jon jacobson

Well said Casey!

<P>

I don't care if you're the greatest people-person on the planet. I still would advise reading and rereading <i>How To Win Friends and Influence People</i>.

<p>

For me personally, I do not make signing on the spot a priority. The opposite actually. Take on the ability to walk away from the meeting without a contract or another meeting set up. This will help you avoid a certain amount of desparation or urgency. I think, "they called me, they want to hire me, so no worries." It's not really being cocky. It's more like avoiding the insecurities that force negotiations and compromises.

<p>

Be yourself. Don't be somebody else just to get the gig. Unless that "somebody else" is also showing up to shoot the wedding.

<p>

The most common complaint I hear at our consultations about other wedding shooters is, "they did nothing but endlessly talk about themselves." Of course there's a point where they will want to know what you offer, and you must cover this, but don't make it a priority. It will naturally come up.

<p>

It's their big day. Lead them to talk about it!

If this is just another proof, I'd have stopped at RAW.

But, like you and others have noted, it's a significant enlargement. Such retouching should be expected of yourself.

If I'm ever in doubt about when to stop, I quite zooming in at 300% px to inspect it.

Even if your's is a 20x30 on canvas, the closest normal viewing distance will probably be about 4', and the canvas will force the loss of some detail anyway.

I like them as far as standard fare goes. Safe. Perhaps the crops are a little too tights.

But ... having seen some of your other work, I was expecting more. Maybe not a burning house, as you said, but something a little more exciting. Something that more closely resembles your other work. It's what you do. It's probably why this couple approached you.

Next time, let some of your previous work inspire you. It doesn't necessarily have to be a protest, but something that may have ended up in the lifestyle section of the paper.

<i><b>Flash: we have one Sunpak Autozoom 3000 (from my old SLR), but are thinking we probably need to buy another (newer) flash. Could you recommend something, bearing in mind we're on a budget? Do you think it's reasonable (for the ceremony) for one person to use flash and the other a high ISO or a long exposure time?</b></i><br>

There will probably be no flash allowed during the ceremony. Even if there is no restriction, I personally prefer to keep the usage limited. It is, after all, a ceremony.<br>

But to answer your question of "buy another flash" and "budget," well, you are painting yourself into a corner with your price structure. I will have only three speedlights for this weekend's weddings, and I feel kind of naked without my fourth.<p>

<i><b>Light: what's the best way of dealing with the black/white contrast of the bride and groom?</b></i><br>

(looking in Nadine's general direction for this answer) :)<br>

I personally meter to the white dress, but it's never really the same from week to week. Too many variations.<p>

<i><b>Position: does it make sense to have the 18-200 lens near the front, and the 75-300 shooting from the back? Should we both use tripods, or just one of us, or neither? </i></b><br>

Yes to the first question. As for tripod, I use the tripod in the balcony during the ceremony, and my wife is on the main floor "moving about." And when I say moving about, I mean it is strictly kept to a MINIMUM!<p>

<i><b>Laptop: do you think it's worth taking a laptop so we can check the pictures during the day? </i></b><br>

No! You'll have enough to do without transferring cards and such. When would you plan on doing this? During the father/daughter dance? :)<p>

<i><b>No flash: what if the church doesn't allow flash during the ceremony? What's the best way of dealing with this? The one suggestion i've read about so far is using a high ISO and shooting B&W.</i></b><br>

High ISO, yes. B&W, up to you. Well, I hope you will shoot all in color and convert later to B&W as you see fit. Not the best idea to shoot B&W in camera. I do not know the cameras you are using, so I do not know what the noise is like at higher ISO. With the 5d I have no problem going to 800 ISO.<p>

<i><b>Formals: we were planning on one of us shooting the formals, while the other takes candids. Given that we're newbies, do you think it would be safer to both shoot the formals so we have double cover? </i></b><br>

I'd personally recommend having just one camera out for formals. Take at least three shots of each pose. If you witness a blink, take another. If you witness eyes on somebody else's camera, take another. If you see somebody looking at the kids, take another. Now you're up to six. You cannot be 100% aware of every set of eyes in a larger group. Better to be safe. And this is not a "because of digital" answer. Same if it is film.<p>

<i><b>Should I shoot raw?</b></i><br>

Yes<p>

(okay, I took the liberty of adding that last question.) :)

The think about dragging the shutter is it gives you more than a 2-dimensional view of what is occurring. That is, the motion blur. Your particular examples are of slow dances. Not exactly a NASCAR race, is it?

