codyj1286

Thank you all for your input, I've really appreciated the comments here. Its always hard to

tell performance wise which machine would do better, just by comparing Mac Vs. PC

Hardware Specs, but this one with a little thought (and your help) has been a little easier.

Just looking spec wise, the G5's have a much larger combined L2 cache on the processor

than the AMD CPU. I've also noticed that file transfers between my external backup and

my Power Mac are blazingly fast, when compared to the transfer on the external to PC. So,

the system's hard drives...(and everything else in the background) for file movement are

much faster. Sadly I won't be able to give up my PC machine, gotta keep it around for its

TV Tuner =)

Thanks again, really appreciate it!

This may just be a self-assurance question, just trying to get some opinion

before I switch computer systems, so you're forewarned!

I recently came into posession of a Power Mac G5 Dual 2.0Ghz (June 2004 Model)

computer. I'm currently using my home built "super gaming machine turned Photo

Editor" computer for my digital workflow. Its an AMD AM2 3800+ single core

CPU, with 2GB's of memory, works fairly well.

I'm trying to decide if switching to the Power Mac would be a good idea. I've

always loved Macs, and heard the mantra that Macs=Photos, but have never seen a

real life comparison. So, if anyone has some personal input, I'd greatly

appreciate it. I know stepping back two years in tech terms is a drop, but I'm

kinda thinking that a Power Mac is a different scenario than the PC world, due

to the high-end Professional nature of their creation.

Thanks!

Is there a possiblity that you may have the Flash Exposure Compensation accidentally

bracketed down?

Gotta ask the "durr" questions sometimes, you never know! =)

I love producing images, but I'm one of those people where you've got to enjoy the equipment you're also working with....I think it tends to inspire me a little.

I've LOVED my digital SLR, its a teeny Canon Digital Rebel XT, I've shot successfully quite a few weddings, with great results, and extremely happy clients. But....I still find myself longing for my B&W days of film shooting. I have an Elan 7NE, and I really like working with the body, its a great one imho.

One of the things I've realized is that I don't produce as many "fun artsy" pictures with my Digital. This is due to the fact that most of these pics just sit on my computer, and are never printed. I don't print my work, because I get super frustrated with all of the digital workflow software. I'm extremely computer literate, have grown up in the Digital Generation, but I just don't like to work out prints on the computer. I guess that means I have the Wet Darkroom bug?

I'm desperately trying to decide on whether I want to spend the money and start going to a local rental darkroom again to print!

Thanks for your knowledge WW!

Much appreciated, even though I'm not the OP, I appreciate the advice.

Thats a neat story Leah, hopefully they did something cute with it?

Definitely something that would be interesting, and could turn it into a positive thing. Even if somewhere its written that its "bad luck", who cares!

I've been in a similar situation, where the Bride has came to me, asking questions about similar issues.

I assist the Bride in subtly reminding her that the coordinator is a paid person, said coordinator is providing a service to the B&G. Maybe in this situation the Coordinator is in charge of something at the church, in my circumstances you usually get "church rules" from the Minister.

Especially if the B&G don't go to the church, and you don't have to deal with residual drama, its an easy fix. Are they going to stop the wedding because you used a flash? :) Evil, I know, but when it comes to Photography, you are a paid service to the B&G, and its your responsibility to advise the Bride in ANYTHING that could compromise her wedding day pictures. I shot at a church that didn't want distractions/flashes going off while the pastor was speaking, I explained to the Bride that to get good pictures (church was horribly lit, even for wide apertures) I needed to be able to flash. She worked it out with the people, but if they had bullied her....it would have fallen onto *ME* when she saw poor quality or lack of pictures that covered an important/keystone event.

Realize that if another service provider to the wedding, creates a restriction on you, it will make you look poor in your photos if that restriction kept you from doing your job. Remind the B&G this well in advance, I personally use great restraint with photo oriented details on the wedding day itself. Politely remind the bride this, and the family will fight for it.

