marissa_c._boucher

<p>Weston here (Marissa's husband)<br>

Hi Mag! Everyone is going to have a way to make all the aforementioned lenses work well in certain situations so the advice thus far is awesome but likely too many options to consider haha. Comes down to preference to some degree based on what's been said so far but IMHO I think what you're looking for is the Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS. Let me explain why...<br>

Of course this is just my opinion so trolls please relax if you're out there lol. Over the past 10 years that lens has been an absolute beast and has produced about 90% of my absolute favorite ceremony shots(the other 10% on our Canon 85mm 1.2L). <br>

I believe the case to be made for the 70-200mm is:<br /><br />-Keeps you from moving around all over the place during the ceremony because A. it's not prime and B. has a great focal range for ceremony shots, key moments, up-close expressions, yet wide enough on a full-frame for wider shots(though I'd always have a 50mm or 24mm on another body handy of course)<br>

-Has much more dramatic depth of field at f2.8 vs the f4. Typically I'm looking to isolate moments/expressions/subjects from distracting things that I want out of focus anyway, drawing the view to my popping subject(s) at 2.8<br>

-It also does well in low light since it can open up to 2.8 AND has IS<br>

-Speed and accuracy. VS all my other lenses this one has always held the highest percentages for correct focus point and was also ready to fire, so quick and dependable. This was tested big time when I shot in Haiti in some scary situations and needed to rely on it's speed.</p>

<p>Again I come back to the zoom element of this lens because it has such great image quality throughout the focal range vs any other zoom I've owned. It might as well be prime it looks so good IMO. The focal range gives you so many cropping/framing possibilities without ever having to move(unless you can of course go for it haha).<br>

Hopefully that's helpful and affirms your initial desire to go for the 70-200mm Canon, definitely can't go wrong. Lens is also amazing for all around photojournalism all throughout the wedding day, sniper lens for sure. Incredible for portraits as well, very compressed, love it.<br>

Head over to our wedding blog if you're curious as to my allegiance to that lens as a large majority was shot on 70-200mm 2.8L IS, 50mm 1.2L and 85mm 1.2L and if you like the look from the ceremony shots then maybe you'll prefer it as well. Keyword, prefer ;) As this is subjective and opinions vary with anything artistic. <br>

-Weston Boucher <br></p>

<p>Okay, I have several computers that all need the contact sheet (old style, not PDF) into CS4. This will take FOREVER. There really isn't an install file that will put all these files into the correct directories? Adobe, are you kidding me?!</p>

<p>An update to my post in hopes of helping someone in the future...<br>

We ended up finding a company called MatPhot (that has 3 locations in Paris, France) to rent our photography workshop equipment from. Michael, who seems to be the manager, has been corresponding with our studio by email in an effort to finalize a rental quote before we arrive. He has been very patient with us as we've had to make some additions and subtractions to the quote but the store seems to have a solid selection of pro equipment. From lights, to cameras, lenses to specific accessories like sandbags, extension cords. All the things you would need for a pro shoot. The one thing they didn't seem to have though was Photoflood lights but they do have Fresnels, strobes, and continuous 1000w to make up for it.<br>

http://www.matphot.com/<br /> <br /> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>

MATPHOT Paris <br /> 36 rue René Boulanger<br /> 75010 Paris<br>

Tel: 01 43 47 20 25<br /> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>

Matphot Lille <br /> 145 avenue de la République<br /> 59110 La Madeleine<br>

Tel: 03 20 74 20 25<br /> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><br>

Studio Bastille <br /> 36 boulevard de la Bastille<br /> 75012 Paris<br>

01 43 47 35 96<br /> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>></p>

<p>Thanks again for the help everyone,<br>

Weston<br /> http://www.TheBoudoirDivas.com<br /> http://www.BoucherPhotography.com</p>