And likewise, it's a matter of your taste, matched with customer's taste. Remember that one time you hurled when you saw my portfolio? It made you dizzy? :o)

When I drag the shutter, I try my darnedest to limit the flash. That usually means AV mode, and dial down the flash.

Once conquered, it makes for an exciting series of images. And in my opinion, more honest to what is taking place. Even if it is the boring walls of the Pinnacle or the Bluff.

To help that, take you above image (the second one of course) and open in PS (CS2). From the Channels palette, Ctrl+click the RGB thumbnail. Go back to layers. Now do a Ctrl+Shift+I to inverse your selection. Now Ctrl+J to duplicate the layer. Now change mode to Multiply. It's more like a quick-fix, but can be adjusted.

These are from the Bob. Lots of shutter dragging! :)<div></div>

Jon, you're creatively full of ideas and you don't even know it!

Have them make up a big sign with SINGLE and a red circle-with-line-through-it symbol on it. Go downtown and start pushing the shutter release button. SERIOUSLY! (I think I'll do this one sometime!)

You have a great style. Stick with it.

If you're looking for posing techniques, remember: if it has a joint, bend it. This includes hips and neck.

Your website states its existance is to document. If this is the case, it's a great site!

If its true intent is to be the gravity for hire, than Garry is being kind. Absolutely, ditch the equipment page! Maybe add it back when you've invested $50,000 in gear.

Also, I'd recommend losing the "apartment" number. Just use "#" or maybe something like "Suite No." A buddy of mine runs a significant business out of his home and has one of those Mailboxes Etc type mail boxes for his business address. Instead of "Box No." he uses "Suite No." Very smart idea!

I booked my first weddings with pictures of lighthouses and waterfalls without having ever assisted. Well, okay, I had a few wedding shots from friends' weddings too. Others here have assisted for years. It's all a matter of what you know you can do & want and your level of self confidence. I personally don't recommend doing what I did!

Either way, it's never an overnight success. Baby steps is the right idea.

(just don't blow up Dr Leo Marvin's house like at the end of that movie!) :)

I shot my sister's wedding. That's the last I "officially" shoot for a reletive. :)

As far as backup gear goes ...

Two nights ago I broke my 550ex. My 420ex is in a container somewhere between here and Japan for repairs, broke last month. Now I'm down to a pair of 580ex speedlights with two weddings this weekend on the calendar. Couple months ago I broke a sync cord. (glad the sync cord broke instead of the speedlight!!)

Yeah, stuff breaks.

Know what you want in advance. Best not to improvise too much once the big day arrives. When it's time to direct traffic, such as "formals," do so with authority. The rest of the time, go with the flow.

It largely depends on your level of self confidence in this kind of situation. It's no easy task, but a lot of fun if you don't sweat the small stuff!

Good luck!

With the shot of mine from the hill with the B&G, I required that 105mm in order to keep the fireworks prominent. So I can't go too wide Anne.

With Dave's excellent example from atop the Hilton, a wide angle focal length renders the fireworks secondary. A nice back ground. In this case, a nice added touch. Plus there wasn't a lot of room given the angle of the shot. (Good heads-up on that shot!)

Unfortunately, I have not yet surveyed the grounds of the reception (a private residence on tons of acreage), so I'm not certain what kind of distance I'm dealing with. I do know it's in the rolling hills and I'm sure it will be at least a couple hundred yards downfield.