Good Luck!

I really appreciate the fact that you've brought this up! I've done a few weddings in the small time that I've been photographing, all small scale, for friends (please lets not make this a business talk about Pro Vs. Amateur Wedding Photogs!).

Honestly, with the couples that I've photographed for, some I've known very closely, and others were merely acquaintances. In all circumstances, most people don't get married too often, and a Wedding Photographer see's weddings all the time. My cousin actually assisted/2nd shot for me on a couple Weddings, just so she could get tips for planning her own wedding.

I only insert personal opinion, if I'm comfortable doing so, and only in the case that the bridal party/family/coordinators, are having some sort of a crisis that I fell I could be of assistance in. I've never hijacked a wedding planning, but as a Photographer there are some things we can comment on in the realm of "Photography". I'm always there at the rehearsal dinner when the coordinator/pastor places the bridal party on the altar....just so I can make sure that its setup properly for optimum photos. Setting up for optimum photos, in many cases, gives a better visual appeal to the setup, and thus enhances the visuals of the wedding.

Personally I think people will remember you if you're able to give advice, when asked of course, in a helpful manner. Its a really good chance to be able to get to know the family members a little better, extend yourself from the "phantom behind the camera" to someone who's personable. (Obviously to an extent). I'd say that as long as you aren't pushy, stepping on toes, and aren't giving "bad" advice, that you'll find there's a good balance of assisting people when they're in a time of need....IMHO its appropriate in some circumstances.

Befriending the Wedding Party (to some extent) + Good Pictures = Overall good image, and potential referrals!

Yeah, you did the really smart thing, as stated above by a lot of the other posters. Instead of making yourself appear to be extremely flaky in front of a potential client, like stammering on the phone, or just not communicating correctly. You took a hard, business-like approach and just overpriced it for them.

Obviously you didn't truly think of doing it for that much money, even if you wanted to, I'm assuming. I won't debate that issue, its been debated a bajillion times, but you were smart enough to just make yourself appear to be really expensive. Nice business smarts move. You did the right thing.

Thanks very much for the response Marc. I do take everything here with a little grain of salt, and definitely take things, like what David said, empathetically, looking at where he's coming from. I completely understand, from the vantage point of a seasoned Pro, who's honed their skill and craft, that you can't just grab a simple dSLR and start shooting away...there definitely is a learning curve.

I absolutely shouldn't come to this forum, looking for responses that in some way justify my photography, and then get offended when people offer a differing opinion. I understand that its a process, and am honestly glad to have people give me a dissenting opinion.

Thanks a million, again! :)

Robbie, thanks for the advice on the equipment. I'm already and avid user of digital, and find it great for the weddings that I have done. I wouldn't think of going back to film for shooting friends' weddings. This day in age with technology what it is, I think people have more fun with having hard copies of their images to present in a number of ways.

David, thanks for the advice. As given above, before I actually "solicit" myself into the true Wedding market, I will undergo an assistant position with a market established photographer. Up until now I've only done weddings by request of friends and family. All of the friends/family have intimate knowledge of my photographic ability, and I've done a few for lessened pay, just for fun. Most of the learning things you've mentioned, I'm already fluent with. Learning the ins and outs of professional lighting is something I am eager to learn, thank you for suggesting that.

I also have more of a photographic background, with a lot of knowledge, I wasn't an "anyone can take a dSLR and get 20-30 nice images", even out of the gate...like explained in my second post. I value your cynicism, it is just as helpful as some of the comments above.

Thanks Again

Well I'm at a loss for words.

Thank you all very much for your poignant comments, there is a lot here from which I can go off of, and I truly appreciate all of the advice. The response, and quality of responses I've gotten in such a short time is very assuring, and I'm glad that I was able to get some outside thoughts. Maybe I just don't peruse this particular section of the Wedding and Social Forum, but I haven't seen responses like this in a very long time.

