melody1

Hi Lauren,

I only book births out of wedding season, and only up to 4 a month. I have comtemplated booking during wedding season, but while births are more powerful and emotional, weddings are more lucrative.

I have two back up photographers, and both are birth assistants for a living - their job is to be on call every day all day for their clients anyway.

My clients for birth photography are generally first time mothers who are either laboring at home or at a local birth center. Without any type of medication, labors generally last around 24 hours. The client contacts me when she is sure labor has started, and the midwives know when to call me to come in.

I did end up with one client for 12 hours because she went into labor at the start of a snow storm and I got there early just in case I wouldn't be able to get there later.

 

Even though it's messy stuff, nothing pretty about it, it is an amazing subject to photograph and totally worth it.

Thank you all for the incredible resource that you are! You are such an

amazing wealth of information, and that you donate your time to help out others

in your industry and those trying to get in your industry... wow!

 

I saw a photo of some species of pelican shot by Yuri bonder, and something

clicked in my head that people can actually take photos seriously. Since I've

joined photo.net (as a point and shoot wielding newbie) I have come so far, and

all because of the encouragement recieved here from amazing photographers. I

got interested in wedding photography, thanks to many of you (Marc Williams,

Mary Ball, and others although not namable off the top of my head), your

portfolios, and your eagerness to be helpful. I got my first assisting

position from photo.net, my first solo wedding from photo.net, even almost

hired my wedding photographer through photo.net!

 

I can't even express what a resource this forum has been , and will continue to

be I'm sure.

 

If you stayed with me through that (I've been meaning to do it for a while),

I'd love your feedback now on both my new webpage, and a recent wedding (second

shooting). The wedding is the top half of the images in the 'wedding' folder

in my portfolio : http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=614264

and my webpage is http://www.MelodyYazdani.com. Thank you ahead of time!

 

 

 

 

And I apologize ahead of time for any typos -- I'm chasing around my six month

old daughter while I post this.

I just took a random photo and tried to create a similiar mood, and this is my guess. Adjusting the midtone slider in levels to the right, then going through each channel and making smaller adjustments until you get that blue feel. Then, if any parts of the image are too distracting because they're too bright, use the burn tool until it's moody enough for you. Again, I only took two or three minutes to try it, but that seems to be how it was manipulated.<div></div>

<div></div>

It can definatly be done. The shot below was handheld ISO 400 Kodak UC film, left uncorrected by the lab when the negs were scanned. Granted, I shot film, and used a 50mm/1.8. I would ask the B&G (if they plan on holding candles.. ) to hold them up higher than normal, as opposed to down at their waists.

I'm sure you will do fine, and possibilities for beautiful shots in that scenario are endless!<div></div>

"A shallow depth of field is an essential artistic technique and must be used extensively to create interesting images."

 

Although I am a wide-open type of gal (and THAT shouldn't be taken out of context, heh), I disagree with this statement.

 

It's about storytelling, and at times the background is key to the story.

The example I'm attaching is made of two photos. Had there been more light, I would have stopped down to get both in focus. Instead, the shot had to be wide open, and looses some of what it is supposed to portray. (FYI, it's from a baby shower, and is the hands of a father and son, one 92 years old and one in his 60s.)There would be more of a story in these pictures if I could have had both in focus.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is aperature and depth of field are tool. When used correctly, it turns a blah image with too much happening into a striking portrait of the subject (whatever that subject may be). At the same time, there are instances where the background is a vital part of the whole, and composing your subject and background to show the relationship between the two is very important.

 

Also, I didn't add in my first post, I shoot manual focus at all times. It used to be because I didn't have a camera that auto focusses. After buying an F100, and a D200 I do it now because I find it too time-consuming to tell the camera where I want to focus, when I can just do it myself. Especially since my subject doesn't usually fall on those little brackets in the viewfinder anyway.<div></div>

One more try.<div></div>

I am the opposite of you Ben. I shoot wide-open almost all of the time. Not saying this is a good thing, but if you look through my portfolio, you can see that my images go well together.

I think my tendancy to shoot wide open comes from two things - 1) I'm an ambient light shooter. I am not experienced in flash, and until I am I shoot without because I know what will and what will not come out. 2) the way our eyes work it to focus on a point when looking at a subject near you, and the background and foreground blur. It 'feels' more realistic to me to shoot wide open when shooting subjects that are near the camera.

