2f stop smaller hole to gain some depth of field. Due to the given distance necessary to cover a group of 10-20 person group with a slight wide angle, about 25-40 feet, I will not distort their bodies with a too close distance choice as well.

 

So long as I am photographing 2 people in a portrait of the Bride and Groom together, I will be pushed back to a distance that will keep me safe from distorting their features in a 1/2 body shot, as well as a full length shot with the 50mm lens.

 

However, if I have the room, and this is seldom, I will drift over to a choice of 85mm focal length in the Bride and Groom portrait or full length shot. This is because I can photograph alittle lower therefore to make the Bride and Groom look alittle slimmer without creating converging lines problems that make the Bride look wider at the bottom and pointed at the top, like a building. Fashion photographers use longer than normal length lenses for a few reasons such as this.

 

PEWS

 

Because of the need to photograph in front of the front pews in the church, a slight wide angle is preferable for groups. I don't want to see part of a pews in the picture, if possible. And I definitely don't want a exaggerated pews shown with a wide angle! This would be the pits. A slight wide angle should not show any pews at all to be best used. If the pews must be shown due to their proximity to the altar, I would chose a normal lens. Then I would try a 85mm lens if it would exclude the pews completely. If it could not hide the pews by its 85mm narrow angle compared to a normal lens, I would use a 50mm normal lens.

 

The farther back you are, the more even will be your flash lighting; this reduces some contrast. Dark edges are OK in altar pictures, too. Therefore, I will consider several choices based upon the above considerations.

I would have him shoot film for all outdoor shots, especially those that need flash fill-in. I would also have him use film for all altar shots. He could use digital for natural light indoor shots. He could use digital for reception shots except for the cake cutting. Digital will let him get wild with lots of reception shots, fine. But for the ones that really matter, I would go with film. If he wants to "back-up" on digital, fine.

I never use the words "my philosophy" when presenting my services. And there is a good

reason for it.

 

I once had a paper which was part of my brochure. My work was different than all the

photographers in my county in the 1970s. Therefore, I needed to present this different

approach to wedding photography. So, I made a paper called, "My Philosophy".

 

Many people did not respond or comment on it. But one did, and I will never forget it. I

dropped my sheet called "My Philosophy" immediately. What happened? The bride-to-be

responded to me thusly on the phone: "I don't CARE what your PHILOSOPHY is; THIS is MY

wedding!"

 

The principal of good marketing is to fulfill the needs and fantasies of the customer. She

felt that I was so much 'into' my style that I was leaving out consideration for her.

 

I have heard many, many complaints of other photographers who were so wrapped up in

THEIR STYLE that the prospective client ditched the photographer for someone else: me. I

learned that it was OK to have a style, but that you must ask careful questions of the

prospect; then prove in your samples that you can do what is needed.

 

There are no secrets to presenting yourself that are not published in books somewhere. I

suggest to anyone to become a member of Toastmasters in their area so that you will

speak well. If you have been to the same reception or church place before, you are

already miles ahead of other photographers. The more you talk in detail about being at

this certain place, with its particular lighting, certain places to photograph, etc. the better.

 

You should have a logical pictorial presentation. Any confusion on your part tells the

prospect that you are disorganized and may create a time delay at her wedding. She and

he will be judging your every move. I like to sit more closely to them.

 

One bride told me (she hired me later) that she didn't really analyse my brochure or

pictures. What she did was to listen to how I spoke about each Bride in the pictures.

 

It is not just "one thing" to look out for. Rather, it is about 25 things. Toastmasters is the

group to join.

I think I would spend some time giving her an ultimatim: Use of flash will create a

memory with low risk. Use of natural light will place this memory at risk of being

satisfactory.

 

I don't know what the room lights will give you in terms of exposure setting, but I could

guess at 1/4 sec, f4 which is a common setting for churches.

 

My approach would be to break through the objection to flash usage. I would take 2 or 3

pictures of a single candle lighting; one would be with flash. In this way, I have it on film

guaranteed. It is common for clients to make all sorts of demands without knowing the

risk that they are creating for the photographer. Therefore, I would spend some time

finding out how "solid" this objection to flash really is.

 

Re-staging the situation should be done even if you are 90% sure you will have it on film

OK. Don't fall for the photojournalistic high-brow rules that prevent you from recording

these people securely, positively, on film even if it is re-staged. Explain the risks. Explain

that the person may move during the one and only lighting and blurr their picture forever.

Many priests/officiators will be irritated by 'THE NEED' that anyone has for flash pictures.