In response to Neil A. about Education, I've taken basic courses in Photography, 101 and 102 when I was doing my general education work. I'm actually a Biochemistry Major at the University of Washington in Seattle, so there are definitely many outlets that I could pursue for fine art education. Before I'd taken the Photo classes at my previous community college, I'd actually set up, and was working in my own B&W Darkroom....with no formal education, learning how to do it mainly through these forums. I think that personal education, and want to learn has really shaped my photography as it progresses. I didn't just grab a dSLR and start shooting, first I learned Film, and the painstaking-yet-rewarding task of a Wet Darkroom.

Thanks Again! Truly, truly, appreciate it!

-Cody

I've been in this situation before, and I'll tell you what I did.

It was my cousin's wedding, and the entire family was there. I have mixed feelings about doing Weddings for my Family, because I want to enjoy the Wedding, and not be on the "job". However, if you're a good photographer, and you're in the Family, you usually produce images that are more heartfelt by the B&G because you know who the non-Bridal party is, and the ins and outs of the family....more intimate portraits are created.

In my situation I told my Cousin that I would be bringing all of my photo equipment, would be staying out of the way of the Pro, and try to grab some nice photos. It was digital, for family, and I enjoyed the wedding, I handed over all my photos on a CD after the wedding. I made an 8x10 out of an amazing picture, matted it for her for fun....and she paid me $100, because she wanted to.

I also tried not to get a bloated ego when she told me that the pics I took were hands above the hired Pro (who she paid an exorbant amount of money). The Pro is hired not just to get good photos, but to work through the entire wedding...and to not really "have fun", or socialize with the people. If you can, its far easier to just give your cousin a copy of the images, that way they can make their own reprints at their own cost.

Because I shoot digital, I also do this for my paid event photography. I get customers that are very happy as a result.

This thread is mainly driven from my personal need for "self-assurance" of the

work that I've been doing in my wedding photography. It is also driven out of

reading the many threads of "Don't Do It" to the "First Time Wedding" posts.

I feel like there may be many people that are in my same situation, and that

advice from other people/Pro's may be an excellent thing to help me (and

everyone else) out.

Background:

I've been involved in photography for around five years now, that is, actually

making an attempt to learn and produce great photos. Before ever attempting my

first wedding I'd done many portrait sessions with friends, and even done a few

paid Senior Portraits. All of them were really successful, and I'd built a

really good reputation around my small town of being a decent photographer.

The first wedding was for a great friend's daughter, shot it on my Elan 7NE (the

first and only time I will shoot a wedding in film). I charged very little, in

all of this I've never pushed myself as a "Pro Photographer", and always have

charged much much less than they do. I always explain to the B&G the situation,

showed them the portfolio's of previous weddings, and have always produced

expected results for the customer.

I'm well versed in my equipment, I have decent lenses, and use an XT 350D.

Obviously not optimal for longevity, but its produced great images for me

personally, and I've never had complaints.

Question:

I've felt very turned off by all the "you shouldn't do it" remarks that I hear

in the first time posts, because I partially fall into that amateur ranking of a

photographer. I look at Photog like some Sports, in that if you're not a Pro,

you're an Amateur, Intermediate isn't really a classification. I'm only

analyzing this now because of a desire to further my abilities as a

photographer, and to continue to continue to do weddings for customers. I'd

eventually like to branch out into non-friends, and plunge into the normal

market.....obviously I have a LOT of growing to do before that time, but its my

goal.

I haven't found many posts that are made by confident photographers dealing with

this issue, and so I apologize if this has been posted before, but I feel the

specificity of many of those "first timer" threads don't apply to my situation.

If someone may be able to critique my "road map" to complete my goals, I would

greatly appreciate it!

Assistance in placing these points in a priority order would really help:

1. L Glass

2. Upgrade Body to 20D/30D and eventually a 5D (at what point should I stop

focusing so much on the body, and spend more on establishing L Glass?)

