bailie photography

Hi Jeff,

 

Thank you for taking the time to answer all the questions. A lot of the answers are actually in your blog and you are kind enough to repeat them here.

 

My question relates more to actual execution of your journalism style - specifically how you physically position yourself.

 

What I found is that if you are too close to your subject (bride, guests, whoever they might be) they will became very self conscious and will stop everything that they were doing and give you a blank face. If on the other hand, you try to stay away from your subject and use a telezoom lens (so that they don't know you are around), I found that 90% of the time, I'm shooting someone's back because there's more chances of someone moving in your way to where the action is.

 

What is your key to getting those expressions without people realising you are there?

<p>Minh, I really feel sorry for you in that regard.

 

<p>Slightly off topic here - but I'm not sure about the rest of you but I do really feel sick and tired of all the newbies coming into discussion forums a week (or day) before the wedding asking for advice. Sure, there are lots of couples out there who can't really afford the pros and ask their uncle bob to help out - by all means... (I'm not concered about those uncle bobs helping out)...But I'm concerned with those who bought a DSLR and claim to be a photographer to go and second shoot a wedding. As wedding photographers, how many times have you had the killer shot only to be ruin by your second shooter standing in the opposite end shooting.

 

<p>As far as I'm concern, the second shooter should be an experienced photographer, with some experience in sitting on the side line watching what happens in a wedding before lifting up a camera at a wedding. Second shooters shouldn't be there to learn photography. They should be there to learn WEDDING photography.

 

<p>Everytime someone ask about which lens/flash/shutter speed/aperture etc to use in a wedding means they shouldn't be in a wedding with a camera. They should learn enough about their style and their equipment before going to their first wedding and WATCH only. After going to a few, then perhaps they are qualified to help the primary shooter carry equipment.

 

<p>I came across this

<a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1014&thread=18472231">discussion</a> on dpreview. The profession/industry is going to be destroyed by the few bad apples...

A quick search on dpreview.com shows that BGLOD can't be attirbutable to some specific range of serial numbers.

 

My D70 die yesterday due to BGLOD problem and my serial is 7xxxxxxx.

Others who posted on dpreview have serial no.# starting at 3xxxxxx, 2xxxxxx, and 4xxxxxxx.

 

It appears to be more on production date before July 04. The latest purchase date I'm seen is September 2004. No one appear to have BGLOD with purchase date after Oct 04.

That's it. Tempus Two.

Jason, I would recommend the Hunter Valley Garden which is beautiful. The garden itself will cost something like $15 admission. But outside the garden, there's shops and stuff which you can use to take some different angle shoots.

 

The actual reception to the Hunter Valley Garden hotel is a classic library type setting which if you are allowed in would provide excellent background.

 

Opposite the Hunter Valley garden on Bells Road (I think), is a huge contemporary looking winery. I can't remember what it's called but it's got a helicopter tour running. The actual cellar is very contemporary and has a little bar which could be nice to wedding photos. Very fashion like type of photo.

hi all,

<p>

The option of stitching is not all that bad. Firstly, please visit my <a href="http://members.optusnet.com.au/kimyan/bailie/landscape/main.htm"> portfolio.</a> All were taken with my D70 and stitched.

<p>

I have yet to get these printed but I suspect should be ok. My interest is really to get up to 40" prints and I don't think my D70 is good enough for that at 300dpi. But I'm considering getting a 1ds(mkII) and hopefully will be good enough for 40" at 300dpi panorama.

Thank you all for your comments.

 

Michelle - You are very right. That photo I "misjudged" the depth of field and wanted to fix it in photoshop and of course didn't spend enough time to do the job probably.

 

Michael - I mainly used 50mm f1.4 but also some with my D70 kit lens.

 

Todd - Thank you for your comments. I have to say I do have an eye for detail shots. So far, everyone I've met has positively commented on my detail shots.

 

I think all weddings are fairly predictable. When I first started, I didn't know what to shoot and watched to see what exactly happens in weddings. So I was able to shoot what I wanted to shoot. Sometimes, there is a danger in doing this as all my portfolio will over time become the same.

 

To answer your questions Todd, I'm using my D70 with kit lens and 50mm f1.4. Most of the processionals were with 50mm. In terms of technique, I learnt a lot from an article on Jeff Ascough. I didn't even bring my flash with me on the day as I relied fully on ambient light and I knew I could just because I have confidence in my 50mm.

