frolickingbits

<p>I have photographed for friends and family before as a wedding gift, no money involved, and it worked out well, but they were very close (my wife's sister was one of them). If this is a relative you only see once a year and he's angling for a discount, that's a bit more problematic. I've had a few 'friends' I have cut loose for the same reason-I wouldn't hear from them for a year and they would suddenly pop up expecting a free photo shoot.<br>

If this is more of a casual acquaintance kind of family member, I would offer something like a 10-20% discount off your regular rates, and treat it like any other job, signed contract, deposit, and so on. I would also make sure you are dealing with the bride and groom, not the grooms father. Regardless of who is paying, I always consider the couple my primary clients, and I try to avoid having a third party intermediary. The biggest challenge with any wedding, and especially working with family is managing expectations. If you talk directly with the couple about their expectations, and set out everything very clearly in a contract, you should be able to avoid most problems.</p>

<p>1. I wouldn't worry too much about somebody 'unliking' your page. My fans fluctuate day to day sometimes up, sometimes down, and as long as the overall trend is headed up, that's fine by me. I don't typically even pay too much attention to who is liking my page.<br>

2. I post a small album from every wedding and portrait shoot on Facebook, usually a day or two after the shoot. It is a great way to build buzz, get your clients excited, they will share the photos with friends, it is an incredible marketing tool. As an example, from one wedding I shot this summer, I have already booked 2 other brides that saw their friend's photos on Facebook. <br>

Not every wedding I shoot ends up in my portfolio, although I do try to create portfolio worthy image regardless of where or who I'm photographing, but I do have a wide range of couples, from early twenties to mid forties, size 0 brides to more Rubenesque women. I would challenge the wisdom of only posting attractive couples. Brides need to be able to picture themselves in your images, and if every bride on your site is stick thin, you could be missing out on some potentially great clients that happen to be a little bit larger. <br>

I'm not suggesting that if you have a wedding with a 400 pound couple at the VFW that you need to put that in your portfolio, but a little variety is good.</p>

 

<p>I did one small one at a mall that was a complete disaster, absolutely no business from it. Fortunately, the show only cost $100, and I already had prints and marketing materials ready to go. I am doing another small show Sunday at an upscale venue, and I just had a large canvas wrap and some other nice prints made up, so I'm hopeful that will lead to a booking or two.<br>

Be careful of the trap of thinking 'one wedding will pay for this.' A lot of sales people will use that line, but the real number to think about is your average advertising cost per wedding, and what number makes sense for you. My average advertising cost per wedding I book is about $250. So to make a $1500 show make sense, I would want to book 6 weddings from it. </p>

<p>I work in Maine with a lot of couples from out of state, so I book quite a few weddings without meeting the couple first, but I do almost always meet them before their wedding, either for an engagement session or just to chat. I've done a few weddings where I met the couple for the first time on their wedding day, and I've definitely found I get better results when I have a chance to meet them first and break the ice. Also, with pre-booking meetings, I've found I probably book over 80% of the people that I meet. If they are taking the time to come meet me, they probably like my work, they have seen my prices, so they know they can afford me, and it's mostly a matter of just connecting on a personal level. <br>

I agree with the others that you should probably raise your prices. I'm not sure what the local market is where you are (as a side note, I would suggest putting your location on your website, I had to do some digging to find out where you are), but with a volume of inquiries like you have, you could certainly up your prices and still probably get 1-2 inquiries a week, which would be a much more manageable volume. </p>

<p>I don't completely understand why you would base your packages on a certain number of final images, from my experience, weddings vary so widely that there are some weddings that I can tell the story and provide a great album with 300 photos, and others where it's closer to 600, others where it might be 900. I explain this up front to the couple when they ask how many photos I usually take. In the few cases where I have had a couple ask for more photos, they have been looking for a particular photo.<br>

I would just offer to deliver all the photos your wife has edited for whatever your added price would be, and if after you deliver those, she is still wanting more, ask if there is a particular photo she is looking for.</p>

<p>I wouldn't do it, you risk devaluing your brand, and as Daniel mentioned, these clients sound like they really aren't interested in you as an artisan. The only time I would consider giving a client all the photos would be if I were shooting for one of my photographer friends. And even in that case, I would still insist on providing a selection of edited images. I was recently married, and the photographer I went with offered all the raw files as well as a small selection of about 200 edited photos. <br>

And of course, you run the risk of this client's friends calling you up and expecting you to do their wedding for 1/3 of your regular price. If you do decide to do it, make sure it is clear that you are offering a one time discounted rate for x,y and z reasons. </p>