At any rate, these are not a couple hundred dollar's worth of fireworks smuggled from South Bend. More like a couple thousand dollar's worth. Something that's going to last less time than a wedding cake. I need to make certain these are prominent in the photos. I'm figuring I'll be in the 50 to 70mm range (full frame). I'm kind of hoping there will be enough twilight in the sky to go 100 ISO and about 1" shutter speed.

Oh yeah, I'll probably be triggering a remote flash too.

No easy formula!

In a couple months, I'll have a wedding to shoot where there will be fireworks.

No problem! I love photographing fireworks.

<p>

This image is from last week's Independence Day.

<p>

Technical info on this shot:<br>

Canon 5d w/ 24-105 on a tripod (IS off)<br>

400 ISO<br>

Manual -- 1.3" -- f4.0 -- 47mm focal length<br>

Manual focus<br>

<img src="http://www.picturemichigan.com/blog/uploaded_images/IMG_9714-

739639.jpg"><br>

No problem with this type of shot. Set it up while it's daylight, zoom in tight

to a building for manual focus, and just fire at will with the cable release.

<p>

So at Saturday's wedding, we had a nice surprise. The fireworks after the

baseball game about a mile or two away. "Quick, somebody get the B&G!!"

<p>

Technical info on this shot:<br>

Canon 5d w/ 24-105 handheld (IS on)<br>

640 ISO<br>

Manual -- 1/15" -- f4.0 -- 105mm focal length<br>

Auto focus<br>

<img src="http://www.picturemichigan.com/blog/uploaded_images/j&b-246-1310-

795406.jpg"><br>

Since this was a last second "lucky" opportunity, there was no preplanning. A

trained eye will note that the fireworks and B&G are in focus, but the other

couple to the right are NOT in focus. This shot is really two in one. I learned

that the DOF is too limited for both the B&G and Pyros to be in focus at the

same time. The fireworks are about a mile or two down field.

<p>

Our September wedding will have the fireworks much closer and not as high. (And

yes, they will be operated by a licensed pyrotechnician)

<p>

My question:<br>

What is the preferred recipe for this type of shot? Can I see any examples of

your fireworks with B&G (or any people) shots with technical data? Did you end

up "cheating the shot" with post production? I'd prefer to get it right in the

camera.

<p>

DOF seems to be the most challenging aspect here. I suppose I'm expecting to

shoot in the f8 to f16 range. Since the fireworks will be planned for the

September wedding, I'll obviously have a tripod ready. I don't exactly have

tons of opportunity to experiment with this. :)

Wow Marc! Can I take the exact wording of your post and make it an addendum to my contract? ;o)

<p>

I'm thinking, I'm going to bring my own sound equipment to the next wedding of which I'm a guest ... and set up my own dance floor! Maybe an ipod and boss soundwave would be enough.

<p>

<i>Gary Rowlands - Manchester, UK , jul 07, 2006; 09:34 a.m.<br>

" but I know these front-row-seat shots MAY be better than mine." <br>

No ! You saying that you don't get on the front row for the best view in the house ??</i>

<p>

I'm not exactly sure what the question here is, but as I mentioned, I was not allowed anywhere except the back of the sanctuary.<br>

Or was it light-hearted sarcasm? Because if this is the case, we've actually seriously considered placing my wife in the front row "disguised" as a guest.

<p>

This year is far worse for us regarding tougher regulations at churches. I think it's largely because many of the newcomers to the field with their lack of experience are very disrespectful during the ceremony and even after. We shot a wedding the week after a photographer posed the bridal party ON the alter. Needless to say, the efficient told us that if we so much as hiccup during the ceremony, he would interrupt the proceedings and kick us out. He told the families this too.

<p>

And it may not even be the "newbies." We're hearing from venues that B&Gs are asking friends and family members to take care of photography. Sub-newbie!

<p>

We're covering these aspects with the B&G as early as initial consultations.

<p>

It's a very tricky balance between "they're guests" and "boatloads of money." I have had to congenially say the latter out loud to a guest once. In this instance, it was just a lack of understanding. There was no self-induced-sex-act request at the end of this brief one-on-one seminar. Congeniality is always key, but sadly does not always work.