Explaining 'THE NEED' to a person who is truly dedicated to his work as a spiritual leader

may earn you a lesson. Flash pictures do not come first here.

 

The rule is that if anyone, anyone flashes during the ceremony, someone else will follow

with their own. As a result, this officiator chose to make the big speech to prevent that.

 

For a professional, it shouldn't matter if anyone else flashes their cameras during the

ceremony. Also, seldom is a church so dark that a 1/2 second exposure at f4 can't handle

the situation.

 

Also, the ceremony begins normally when the officiator first speaks. This means that the

photographer, photographers have a few seconds to take a flash picture before he/she

speaks, get it? So, now you have it, the picture legally taken. After he speaks to ban or

permit pictures, the ceremony begins.

 

All wedding photographers should be prepared to perform a natural light shot at this time:

tripod, release, etc. So where is the happiness? You forgot your tripod? You forgot your

incident meter?

Rather than to expose my customers to a 30 question survey, I simply ask them for the

one or two things they would change to make my services better. If the response is

logical, I make the change. I simply take into account the cost of the suggestion.

 

Since the sample size of any wedding client survey is so small, maybe 20-50 per year, it is

much more accurate to evaluate it on a qualitive basis rather than a quantitive basis.

Surveys wherein you have 3,000 customer responses or more are the stuff of statisticians.

You simply don't have the numbers to evaluate in this type of business.

 

Also, take into consideration that the people being surveyed do not really know the

business side of the wedding photography business. Their suggestions and comments

forget good wedding day planning, and they disregard the limitations of what a

photographer

can actually do on the day.

 

Now that photographers are going digital, and the threat of scanners is real, the emphasis

on questions should probably be more slanted to the personal aspects of the

photographer's service: personality, sales, speed, working abilities at the wedding, etc.

This is in contrast to comparing wedding packages for price and print sizes comparisons.

 

Asking questions after the fact is basic marketing research. It is called "primary research"

if you talk to the people in person. And this is the way you should do it. Handing them a

form puts them to work. Be respectful of their time, and quiz them personally on the

phone. You may be lucky to have 10 minutes of their time depending upon how personal

your relationship went. Try to take only 3 minutes, if she talks for a long time, great. Ask

later clients what they would chose to be "different." They

will search their thinking and come up with the number one topic on their mind. And this

is the one topic you want, the topic that gave them a memory. If it is a negative memory,

this is the one you want.

 

Steve Levine once said to the effect that his sales approach was as a "negative swatter' in

so

many words. I feel the same way. They will turn you down if they can find 2-3

negatives. One negative may be OK. This is a perfectionist's business if you are calling on

city type people. You must continue to perfect yourself. Disregard the comments of

photographers who seem loose and immature with contempt for a perfectionistic bride.

Don't blame the bride. Figure out how to become the perfect photographer she was

looking for originally.

 

I made every change possible. I ended up monopolizing weddings in my county years ago.

I was always booked. I would book 95% or more of the weddings I sold to. It became a

sure thing for me. However, you can become burned-out with success!

 

I suggest again that you not use super market type surveys with a number system of

rating, like photo.net's number system for aesthic quality of photographs. Do not use

numbers. Listen to the tone of their voice; and it will be the Bride who will care the most.

This is a woman's area of business concern; and they will give you the most detailed

answer.

The value of selling negatives is that the bride will want a memory of her parents when

they pass away, whether there was a divorce or not. I would never sell negatives until the

contract time period has elapsed. Otherwise, they could sue me for "giving up". To be

even safer about all this, sell them after the Statue of Limitations expires on any contract,

usually 4 years.

 

I find it is easy to contact people after 10 years or 20 years merely by asking them for the

names and addresses of relatives at the time they sign my contract. One of them will

know where "they" are. It just takes alittle more thinking about this problem to solve it.

 

The days of storing negatives hoping for more sales is past. Digital media is really forcing

many photographers to think about getting all their money "in front".

You don't have the right equipment. However, if all you are trying to do is to show that a

large number of people can co-exist without being able to discern who they are, then you

are OK. Otherwise, you need an 8x10 with a tilting front lens. I would photograph them

only with their faces "into the sun" in order to use the sun as my main light. Banquet

cameras with a larger than 8x10 format are also used for this type of shot. Go to Wisner

.com's site to see what a banquet camera is like.

Some hairdressers are a friend of the bride and it is therefore a good idea. My rule of

thumb is simply to photograph everyone. I therefore don't use a list.