<p>Very nicely done, good clean compositions, and most of your exposures were right on. I did notice some blown highlights, which as was mentioned above can be somewhat mitigated by stopping down a bit and a little recovery in LR or Aperture. I love the outdoor reception, although that green color cast is a bit unsightly. I've had some luck working with a orange colored fill layer at a low opacity set to color mode sometimes, but those sodium vapor lights aren't full spectrum, so you may just have to go B&W with them. In a situation like that, I would suggest adding just a splash of fill flash to get rid of the color cast without spoiling the atmosphere of the shot.<br>

All told, a very good job.</p>

<p>I am in a similar situation to you-I do a lot of weddings, as well as a good deal of product and interiors. Right now I have a 5 head, 2 pack Speedotron kit for my product work, complete with a couple boom stands, several softboxes, a pile of reflectors, and the whole kit pretty much fills my car and weighs a good 100+ pounds. For weddings, I have a Quantum T5D, and a Sunpak 555. <br>

The system I am very seriously considering is the Elinchrom Ranger. I want something I can use at weddings and take to smaller commercial shoots. The Einstein with a Vagabond Mini looks like a pretty good system too, though.</p>

<p>The Flex system is completely brand specific, but the TT1 and TT5 are marketed as being able to trigger all PocketWizard triggers, so in theory you should be able to trigger a Canon TT5 in manual mode from a Nikon TT1 or TT5 or vise versa. But obviously, TTL will not work cross platform.</p>

<p>For $70 you can buy a third party grip for B&H, a reputable company that stands behind what they sell. <br>

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/697331-REG/Vello_BG_C2_BG_C2_Battery_Grip_for.html</p>

<p>Do you still have the crop body? If you do, I would put the 70-200 on that, and the 24-70 on the FF. It is a heavy rig, but I have a 5D with a 70-200 f2.8 that I carry in a Spider Holster on a Lowepro S&F belt, and a 5D MarkII with a 24-70 that i carry with a regular shoulder strap. I prefer the 70-200 for shooting at 70mm, and I tend to do a lot of headshots around 135mm or so. But the 24-70 is very useful when a large group corners me and wants their photo taken. <br>

I'm not a big guy by any stretch, about 5'5, 135 pounds, but I can manage two cameras pretty well. <br>

And yes, I am fully qualified to give advice on the internet, or at least as qualified as anybody else is to give their opinions. (i.e., I have a pulse)</p>

<p>I shot a couple weddings with Bella as a trainee, never made it to full on primary photographer. They do allow you to continue with your own studio, they just send out an e-mail to find if you are available for a date. I was not impressed with the finished product they delivered to the couple, very little editing, if I remember correctly, there were over 2,000 photos in the final online gallery, most of which had no color correction, exposure adjustment, just straight out of the camera, and many that I would have rejected.<br>

It was also strange showing up to shoot a wedding where I had never met the couple before, when I am used to at least one meeting, and plenty of e-mails and phone calls before the weddings I photograph. <br>

I will say they did pay on time, even if it was a pittance. If I remember correctly, I think I was paid $150 for an 8 hour second shooting gig. All in all, not a good experience, and for $150, I would rather just have a weekend off.</p>

<p>I agree with Chas-if you are shooting for the museum, you should be able to move the objects. You would probably need a conservator and curator there to move the items, depending on how strict the museum is with object handling policies, but it can definitely be done. I do a decent amount of work for museums, and everything I shoot is brought onto the photo set. <br>

But, if they can't be moved, light the display cases from the sides, get a big sheet of black cloth, and a cable release. You are going to want to cover your tripod, and probably gaffer tape any of the logos and non black parts of your cameras. And I usually shoot with at least a 100mm when I'm photographing objects under glass, the farther away I am, the less chance their is of me being reflected. No need for a polarizer if you light it right, but it wouldn't hurt, you should have enough power with your Bees to not need the extra stop of light.</p>

<p>I would not buy any zooms, shooting only with primes is a far better way to really learn photography and forces you to make conscious choices about composition. I buy a good deal of used gear from keh.com, they have some really good deals on used lenses in good shape. You can get a 24 f2.8 for about $300, which would be the equivalent of about 42mm on the 40D. And definitely buy a pop up reflector or two, they are really not expensive, and if you find the right light, they work wonders.<br>

The blurred background you are looking for is more a factor of focal length, background, and subject distance than it is of the max aperture of your lens. I can show you a scene shot at f2.8 that has a very deep DOF, and one at f8 that has beautiful bokeh. Even an f1.8 lens won't give you a blurred background if you are shooting wide and have your subjects backed up against a wall. </p>

<p>I haven't used the Tamron 17-50, but I did have the Tamron 28-75 f2.8, and when I upgraded to the Canon 24-70, the difference in IQ, AF, and overall quality was pretty amazing. Well worth the $700 price difference, IMO. Plus, you will have IS on the Canon, which seems a little strange on a wide angle, but may come in handy shooting stationary things inside. </p>