3. Shadow a Pro, in the many forms, such as 2nd Photographer, or Assistant.

4. Aside from Weddings, I also enjoy non-wedding Portraits, and if available, I

would love to move into Fashion.

I appreciate all of you who read this thread, and absolutely am thankful for any

and all advice that is given.

Thank You!

This is obviously an older post, so I'm contributing a dated comment.

I've done quite a bit of research on the three 70-200 L zooms, and doing a little summary could add a bit of extra info for future readers of this thread. Many say that the 70-200L is usually *too* sharp for flattering portraits (Phil Greenspun said it in his review of the three).

I'll be getting the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS version when I save up enough money. My choice in selection wasn't based upon sharpness, it was of my ability to create good images in low light situations. While I'm still mastering the use of fill flash, in my experience I'd rather take available light shots than have to use the flash, results are almost always superior. But thats just my skill level, in time I'll be confident enough in my flash results to use it consistently.

My very first wedding was shot in Film, and I had reservations about doing such, with this issue and all. I knew the family very well, and handing over the negatives was apart of the purchase, with the contingency that at a later date I could request and reprint anything I wanted for my portfolio.

Traditionally Professionals will keep the negatives forever, and then make money by charging and exorbant amount for reprints. Personally, I chose to save myself, and the customer the hassle by shooting Digital, I can pass along the savings in development costs to the consumer, which leaves them extremely happy.

Everyone above is saying the right things. Photography is a strange business, as in most cases the "Customer Is Always Right", but we have the stickler of Copyright Laws. I've never elected to keep negatives, because I don't have archival (disasterproof) methods of storing someone's precious memories for 50+ years. I'd advise people to add the "purchase of negatives" to their package, and just make sure that you create portfolio prints for yourself before you hand the negs over, its a win/win scenario.

Sorry you're in this situation, sounds like you had Digital but elected Film, tough call, but I hope it all works out well!

Even though people find it mundane to answer these questions, because the "My First Wedding" threads pop up every day...I personally like reading them, and passing along advice.

Only you know how well you can shoot photos. If you have no experience in the situations where you'd be taking such photos, I would definitely advice against doing this, or at least practice a LOT in that situation. I casually shoot weddings for friends/family, I undercharge by a lot compared to the Pros (I'm not a Pro, and do expect to be compensated as such). The main thing is confidence, I didn't accept shooting a wedding until I had confidence in my abilities. By my first, I had done a lot of "amateur" portrait work, and learned up to an "intermediate" level, doing very very good Senior Portraits.

Your camera is great, if you know how to work it properly. I use the XT (350D) and to this day am still learning how to best use some of the more advanced settings to achieve good photos (more like increase the ratio of good to bad photos). You also have to be confident with your equipment. Might be kiddy, but its worked very well for me, I use the 350D with a 420EX Flash, I generally use my 28-105 f/3.5-4.5, the standard 50 f/1.8, and occasionally the 135 f/2.8 SF (1.6x makes the 135 a little big).

Just as important as knowing what you can do, is knowing what you can't do. Confidently talk camera details, after checking out the locations, with the B&G BEFORE the wedding. You shouldn't have to make the B&G worry about photos on their wedding day. Example about knowing what you can't do: My third wedding was shot in a horrible-for-photography church. Picture Noahs Ark, but turned upside down, and someone put a church inside. The ceiling was 50+ ft tall, arched, poor lighting, poor available light from windows. It was just a mess. After seeing the location I promptly told the Bride that with my equipment, I could NOT do any sort of decent formals in the sanctuary. Outside formals turned out wonderful!

Good luck with whatever you decide to do, but the key thing is to know your ability, and have confidence in your ability, and confidence in your equipment. A wedding is the worst place to learn big concepts in photography, you don't want someone paying you to learn how to shoot.

Hehe, I love this question!

