William Michael

<blockquote> <p>"high school football and basketball games"</p> </blockquote> <p>For these shooting scenarios, I would be firstly looking at the comparisons and contrasts of the <strong>quality of the images from the two cameras at High ISO</strong> (1600; 3200 and 6400).</p> <p>Secondly the <strong>IQ of the cropped image vs. the (non-cropped) reach gain</strong> of the APS-H vs. APS-C format.</p> <p>I expect the 7D would have the edge in the high ISO stakes - but I don’t know. And I think that the 7D would fare better than a cropped image from the 1DMkIII – but again I don’t know.<br /> <br /> Quality of Build and Frame Rate in continuous shooting mode, would both be VERY secondary considerations to those features I mentioned above. Battery Charging Time I would not consider – I’d just buy more batteries. Either camera can make very good Family Photos</p> <p>So, simply intuitively, between the two I would opt for the 7D.</p> <p>But it is not clear to me what is the exact meaning of: <em>“I have been offered a choice between two digital cameras.”</em><br /> Does that mean <strong>without paying anything</strong> or if there a cost involved? Cost would be a factor that I would consider; also <strong>how old and how much wear/usage/damage</strong> each had sustained would have an impact upon my choice; as would <strong>what lenses, if any come with the cameras?</strong></p> <p>WW</p>

<p>I changed the Colour Balance between yellow and blue, across the range of image, but more so in the highlights; which results in a marked contrast shift whilst still keeping the overall, tonal range.<br> Doubt that I would do much more as I liked it basically as it was.</p> <p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17876517-md.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p>WW</p>

<p>Sorry I was late.<br> I used an early version of Photoshop:<br> 1. Four passes: “Shadow Highlight” increase shadows 2% at Tonal Range 100% and increase Mid Tone Contrast +18<br> 2. Sharpened<br> 3. Slight Increase Saturation Red and Green // Slight Reduction Yellow Saturation<br> 4. Increase Contrast +2<br> 5. Burnt Shed<br> 6. Crop to Square</p> <p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17876515-md.jpg" alt="" width="680" height="680" /><br /> <br> WW</p>

<blockquote> <p>Also, for this camera, is there a lens that you could suggest for close up pictures of models, and material for clothes.</p> </blockquote> <p>1. What lenses do you have?<br> 2. When you write “models” - do you mean pictures of people modelling clothes or samll toy-like models?<br> 3. And when you write "close-up pictures" - do you mean close up pictures ONLY of material swatches - i.e. NOT close up pictures of toy models or other similar small objects?</p> <p>WW </p> <p> </p>

<blockquote> <p>Is it good for taking pictures of people?</p> </blockquote> <p>The only occasions I've found a CPL helpful for 'people photos' is when the people are in or near the water / seaside and there are strong reflections, usually from the water, which would otherwise be distracting. </p> <p>*</p> <p>In addition to the points made by others above, be careful using a CPL with wide angle lenses, especially if there is a large expanse of sky or land or sea in the shot, as you can get a banding effect whereby there will be patches (of the sky for example) where the filter has had an effect to a differing degree across the scene. For 'landscape' type photos I wouldn't usually use a CPL on a lens wider than 35mm (on a FF camera), that is a 20mm lens on APS-C Camera - and even with a 35~50 mm lenses I am very careful. I tend to use my CPL on lenses about 70mm and longer.</p> <p><a href="/photodb/folder?folder_id=1072533">I don’t have an example of that banding – but this folder might be of use to you. </a><br> Regarding the two picture of the swimmers in that folder: Both pictures are taken at the same pool and I was shooting into the sunlight coming through the glass opposite me. Notice the very bright shimmer/glare from the water in the top photo where a CPL was NOT used.<br> However in the bottom picture a CPL was used and we can clearly see the arm and hand of the swimmer under the water and there is minimal shimmer and glare off the water. </p> <p>WW</p>