Just came back from another wedding. Would love to hear what you

think.....

 

<a

href="http://members.optusnet.com.au/kimyan/bailie/a.htm">Wedding</a>

Very nice shoot Stacy. I have done some PS work to one of your photos. Hope you don't mind and like the effect.<div></div>

Have any of you seen behind the scene creation of the ad. I was privilege enough to see it in Australia. Aussie actor and Aussie director ad. From a photographer's prespective it was amazing knowing how it was done. Anyway.. no relevance to the current discussions here...

To further correct the correction, pure water freezes at 0?C. This dynamic equilibrium is said to shift to a lower temp. The amount of temp drop required to freeze the water depends on the concentration of salt. Hence different sea water has different melting point.

 

To answer the inital question, it depends where you are shooting.

Thanks again.

 

Manuel, I made the executive decision on the day of the wedding to concentrate on the bride as I thought she's nicer.

 

It was a difficult wedding to take not so much of the technicality.

 

Someone mentioned at photo.net before that a $5,000 wedding photo package is easier than a $500 one. Simply because they couple are willing to spend more on everything: altar, reception, wedding car, etc, etc. This wedding was a low budget wedding and hence I had to concentrate on the couple and try not to show too much of the place itself. That's what made this difficult.

Thanks guys for your comment. I think you have all overrated the photos.

 

Anton. It's amazing you were able to get into my landscape photos. They are all taken with my D70 and hence not capable of enlarging to any big size prints.

 

For your info, all of these photos were taken with my D70 and most taken with 50mm/f1.4 and some with kit lens.

<a href="http://members.optusnet.com.au/raymany/bailie/arliah/1.htm">Wedding</a>

Would love to hear from you about the wedding I attended a couple of

weeks ago:

<a

href="members.optusnet.com.au/raymany/bailie/arliah/1.htm">Wedding</a

>

I totally agree that no amount of photoshopping can get anywhere near a fast lens and wide open aperture for bokeh. That's why I bought a new 50mm/f1.4 even though I can't really afford one.

 

I love that photo and it benefited greatly from the blur background. That's why I gave it a try. Otherwise, I agree with you all, we just can't spend hours and hours on one shot in wedding photography.

 

Very amazed with Mr Zapped's skills. You spent 10mins to achieve more than my 3 hours.

I'm not particularly impress with the artificial depth of field. But what I'm very impressed with is the detail on the flowersgirls' dress I was able to bring back. The photo is taken with my D70.

 

I have a few recommendations as a result of my 3 hour session:

1. Always shoot in RAW.

2. Always minimise contrast in the RAW conversion process so to retain as much details as possible. (you can increase the contrast later).

3. Always use Level for adjustments in brightness and contrast. Never use Photoshop's brightness and contrast tool.

4. Never judge the photo based on LED screens. Always use CRT screens and colour calibrate your monitor to printer.

and<div></div>

Just thought I might share with you my work using photoshop after 3

hours.......<div></div>

Neat Image with PS touch up....is this better now?

I would also put it through Neat Image.<div></div>

A BIG thank you so much for all of you. I knew there's a problem with this picture as a wedding photo but just cannot exactly pin point the flaws. You guys are absolutely 100% correct. I think it's a reasonable photo in itself. But for wedding there's no connection, a rather miserable emotion, lacking the first touch kind of feeling if used in marketing.

 

Total agree with all of you. Thank you so much everyone. I think I will just leave it as one in the gallery.....

I suppose I should really post this photo for critics but I want to

know your view on photo rather than rating. <P>

 

I'm planning to use it as my main photo for advertising on

magazines, business cards, etc. What do you think?

<p>

 

 

 

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/2539551-lg.jpg">

Try the shop at corner of George Street and King Street(forgot the name). Upstairs in the fringe.

Thank you so much for your responses. I think I'm starting to get a feel for the answer. Sorry to pose the question here as I couldn't find a color processing forum. I'm referring to color film.

 

I guess my question was more 'Does it require much judgement in processing color negatives?' My feeling at this stage is that as long as they have some clean equipment, any lab is just as good. Of course for B+W processing that's different.