I think its been answered very well already, but I personally found the "Eat!" comments to be hilarious! Not that you shouldn't eat at the reception, but I've always restrained. I look at the entire wedding as a huge interview for potential clients, you're the photographer and the entire family has an eye trained on you. I've always been super self conscious to the fact that people seeing you sitting down and eating (read, missing shots) might think that you weren't giving the B&G every $ they paid.

Normally I bring a pick-me-up for the drive from the Wedding to the reception. I'm totally not criticizing anyone here.....but does anyone else feel the same? I've always thought that it was a really fun/awkward situation during the Wedding. Any thoughts? :)

I rechecked everything, and I must have put it into Raw+JPEG for a while, not a problem, just weird ;) I don't usually shoot in that format. The Blue pic was just one, and yes, easily fixable. It was just a friends wedding, so I only did some casual shooting, wasn't being paid.

The issue that I still have is, should you have noticeable noise on ISO 400 when using Flash Indoors? I believe I've seen it happen before, and guess its just a digital fluke with exposure, film does the same thing in a limited capacity.

Thanks!

Hello Everyone!

I recently shot a friends wedding with my Rebel XT, and while the

pictures were very good, I believe my camera is having some issues.

When going through the pictures on the computer, during the formals my

camera was only in Raw mode, not Raw+JPG, but none the less, there are

JPEG files mixed into the RAW files, during times where I'm certain I

didn't change any settings.

I also noticed that during one of the shots the White Balance went to

Tungsten (making the picture eerily blue), it was set for Flash WB and

I'm certain that I never changed it during the shoot. The blue effect

is easily fixed by some quick RAW editing, but it is still annoying. I

know that flash photography can also influence the amount of noise in

some pictures. Inside I has the ISO set to 400 while using the flash

(Speedlite 420EX) and in many of the pictures there is a lot more

noise than I am used to seeing with this camera.

These are mounting troubles I'm having with it, does this sound like

Warranty issues? Send it back to Canon? I haven't heavily used this

camera either, I have only used it lightly for 6 months. I understand

why you buy a Professional Camera like the 20D, but the Rebel

shouldn't be crapping out after 6 months of light use.

Any thoughts or advice will be greatly appreciated!

Thank You!

This is awesome! Its so specialized its hilarious, but the pictures that you got are very, very good. When I was looking through the pics you posted from the event in your portfolio one thing struck me. I'm an avid Star Wars movie go'er, in the group photos, the Storm Troopers look a little too "marine'ish" for my idea of what a Storm Trooper should look like. I don't know how to explain that, but some of them just looked like Marine commando's in funny gear (which isn't what I see of them in the movies). And as said before, you really can't pose the Darth :) just go with it.

Great Work and Good Luck to you!

Hi Katie,

I too have a Rebel XT that I absolutely adore, though I'm not daring enough yet to shoot a full wedding with it as a main camera (normally I shoot weddings in film, for no extremely particular reason). You said that you were starting a business, or already had one going for photography, so hopefully you'll be getting more money soon to eventually get some of the "L" glass that Canon users covet. I myself, being on a tight butdget try to do everything I can with the less expensive lenses.

The 50mm f/1.8 is a gem of a lens, and for the price, I believe every photographer should have one. Another thing to consider, wide angle lenses do have a beauty, but with the 1.6x factor put on all lenses we use (when shooting with the Rebel XT) the wide angle is totally lost. The 50mm is a nice portrait lens considering that on a Rebel XT it is really an 80mm lens. You are right, and if your 35-80 is soft its safe to assume that it was an old "kit" lens from a camera package. I absolutely love my 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5, and it is a very classic range. It would give you sharper images over your kit lens, and also go a little wider. We literally have a similar lens setup, I have a 135mm f/2.8 Soft Focus (Canon Lens) that I bought specifically for portraits, it works great on my film bodies but isn't very practical for portraits on my Rebel XT because its such a long lens (135x1.6=digital mm).