<p>Thanks for the input everyone, much appreciated. I have been in touch with a bunch of photo stores along with the ones you mentioned but have still come up short. None so far rent gear and the lighting they do carry starts at a super high grade. I'm really just looking for basic smith-victor flood type light kits that are around $100-$200 here in the USA. Basically plan on leaving them there or selling them back to the store before leaving.<br>

The lightclubpro store is actually online only. I suppose we could purchase ahead of time and have them shipped but the logistics and risk involved may be too much for us to chance for the workshop.<br>

I am also trying to find a place that may rent commercial grade power/voltage converters as if I could rent one we could bring our smith-victor lights and use those.<br>

I'm doing some more googling today, wish me luck! Thanks again everyone.</p>

<p>Hi,<br>

Our studio wil be putting on a photography workshop in Paris in early April of 2009 and we're having a hard time finding Professional photo stores that physically stock even the most basic lighting equipment. Ex. Smith-Victor Photoflood kits. We figure that the purchase would outweigh the hassle of shipping our lighting and also purchasing heavy duty power converter units.<br>

We would greatly appreciate any info as I've done google searches, photo.net searches and all the suggested stores don't seem to carry actual lighting gear. Maybe I missed something, but I've checked FNAC, Picto, Lotz, etc. suggested on photo.net and come up short.<br>

My last hope is Objectif but their website doesn't have an english view option. I'll have to give them a call to check. I would imagine with how much photography takes place in Paris in terms of fashion, etc that there's tons of places but they aren't coming up on google searches.<br>

Any ideas? Thanks in advance,<br>

Weston<br>

<b>Signature URL deleted. Not permitted by photo.net.</b>

Hi Michael, Ann,

 

Thanks for your responses. To clarify I am running on PC's, processing in Bridge/Photoshop CS3 and have purchased Lightroom recently and intend on using it ASAP. Bridge is awful and I know I should've switched over a long time ago.

 

My filenames all correspond, I've already taken that step so that my RAWs and JPEGs have the exact same name with a different extension. The problem lies in that we're talking about 100-200 images per album order so simply knowing the filenames doesn't save me enough time at this quantity per album order.

 

I have no time to invest or knowledge in the area of scripting in JAVA but I will keep it in mind as an option if it comes to that.

 

Initially gathering the chosen RAWs is what the issue is; not after the fact in regards to RED flags.

 

More ideas? Thanks :)

Hi there,

 

I've racked my brain trying to think of the most efficient way to handle client

album orders when it comes to gathering their album photo selections, and have

continued to come up short. Hoping that my fellow RAW shooters can offer some

better methods.

 

Being a RAW shooter, I've found it very difficult to quickly assemble client's

album image selections once they've been submitted/chosen.

 

Currently I proof my images online with Collages.net and their software will

actually take a clients album selection folder online and assemble those images

from my actual hard drive into a folder. Perfect right? Wrong, since I shoot RAW

I need to be working/processing off of the RAW files, not the JPEGs. The JPEGs

are only used to get their images online quickly for proofing. I'm not going to

process my album images from quickly processed JPEGs that were made from basic

RAW image adjustments so you can see my dilemma.

 

If they choose 100-200 images for their album you can imagine how long it would

take to find the corresponding RAW files even if I have the filenames or JPEG

files in a folder already. Especially since the weddings have already been

categorized into different folders (pre-ceremony, ceremony, reception, etc.)

 

One method that I've used (which feels pre-historic, lol) is having the client

send me a word doc with their album selection filenames in comma separated

format. Then I take those image numbers and paste them into windows' search

feature and select the client's main wedding folder as the search area. This

brings up the JPEGs and RAW files at the same time. It works, but it still

leaves some room for error by my employees because you have to be pretty tedious

with it all.

 

What I would love to see as far as new features in Lightroom or Bridge is a way

to find the corresponding RAW file for a JPEG created from that RAW file.

 

Anyway, I'm dying to find a better way to handle client album image selections

so maybe some of you raw shooters have a method to relieve my pain? :)

 

Thanks,

Weston

Anyone know what Canon lens was used for episode 6 where they shot VS models on the beach? It looks like a prime lens, either the 85mm or the 50mm 1.2L. I'm trying to figure out which one because I love results of Dean's shots.