Anyway, to each their own, I'm working on closing my aperture in order to allow for more creative freedom.<div></div>

In the spring, I turned down quite a few weddings that fell right in September and October because of my pregnancy. I'm at 8 months, and was an active person prepregnancy. Boy am I glad I did. Now, active means waddling down some trails with numerous potty breaks, jugs of water, and stops to rest. I've been shooting in studio, and if I have two two hour shoots back to back, that gets to me.

 

It's not so easy, and pregnancy, even with great nutrition and care can be unpredictable.

 

I would reccommend, from my current experience, not to book at eight months. But, to each their own, and its just my 2 cents.

I set up a small studio in one of the extra rooms in our house. These photos

are from my first three shoots -- I have no studio or lighting experience, so

I'm pretty much winging it.

 

I would love critiques, please don't just say you like or dislike, let me know

why.

 

I'm trying to learn, and want to start offering this service for pay

relatively soon.

 

Check them out here : http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=643885

I have no idea how some newbies say - I bought this camera because my friend

wants me to shoot their wedding.

 

I followed some advice and picked up a Nikon F100, a prime 28/2.8 and an

85/1.8 to accompiany my 50/1.8. (This is my upgrade from an N2000) All I can

say is wow. I am amazed at the amount of options -- buttons, triggers, dials,

and thing-a-ma-bobbers. I'm disappearing for a while to figure it all out,

and to learn which lenses are best for which shots...I feel like the

possibilities are endless with such a variety of focal lengths. Is it silly

to have a camera with so many options and shoot and focus manually anyway?

Marc: I loved your indepth explanation of the golden mean. I have actively used the rule of thirds, although explained somewhat differently in my basic photo class. I find myself now using it intuitively, but in the beginning, I did what most people do - I focused my subject dead center, and shot.

Using the rule of thirds can help drastically with interesting composition, and use of negative space.

 

The amount of backlash in this post has been suprising, and very interesting to read.

Perhaps, I'm from a completely different mindset - I think that all of the work that goes into a birth, all of the pain, the entire experience is beautiful. I'm also thinking of a slightly different clientelle, alternative birth, if you will. In my area, there is a large percentage of people who deliver naturally, whether at home or in a free standing birth center with midwives, and the philosophy is that it is a huge transitional event that actively involves the father as a coach and support.

I have been in quite a few midwive's offices, and all of them have framed professional pictures taken during delivery by hired photographers, so there must be a few photographers, at least in the DC area, that offer it.

 

Capturing the look on the mother's face as she sees her baby for the first time, the intensity of the moment as dad helps coach his partner through some of the most pain she may ever feel, and even pictures of him cutting the cord. I can think of endless other possibilities.

 

I understand that this would have to be geared toward families that would view the process not as a time when they weren't photogenic, but an extremly emotional time worth documenting. I also don't picture this as obtrusive. I was thinking fast, b&w film just right for low light conditions, with a grain that would be perfect for the subject. (aka no flash, but then I'm a no flash type of gal)

 

Your comments were, and still are greatly appreciated!

I was at the docs a few days ago, and became curious after looking through a

couple of books, how many photographers offer coverage of a baby's birth?

 

I know this isn't exactly a 'social' event, but it is a major life event, so:

 

Would you be comfortable shooting a birth? I found myself very intrigued, and

wondering how one could advertise this service. The images in the books were

so striking and emotional (hey, I'm a woman), I would love the opportunity to

cover something like this.

 

I have thought about offering this service, and it you would have to be 'on

call' in order to be there at the right time, and willing to wait for hours...

before enything potentially might happen.

 

 

I would like to know what you think.

 

(I noticed the post about boudior wedding photography a few weeks back, and,

although the two are not one in the same, I wonder how this will be recieved.)

This discussion sounds like it could be a debate between my art school professors.

 

Some will tell you to carry a camera everywhere. Some will tell you to revise the way you see the world. Some will tell you to study your colleges, and take inspiration from them. Some will tell you to disregard the peers and study the established masters. Some will tell you to study no one, and draw from within.

 

Personally, I draw inspiration from great artists, great photojournalists, great businessmen (and women), great fine art photographers, teachers, and also, from my peers. When in class during a critique, I learn from those around me. Same with life. I learn from not only my experiences, but also from my peers. Being at the top of your game is such a multifacetted thing, that it could be assumed that one should never stop striving toward it.

 

I know that I am young and neive in ways, but there is much to learn in all stages of life from every person and experience.

Thank you!