Hopefully that is some insight, and I have shot weddings with my 28-105mm on both my film and digital bodies and find it works nicely. PS: You have a very nice portfoilo, very good eye for composition and the like.

Good Luck!

Cody

Great ideas, I will definately be trying to incorporate a cost per roll situation. Here is some

more background information about the general shoot, and then I'll add/ask about the

Digital question brought up. This is a whole event coverage, they want me there for

rehersal (I'll be shooting some candids there, as well as getting set up for the actual

wedding) formals, actual event, and reception. The most recent wedding I did all of that

coverage in nine rolls, which is why the roll question was important to me. Charging by

roll fixes the issues of costs being too great for actual profit earned from event. I'll be

using Porta for film, and developing it "professionally" at the local dev store, which adding

total costs it is around $20 per roll (film, dev, 4x of all pics).

So with that info, I'd like to ask a couple extra questions about the situation and what you

would do. I default to shooting in film, just because its more "traditional" but it is more

expensive to develop due to the scemantics of using the medium. I do have a Canon

350D (Rebel XT) which for all intent and purpose to me, is equal in photograph quality to

the professional model 20D (Rebel just having more computerized menu options where as

the 20D has more buttons). Shooting the wedding in digital is something I would be

interested in, and I have enough experience using my digital to know how to use it in the

moment. Quality questions rise up between digital and film, and it all depends on exactly

what the customer wants, but it would be loads cheaper in cost if I shot 90% of the event

in digital. Using portrait films for formals only might to of an advantage.

Thanks Again!

Hello Everyone,

I just recently booked another wedding, and have a few questions about

some general wedding shooting, especially film usage. I've shot a

couple weddings before, for hire, so this isn't extremely new to me.

The other weddings were for friends, so I wasn't too stickler on

prices that I would charge, or concerned about how much I would make

in pure profit. Photography is more of a hobby for me, so getting the

most out of my "investements" through weddings is not practical.

So, my last wedding I used 8 rolls of 36 exposures, and I know that

there were quite a bit of misses, but many, many great shots. This

recent wedding is booked for a friend of a friend, and I want to get

them great pictures, but I do want to make a fair profit off of the

endeavor. I'm charging what I feel is extremely fair (very cheap

compared to local pro's, but thats obvious). I do an arrangement

where I figure out how much coverage they want, give them the price,

and then they are "buying" the negatives/digital files. They get a 3x

or 4x proof print of every shot, their choice, and then after editing

and such of digital files, and developing the color prints, I hand

them over. I don't have the capacity or need to charge people on

reprints (I'd rather them keep their treasured moments than I, college

scene's aren't too "archival")

Anyway, I'm thinking I can do this wedding easily with a max of 5

rolls of 36exp, I will bring more film but the 5 is just a goal. I

also bring my Rebel XT for some nice filler casual shots, and can

easily fill that up as well. I don't want to shortchange these

people, but I'm giving them a great price for what they are getting.

Shooting more film, and getting extra shots should cost more

considering how I charge for weddings, and considering the price I

already gave I don't want to blow all of my profit by "overshooting"

their wedding.

Refining pictures and using compositional talent by restraining and

taking great pictures is better than *exaggeration* just firing off at

4fps. If anyone could give some real life examples or just

professional insight/suggestions I would be greatly appreciated.

While weddings may not be my photographic specialty, I really do

admire photographers that excell in this field, its a ton of work, and

enormous pressure!

Thanks All!

Her porfolio was the one that I was referring to in my original post, I love the fact that you too saw the genious in her work. Obviously there are printing problems to overcome, especially because I'm using a printing shop that uses chemically processed photo papers for their digital shots as well (so some B&W prints will come out tinged because of chemicals in the printing process).

The fooling part was just an interesting side comment, obviously my photo professor would be able to tell the difference, but making an old photographer who's never worked with digital fooled into thinking its film would show me that I do good work when it comes to digital B&W.

Thanks Again!