<blockquote> <p>"I'm based in the UK . . .”</p> </blockquote> <p>The spelling of "<em>honour</em>" was the hint to that. My guess is that, " <em>'work for hire' </em>", being written within the apostrophes, was purposeful.</p> <p>*</p> <blockquote> <p>"This is the first (and last) time I have used a student for photos. I have learnt a valuable lesson . . . it is best that I just move on."</p> </blockquote> <p>I think that's a good idea - to move on.<br /> However I wouldn't close all doors based upon one experience. For example, you might be simply more experienced, worldlier than they: and you just expected for this simple matter that an 'handshake' deal would be OK - maybe because you've done so before, with other 'experienced' people.<br /> Then if there is the opportunity to work with 'a Student' again, maybe it just requires a tad of instruction from you to advise them of the value of a (simple) written contract - perhaps that instruction would be more valuable to them, than you building them a website.</p> <p>WW</p> <p>I am glad that your world is not ending . . .</p>

<p>I think that you are correct in expecting both parties should honour what was agreed.</p> <p>How you get what you expect is rightly yours from that agreement is another matter and I think will depend upon two main elements:</p> <p>> Where you live (i.e. what are the local mechanisms / laws)<br> > How much effort you need to apply to get what you want vs. walking away and starting over with someone who acts more professionally, and frankly, you entering into that next business arrangement with a better professional approach (i.e. A contract definitely and, perhaps not clouding the issue with a quid pro quo, but just limit the deal to money transacting for specified outcomes within a specified time frame) <br> <br> What I do not understand is how much leverage does the Photographer have by holding the images from you and or displaying them publically? I do not mean the nuisance value of you not having the results of the shoot - what I mean is this equipment a secret design or something similar, that if it gets out will mean the end of your world as you know it?</p> <p>As for the other questions that you ask, the answers to those are kind of irrelevant to you moving forward, until you know (and you might already know?) what mechanisms that you have to enforce getting what you want - and also how much time effort and money pursuing same will cost you.</p> <p>WW </p>

<blockquote> <p>“I was going to suggest more custom sessions <em>[for the Couple’s Engagement Shoot]</em> telling broad story with 2-3 package options where they can choose several locations and outfits. Also this is great for newly engaged couples who did not choose their wedding photographer yet, and wanted photos for save the date cards, guest albums...etc”</p> </blockquote> <p>I agree with Marc and Michael. In the short term, I think that you need to come up with a different angle to sell at the Bridal Show.</p> <p>But in the longer term, perhaps you might need to rethink the whole of your Branding Strategy. Perhaps aligning yourself with the generic Wedding Market is not the best scaffold around which to build your Branding. Perhaps it would be better to come from the direction of you being a Portrait Photographer who offers a boutique service – and allow the outline of that Boutique Portraiture Service to be your Brand’s Fundamental Strategy to attract newly Engaged Couples and of course others, also.</p> <p>WW</p>

Member "l_name" has asked me to comment on this thread that the matter which is detailed above has been resolved. WW

<blockquote> <p>"Lex forgot to mention champagne."</p> </blockquote> <p>And also dogs licking the ends of lenses. And kids shoving ice-cream in the end of the lens. (That happened to the second camera which was slung over my shoulder at the time: yes the dog cleaned up the ice-cream.)</p> <p>***</p> <p>To the original question – No. As already mentioned, there’s usually no advantage on stacking a UV and a CPL - except to protect the CPL - which BTW I do not do and I do often work at the sea-side or at a swimming pool or on a boat.<br /> Re salt spray on filters (I use a filter when shooting near the salt water): I find a little bit of water to reduce the salt and then a wash is quite OK for a good filter clean: so long as one doesn't rub the dry salt to scratch the filter, then is all OK.</p> <p>***<br> <br /> Sorry for being a bit off topic: but the kid and the dog and the ice-cream were quite funny at the time that it all happened.</p> <p>WW</p>

<blockquote> <p>"But this has red flags all over it to me."</p> </blockquote> <p>Certainly has that potential. I agree. I'd have my telephone conversation interrogative <em>"must says"</em> well and truly organized, before I rang him to allow enough flag poles to run as many red flags up as he wanted to fly.<br> WW<br> (Mars Bars – an internationally understood currency)</p> <p> </p>