<p>

And on that note...<br>

Phillip? You're an awesome businessman for pulling off that technique! :)

The 5d is very liberating. It's like having a normal 35mm camera again. No crop factor! Plus the 13 MB is nice too.

But there's no reason not to be committed to the 1.6x crop cameras, especially with the new 17-55 2.8 IS lens. That is, if Canon remains committed to the 1.6x crop cameras.

I've printed plenty of 16x24 prints from the 20d and they're still fabulous, even after having the 5d mindset of "bigger is better." :)

During those days, I will tentatively be in God's country (AKA, the Upper Peninsula). August will be insanely busy for us, which also includes shooting two Mackinac Island weddings.

So nope, no name tags for me that week! :) Instead, I'll look forward to your full summery and review (which will hopefully include where you had pizza).

The only times this really bothers me is when a church puts huge restrictions on the pro but guests are free to do as they please.

Flash usage during the ceremony is not as big of a deal. I prefer NOT using the flash at this time anyway. But one recent wedding has a guest with some pretty serious pro gear in the front row using a flash. We were relegated to the back of the sanctuary and no flash.

Now ordinarily I know my images will turn out better than the guests', but I know these front-row-seat shots MAY be better than mine. This guest not only stayed out of our way, but completely avoided us the entire day. (bonus I suppose)

My thoughts (and I keep them to myself during the day), are, "wouldn't you rather enjoy this celebration live in person than constantly watching the events unfold on the back of your camera?"

You want these brochures to increase awareness and generate excitement. Even if you have the lowest prices in town, I don't think a wedding photographer should make that a selling point. It may work for appliances and stereos. But Crazy Sam's low low prices is not as classy as a wedding photographer.

Plus, you may wish to recycle these cards into next year after your prices have increased.

Sorry Kari. I was looking at name tags at first, but thought it was rude when others would merely look at my name tag while walking by -- no eye contact. So I stopped looking at nametags. (I think they were all scoping out my chest anyway ... sigh)

Well, as any good Cub's fan will tell ya..., "there's always next year."

:)

Stacy ... I guess the best places to check around for your immediate neck of the woods is at your local camera store or local lab. They may have the scoop. This is one reason I like dealing with local vendors. I feel like Norm walking into Cheers. ("It's a dog-eat-dog world and I'm wearing milk-bone underwear.") If I hear of anything, I'll certainly share it.

The bummer about that DWF show is that it's in Arlington Hts. I mean, really. Have these people never heard of the Palmer House?

Try some local chapters of national organizations. There was a recent show put on by Michigan PPA earlier this spring that was rather reasonably priced (but I didn't go) in Kalamazoo -- not too far from you.

Also in these parts, there are well kept secrets! A local lab here put on a two day show that I probably would have otherwise not known about. Kari Douma shot me an email about it. I think I was the only non-customer there! :)

If somebody calls you a fat slob and you're skinny as a rail -- no worries. If somebody says you could lose a few pounds, and it's a reality, and then offers advice behind it, it's not as bad as you may think. Just hurts a little.

If this person's unsolicited emails are hitting a nerve, deal with it accordingly. Otherwise, hit delete without even reading them. I cannot understand why somebody would air it all out like that, but at least they're keeping their comments private.

You asked, "or is it just me?" Without knowing exactly what is said in these emails, I'm inclined to ask, could you be misinterpreting it some how?

I guess I'm thinking, you took a post I made to a recent question of yours more harshly than I meant it. I sensed you thought I was recommending you should just close your doors and go out of business. Quite the contrary. I would personally hate to see you mired in something that contributes to the demise of your passion for photography. Could it be something in line with "truth hurts?" And, is this person somebody with a phone number that you could call? Maybe make an attempt to clear the air?

The unsung heroes of the world are those that silently take the high road. I'd personally recommend just hitting the delete key if you truly think these emails are doing more damage to your psyche than good.

Thanks Dave. I think the thread was one of those "how do I get the word out" posts. As I recall, I said essentially the same thing Al said.