Hello! My name is Marissa Boucher and I am a photog here in San Diego. I am boudoir photographer and my partner in biz and I are writing a book on the subject. Thought you may be interested!

 

www.womancaptured.com

Hi Ellis,

 

I simply need someone who specializes in calibrating digital color so I can have as best of a foundation to work off of for my color processing. I don't mind messing with photos individually if I have to. But my foundation just isn't working for me right now and I simply don't have any more time to dedicate to this. I'm sick of being behind a computer instead of a camera! haha.

 

Thanks for the info though. I'm definitely making use of syncing photos but there's specific issues with my calibrated results that I can't make sense of.

 

For example, my ACR presets for let's say "5D_Tungsten" completely oversaturates my reds. If someone is wearing a red shirt it completely saturates it beyond detail.

 

I'm wondering if I need to run the ACRcalibrator script again but I know I did it correct the first time.

I'm so tired of spending time trying to get accurate, consistent color

processing of my studio's images that I'm simply ready to pay someone to come

in, calibrate everything, and get it dialed in.

 

Does anyone know of a technician for hire or someone I could literally have

come to my studio and dial in my color workflow?

 

I have done all the Bruce Fraser, Chromoholics, and the like calibrating

scripts and 24 patch gretagmacbeth cards, etc and I'm still not satisfied with

the results.

 

From portrait shoots to weddings, the lighting scenarios combined with 3

different canon cameras is just making working in Adobe Camera Raw a mess with

all the white balancing and camera calibration presets. I need to speed up my

workflow and this is where it's bottlenecking right now.

 

I'm getting much better results than before but I'm still noticing things where

the color is still off and I can't figure out why. I know I'm leaving out a lot

of information but if anyone knows of anyone who may do something like this

please do let me know.

 

 

 

Thanks!

Weston

I too saw that article and it inspired me to buy corel, but Iam also having a hard time finding valuable info on corel. I want to make images look pin up style but and having a very difficult time acheiving this.

After reading through this entire thread I could use some clarification on some of the suggestions because I'm always open to changing/adding things to my workflow to get the best results.

 

1. -Working at a magnification of at least 50%- How is this realistic in the sense that the image is so massive and overwhelming onscreen at this magnification? It's hard to get a feel for the shot as a whole for imaging when the desktop space can't accompany such a viewing size. I can understand doing this for sharpening methods/comparison but otherwise I am confused. (I shoot on a 5D and image on a 22in LaCie Electron III at a screen resolution of 1600x1200)

 

2. -Sharpening once the photo has been resized for print-. I'm hoping this isn't necessary because that would mean that all the photo orders I get I would have to resize for every print size thus increasing my workflow time per picture. I would also have to take the step of saving a master imaged file for each different size ordered in the future as well. We submit orders using Lab Prints software in which the photo never actually gets cropped on our end, we simply enter 5x7 and position a floating guide over the shot where we'd like it cropped and then it actually gets printed at that crop after the fact.

 

My lab (www.WHCC.com) also asks that we send shots at standard resolution so they can handle it on their end. However we recently started shooting RAW and we're sending everything to them at 300 ppi. Can this be a problem with the print quality and if so, what exactly?

 

Any feedback would be welcomed. I'm tired of our prints being unsatisfactory so I'll do anything to improve things if within reason based on increase level of results.

I wanted to also mention that I just compared this again and I noticed that the saturation levels are much higher looking in ACR but once in PSCS2 the saturation is much lower looking.

 

Weston

Hi everyone,

 

I'm just curious as to why images look slightly different in the

Adobe Camera RAW window versus after opening in Photoshop CS2 for

further editing. Different as in the color mostly.

 

For example, I may have a shot that looks great in ACR after

whitebalance, then once I click "OPEN" in photoshop it is still

white balanced but the temperature is a little different than how it

looked back in ACR.