I've looked through the site for a place to change my name from Melody Small

ro Melody Yazdani. I just updated my subscription right before getting

married. Any help would be appreciated.

I wanted to add -

 

Some technical info - I shoot with a Nikon N2000 (for the next few months anyway); manual focus, and all manual settings. Most pictures were metered off of the blue mats on the floor, as they were as close to middle grey as I could find (for zone system enthusiasts). My meter was going crazy every time I recomposed with a light in the shot. That was one concern I had - that the pictures would be blown out.

 

Also, I shoot with a 50mm/1.8. I have one 80-200 old zoom, but the quality of the glass is poor and it sits on a shelf more than anything. These were all taken from the floor of the gym, and up on the boxes they use to get up to the rings and bars, so I was under and beside the gymnastits. I have the fortune of knowing the manager of the gym, and was given lots of freedom while shooting.

 

I have edited and posted almost all of the shots that caught my eye. I still have two rolls that I haven't touched, and will post in a few weeks, once I'm married and the hubbub has dies down.

 

In retrospect, I think having a fast, quality, auto-focusing camera would have helped. Maybe a camera that has more than 2.5 frames per second. Also, although I like the grain in some shots, it gets plain annoying in others. It would be interesting to have more light and see what the possibilities were.

 

Thanks for your comments, and feel free to leave more!

I shot all day at an Arkansas gymnastics training center. There was

so little light in the gym that I had to shoot 800 speed film (no

higher speed film available in small-town Arkansas), and was wide open

for 95% of the shots. I don't currently own a flash, and wouldn't

have the knowledge to use it (yet), so it was all available lighting

the whole day. After shooting, I was so excited about the pictures,

and I think for good reason.

 

 

I would love comments, critiques, any words welcome.

 

The link is http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=601529 .<div></div>

A nice feature of Adobe - you can adjust the histogram without even having a color monitor. If you open levels, you see your RGB histogram. Click RGB, the drop-down menu, and go through each individual channel, red, green, blue. Adjust each histogram by holding alt while sliding the left and right sliders until you have just reached the end of the histogram. You should see a few (under ten) pixels appear while you do this - these are the pixels that will begin clipping, and the object is to have as few pixels as possible, unless you have areas with no shadow or highlight detail. If you have areas of purposefully blown out highlight or detail-less shadow, take that into consideration while adjusting. After adjusting each indiviual channel, use the drop down menu to go back to RGB, and you will see a corrected histogram. If you prefer darker midtones as I generally do, adjust the middle slider (only on the RGB histogram). This generally will fix any color cast, density issues, and leave an image as close to accurate as possible even in unusual lighting situations.

 

I would give an example, but I'm visiting family and don't have adobe acess here. Good luck with your images!

I'm not sure where you go to school, but being an art student myself, I'm sure you run into graphic design majors all of the time. Ask their opinions, and remember that a lot of elements in photography - composition, color, etc. also apply to graphic design (and vice versa).

 

This card will represent you - especially if you can leave a stack with vendors. Most people will see your card first, portfolio second.

I was wondering what route you all took when forming your businesses

and why? C corporation, S corporation, sole proprietorship, general

partnerships (where it applies I suppose), limited partnerships, or

LLC.

 

I'm reading 'Rich Dad Poor Dad,' 'Small Business Kit for dummies,'

and have a stack of other business building books for when I'm

finished with these.

 

Just looking for more $.02 . I am trying to make well-informed

decisions about the steps ahead.

Arlington, VA

Dan - I do develop my own b&w - Tmax 100 through 3200 unless asked for another.

No I don't develop my own C41 and E6 - I leave it to National Geographic to develop and scan, and I print in the school color darkroom for prints.

 

I totally agree with you comment about exposure and contrast - so much to learn!

 

The reason I asked is two fold. I have absolutely no experience with flash. I don't even own a flash at the moment (not practical for business I assume). I know I have oodles of time to spend mastering flash.

As far as film goes, I started with b&w, processing myslef, ect. I fell in love with color for a while, and am now in a b&w craft class and falling back in love with it.

 

Thanks for your responses so much!!

Does anyone strictly shoot available light or is this unpractical?

 

On another note, does anyone give the option to shoot true b&w film,

or is the preference to shoot color film and convert to b&w? In my

(somewhat limited) experience, color film or digital b&w does not

quite catch true tmax or ilford b&w.

 

AND: What are your preferences for film, color and otherwise?