<p>I've found Photoflex to be probably the best balance between cost and quality, I have several softboxes from them, and they are all holding up very well, and are easy to setup and tear down, which is great. </p>

<p>A simple workaround to trick the camera into a higher sync speed is to tape over the TTL contacts on your flash, and just let the center contact touch. With the RadioPoppers, you can do wireless HSS, but as others mentioned, it will eat into your flash power. I'm getting my PocketWizard Flex system in tomorrow, which has HyperSync, which fires the flash just milliseconds before the shutter is released, and allows a higher sync speed while still using about 95% of the flash's full power. They also support full TTL, so I will be interested to see what sync speeds I can get with my QFlash.</p>

<p>This is a business that requires a thick skin, but it is also a business in which you can choose your clients. I have had the great fortune to work with couples that absolutely respect me and my work, but even if you have the best clients, there are still relatives and wedding guests to deal with, and some people can be very abrasive. <br>

As far as the e-session being a test, if the couple hasn't already booked you, than yes, the e-session is a test. So are initial meetings, e-mails, phone calls, anything before the couple books you is a test to see if you are the right person to photograph their wedding. It sounds like this guy was just putting in words what you already knew. <br>

And the priest analogy isn't quite right. Think of bakers and caterers-they usually provide a free tasting to the couple. So providing an e-session isn't that far off from that. I sometimes offer free e-sessions as a tool to get couples in to meet with me.</p>

<p>I was using the White Lighting X series, my problem was with the stand connection where you would adjust the angle of the light, and it's possible I'm hard on lights or got a couple bad copies, almost everyone else I know that's used White Lightning loves it. I do have one really old UltraZap that I got for $40-it was too good of a deal to pass up, and I figured it would be handy as a spare light if I ever needed a small accent light for interior work.<br>

Zach-you make a good point about the quadras being a more manageable system, and I would like to have more than 1 pack for backup and more flexibility.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I still do not quite understand why people insist on beating the snot out of their expensive speed-lights to do off-camera lighting.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Finally, somebody said it! I'm always a bit amazed when I see people using 2 or more $550 flashes, plus bulky umbrella mounts and a pile of AA batteries, when you could get more power and durability out of an old Norman, Metz or Quantum system as Nadine mentions. I have a Sunpak 555, and it beats the snot out of any hotshoe flash, for a fraction of the price.<br>

As far as high speed sync, the new PocketWizard Flex system with its HyperSync to allow HSS with just about any flash with a slow enough flash duration looks pretty incredible. </p>

<p>I met a portrait photographer once whose business card had a dotted line down the back-if you folded it at a right angle, it was the same concept. Very clever.</p>

<p>I'm looking at the Elinchrom Ranger RX system-it seems like the best of both worlds, battery powered, 1100 W/S, asymmetrical, and the whole kit with one head weighs 18 pounds. I have a pretty large Speedotron kit, 7 heads, 7200 w/s, tons of reflectors, softboxes and so on, but it is a beast to haul around, so I am looking for something portable enough for weddings and portraits, but powerful enough to do some location commercial work. <br>

I've worked with White Lightning gear, and have been less than impressed. The Einstein looks like they fixed one of my main gripes, which was color accuracy, but I also didn't much like the build quality-I managed to break the handle on one, had to send another back in for an electrical issue, and the reflector mount on one got stuck. And i was even less impressed with their light stands and softboxes. Paul Buff's support was excellent, but my favorite customer service is the kind I don't have to use.</p>

<p>I would say if you ever think your photographs are perfect and there is nothing to improve, you should probably start worrying....part of being a good photographer is knowing that there is always something that you can learn, ways that a photograph could be improved.<br>

Finding the balance between a healthy level of humility and confidence is a difficult battle, and one that I am still fighting.</p>

<p>It all depends on the particular lighting situation, I usually shoot aperture priority, and if I am shooting a scene that is highly backlit, I will set the exposure compensation on my 5D MarkII up 2/3 of a stop, or sometimes a full stop. I use a lot of flash and tend to avoid blown highlights, so it's not a technique I use very often, but when used properly, it can be pretty amazing. It is definitely not something I would use unless I did have a good deal of backlight, overexposing if you just have flat frontal lighting is basically just going to look washed out.</p>

 

<p>I don't shoot many weddings with videographers-just 2 out of the dozen or so I did this year, and I've never really had a problem with them. I do try to keep in mind where the videographer is, and if I'm going to be in his frame while I grab a shot, I try to minimize my time there. I sometimes feel bad when I'm using flash, because I know it's going to mess up his video, but I've gotta get my shots too.<br>

As far as the guests with cameras go, it sounds rude, but I really don't worry about walking in front of them, sticking cameras over their shoulders, or any of that. One of the recent weddings I photographed, almost every guest had a camera, so trying to stay out of everyone's way would have been impossible. So I focused on getting my shots, and let the chips fall where it would be.</p>