It's about networking and building relationships. But it's not that easy. A lot of it is personality driven combined with a good business sense.

Look into your state's PPA and go to a seminar they put on. You can get a lot out of these. Not just lighting and technique, but business and motivation. I was at one a few months ago put on by a local lab. The speakers were studio owners out of a small town in Idaho. It was very inspirational!

Networking and building business relationships takes a certain natural savvy. It's not like you tell yourself in the morning, "I think I'll go out and make a new friend today." Likewise, when it comes to building these business relationships, there needs to be a reason. For instance, drop by on a local vendor with some of your lit collateral, ask them for theirs, and interact. It needs to be mutually beneficial. By helping somebody else, you help yourself.

Okay, enough said about that.

To answer your question about the YP, I think maybe in your market, it actually may be a good idea. The search engines are not that reliable, in that all the directories (wedj, knot, partypop, etc) are at the top. In your market Jeff, your YP will be regionalized, which will include a number of communities within a thirty mile radius just to meet the need. Yet it's still nice and small. Not like a Dayton or Grand Rapids, and especially like a Miami or Chicago. Your market does not command the audience, but at the same time, won't have the overwhelming sense of getting lost in the YP.

Al's idea of joining the local chamber is an excellent one, even in a market such as yours. Maybe especially in a market such as yours. Offer up some images for their publications in exchange for a bigger ad in their directory.

I bought Vol 2 last week and was initially pleased while "playing around" with the actions, but this week, when applying them to real life, a bit disappointed.

It's ultimately a personal thing. Kevin Kubota wrote these actions based on a.) his photographic style and b.) his desired final output. This may not match your style or desired output.

I think you hit the nail on the head regarding his actions though Ariana. The detail is not preserved very well.

I would suggest duplicating an action you really like, then run it, then record more to that action to make it better suit your needs.

Here's two things I'd recommend:

1.) Add some of that detail back. While recording, select the "background" or bottom layer (Kubota renames his backgrounds sometimes). Hit Ctrl + J to duplicate it. Change the blending mode to OVERLAY and opacity to 20%. Now run the High Pass filter (found in filters -> other -> High Pass) at 4.5 pix. Move that layer to the top, change the name to "preserved detail" or whatever, and stop recording.

2.) Add a little of that "grain" or noise that is lost when the action softens only part of an image. Again, run the action and then start recording. Create a new layer by using the little triangle drop-down on your layer palette and select new layer (don't use the little new-layer button at the bottom of the layers palette for this one). In this dialogue, name your layer something like "add grain", select OVERLAY as your blending mode, opacity at 65%, check the fill with neutral box and click OK. Now run the add noise filter at 4.5 / Gaussian / mono. Move to the top and stop recording.

I'm working with 50 MB files, so these are the settings that work for me and my 5d. You may wish to tweak these numbers based on your file sizes.

Just like Kevin's actions, these layers are adjustable to suit your tastes and needs for individual images. And Kevin (I know you're reading this), I hope you'll consider adding these recommendations to your next suite of actions! :)

It's also a two-way street. The B&G respond better to you if they already know you.

But that's not just for those you know personally.

Given the same personality type, we'll do better with a B&G after getting to know them for a few hours between the engagement shoot and consultations, than an out-of-towner we're meeting for the first time.

The big fix could very well be your monitor. Send some prints to the lab and see what happens. Then adjust your monitor accordingly.

Absolutely agreeing with Douma, shoot raw. Digital's downfall is ironically digital's advantage. And that is white balance. A raw file can be manipulated on the computer just like changing out a roll of film.

For those individual shots:

In PS, create an adjustment layer of Saturate/Hue, find the drop-down next to edit and select Red. Adjust the saturation down to -15 and lightness to +15.

Fill the adjustment mask with black (with the mask thumbnail active in the layers pallete, hit the D key then CTRL+BACKSPACE). Then with a soft brush, paint over the areas of skin you wish to correct. Then readjust further if needed.

<i>Why buy one book when you can buy 5 or 6? ;-)</i>

<p>

Well, yeah, then make it the first. :)