 

I'm wondering, are there some sort of color mangagement settings I'm

overlooking in ACR and PSCS2? I'm working in sRGB in PS but I swear

my color looks more vibrant and correct in ACR.

 

Any ideas? Thanks,

Tim...I think you nailed it with that comparison link you posted, thanks! That is exactly what some of my other shots look like magnified as well. It's the in-camera JPG problem, you're right. Thank you! Well, I don't shoot JPG anymore so problem solved!

Thomas...I've already been running a fully, regularly calibrated setup for years now so I don't think it's related to that. I also am informed on WB methods and processing. The WB on that photo still needs some work though, I agree. Thanks though.

 

I'm not going to sweat this too much because I just switched to shooting 100% RAW so if the problem persists then I'll be more worried.

 

The shot was actually taken at 100 ISO, 180 shutter at f4.5, which is why I'm shocked that noise would appear. No flash was used according to the properties data. I agree that it could be related to JPG in some way.

 

I don't think it's reflection from the sky creating those green pixels though because I've seen this problem on indoor shots as well.

 

I agree that it's probably noise even though it was at 100 ISO. I'm looking to get two Canon 5D's this year anyway and they produce less noise throughout each ISO range so that could help a little combined with shooting RAW too.

 

Thanks for help everyone.

Thank you for the compliments on the site and our work, much appreciated! ;)

 

I'm not sure though that some of the users posting responses are reading my entire post, please if you have time go back and read through the whole thing to get more details.

 

I'm looking for software for sorting specifically. Not downloading, not editing, just sorting FAST with RAW files. And I mentioned that I already was trying BBpro and it was still too slow.

 

As I mentioned my computer runs CS2 very fast, it's just when you're specifically dragging and dropping RAW images in Bridge from a folder that contains 1000 RAW images it's just way too slow. I don't think it's the power of my computer. I think it's based on what the program was designed to do. For example, if I have bridge, CS2, and several other programs running my memory isn't even close to being tapped out with 2GB of RAM.

 

To clarify, I'm not trying to sort off of my CF cards, haha, that's crazy talk. These images are located on my external GIGABIT network HD.

 

I tried purging both my image caches but it didn't make much difference. I think I just need software that can handle the task, which is designed specifically for organizing only in RAW with 1000s of images. Many claim to be but they're not fast enough.

 

Before switching to shooting RAW I used to be able to use windows to sort all my images by drag and drop into specified wedding timeline folders and it was perfectly fast. I wish windows would support previewing of RAW files in their explorer windows. :(

 

I tried RawShooter and it took FOREVER to create all the thumbnails, then it took even longer to make each preview. Way slower than bridge and BBpro combined.

Here's the image bigger.<div></div>

Some of my images appear to have weird color problems in the pixels

when magnifying. For example, if I magnify a groom's black lapel,

I'll see all sorts of pixel discoloration of greens. To better

explain, take a look at a close up view of this groom's lapel. By

the way I see this is lots of my images. They're shot on a 20D and

10D on L lenses. Just switched to shooting RAW so maybe it's JPG

related, these images you see were shot JPG though.<div></div>

Hi everyone,

 

Can anyone recommend FAST software for sorting a huge amount of RAW

files? I figured asking this question in the wedding forum with how

many RAW shooters there were out there would be wise. What are you

guys using that doesn't take 20 seconds just to highlight, preview,

and drag and drop a RAW file into it's according folder?

 

I recently downloaded the trial version of BreezeBrowserPro in hopes

that I finally found software that could sort my RAW wedding shoot

images quickly but I'm finding that it's extremely slow and

unresponsive. Sorting in Photoshop's Bridge is extremely slow as

well so I'm trying to find a solution here.

 

My typical needs from sorting software after a wedding are...

 

-being able to see my RAW thumbnails

-a reasonably sized preview window when clicking on a thumbnail to

see if the shot is good or not

-then my list of folders to drag and drop that image where it needs

to go and so on until they're all sorted accordingly based on the

wedding day folders, PreCeremony, Ceremony, Formals, Reception, etc.

 

I was so excited when I saw that BreezeBrowserPro provided the

above. The problem lies in how extremely unresponsive the program is

when trying to actually use it for sorting. I know it isn't my

machines either because my CS2 smokes; and every other program I run

is blazing fast even with multiple programs open. I have an

optimized P4, 2GB RAM, 3ghz machine with a great video card.

 

I changed my cache settings in BBpro to 50 to see if this helped but

it didn't (not sure if this matters or not). I don't have high

quality preview selected but it seems like the preview shot looks

better than I need it to be, maybe that's part of the slowness?

 

Typically there's about 600-1000 RAW images initially when I start

sorting from scratch. Let's say I click on one of the RAW

thumbnails, it immediately lags just to show the preview for about 3-

4 seconds. Then once I've decided that this photo can go in a

specific folder, I try to drag it to my folder list below within

BBpro and I get an hour glass icon for my mouse. So just to preview,

then drag one CRW into a folder takes up to 15-20 seconds or more

per image! Clearly the math shows that this is not time efficient

for my business.

 

What is wrong or what am I possibly doing wrong? Or, am I expecting

too much from the software itself? I'm only dealing with RAW files

from a 20D and 10D so they're not as big as they could be.

 

Thanks for listening everyone,

Weston

I've heard that it may be smarter to use your actual camera

manufacturer's RAW converter over let's say ACR, or Phase One.

 

I would think that in theory this makes more sense since the

software is made for your specific camera brand.

 

I'd like to know if anyone here has compared their manufacturer's

RAW converter to ACR or Phase One and noticed significant

differences.

 

I notice that my Canon files always look a little off with ACR's

white balance tool. They also look a little bluish, too cool if

anything. I have also noticed this from other photographer's shots

who I personally know use ACR and shoot Canon.

 

Any feedback appreciated.

Thanks guys, I appreciate the help. You know what I did find though that is also helpful is the "Image Processor..." option in PSCS2's Bridge. There I can do everything in one swoop without worrying about having a ton of images loaded in my ACR window.

 

Michael...So you save to JPG? Not TIFF? I would think that you would want to save as TIFF in order to manipulate further with PS's additional imaging options on a file that isn't compressed. Then, once the photo has been processed in ACR and PS, it can be saved from that master "imaged/processed" TIFF to different sized JPG's based on required print sizes.

Going RAW this year for all our wedding and portrait photography and

I want to make sure we're choosing the best workflow overall.

 

I've read that shooting in 8 bit, then working in 16 bit gives the

most possible manipulatable data, then converting back to 8 bit for

printing.

 

What I want to know is how many high end pro RAW wedding shooters

use the 8 bit > 16 bit > 8 bit workflow. I want to know if it's

realistic for serious full time professional wedding photographers

to use this method.

 

I need to know if the hard drive space required for working with 16

bit RAW files will require more hard drive space than being worth it

in processing advantages. I also need to know if it's going to slow

down my workflow significantly since each RAW image may take longer

to open, close, convert, save, etc.

 

Forgive me if I am uninformed in RAW workflow, I'm just basing it

off what I know or have heard.

 

Any input appreciated.

 

 

 

Thanks,

Weston

After years of shooting JPG, we're starting to shoot RAW starting

this year for all our wedding and portrait work.

 

With that said, in the past we would deliver negatives to clients in

JPG format on a DVD. Some of those images fully processed, some not.

 

Now that we're shooting RAW, I'm looking to find the quickest,

easiest way to deliver negatives on disc so that they are at least

in a printable, viewable format.

 

My question is this, for the images that were never ordered for use

in the album or as an enlargement (meaning still in RAW format,

untouched), is there a batch process that I can run in PSCS2 that

will convert the remaining RAWs & TIFFs into JPGs so I don't have to

open up every unordered image individually to manually convert them

myself?

 

Also, should I run a batch process that changes the dpi of all

images to 300dpi?