<p>As per the comment I made on this <a href="/business-photography-forum/00crPq">other recent business thread</a> - I'd simply telephone the guy.<br> What can be sorted in a five minute phone conversation may take days of email / website written correspondence.<br> He might be vague because he cannot succinctly express his ideas in writing; he might just be vague altogether; he might be floating an idea for which he has zero authority at the moment; whatever the case I'd bet a Mars bars that I could make reasonable fist of what was going on after a brief telephone conversation with him.</p> <p>I think that businesses generally have fallen into the trap of believing that written "electronic communication" is superior in every fashion. It is my belief that it simply isn't. Having a brief chat can resolve an innumerable amount of misunderstandings, even before there is the opportunity to be misunderstood.</p> <p>It's possible that you might have already spoken on the 'phone to this man, you don’t define your communication mechanisms: if you have and you are still unsure of what his brief and outcomes are about, then, it would seem he won't be much more articulate and definitive at a meeting in person. In which case a face to face “planning meeting” <strong>charged at your time</strong> (as Matt suggests) would also be my advice <strong>for the next step</strong>, you take.</p> <p>WW</p>

<p> </p> <blockquote> <p><strong>Now the advise that i wanna get is do i just get the 70-200 f2.8 vc and wait for a year or two and just honed my skills and then go full frame </strong>maybe at that time there would be a canon 6d mk2 or a cheaper 5d mk3, or do i sell my 70d and get the 6d now and wait a year or two for the tamron 70-200 f2.8 vc or the canon equivalent maybe at that time it will be a little cheaper and will it makes a tons of difference if i switch from 70d to 6d ?</p> </blockquote> <p> The advice I will give you is that you NEED a logical reason “to go full frame”. <br> Honing your skill is not a logical reason to “go full frame”<br> Waiting for the 6D or other models to be cheaper are not logical reasons to “go full frame”<br> <br> IF you are shooting soccer – and you want to get better at it, and you want very shallow DoF - then it would be less expensive; less problematic more reach and you would have nearly as shallow DoF if you kept your 70D bought a 70 to 200 (I’d choose the Canon EF 70 to 200F/2.8 L IS MkII USM) and a x1.4 or x2.0 MkIII EF Extender to use with it - rather than buying an EOS 6D (or similar) and spending several thousands of dollars buying a 500mm or 600mm lens to achieve similar (but not the same) results.<br> <br> WW </p>

<p>Just a few points.<br /> <br /> Sorry in advance if this appears to be a blunt introduction to a new member. <br /> <br /> I am having a blunt sort of day and anyway you’ve surely had blunt comments before, I expect, and you should by now have the skill and experience to determine ‘blunt and intended to be useful’ from ‘simply blunt for the sake of being blunt and silly’.<br /> <br /> *<br /> <br /> I think that there is a great deal of good advice above, re read it twice, thrice . . . one always misses good points or other angles on the first and second pass. <br /> <br /> *<br /> <br /> I know you’ve bought your gear. Considering your medical history, rethink it. Two small format cameras perhaps mirror-less bodies and two main working lighter weight lenses might be a better choice.<br /> <br /> *<br /> <br /> Plan the gigs that you go after and the down-time that you spend with a camera to suit your purposes – which leads to <strong>Define your purposes</strong>. I don’t think you have done that yet. What I mean is you need to write out your purposes. <br /> <br /> As for one example: WP’s comment is sage – the comment about learning everything yourself is inefficient. That might define one of your purposes: “<strong>to learn from the experienced ones</strong>” – so you need to set about creating a LIST of activities that address that purpose. That list is NOT just ONE item being “I’ll be a second shooter”. <br /> <br /> Another purpose might be to get an idea of your endurance and your skill level and your ability to work directly and MORE intimately, one on one with your Subjects. A Film Set has a lot of people. I have worked on Film Sets. A Wedding or a Portrait Shoot has very few people. Basically it is just ‘you’ and ‘a few of them’ - OR - ‘you’ and ‘him’ or ‘her’. <br /> <br /> So a list to address those purposes will NOT just be the one item: “I’ll shoot a few portrait sittings”. <br /> <br /> *<br /> <br /> (now the blunt bit) If you mean to fast-track this idea and if you really mean business, then you need to be <em><strong>creative</strong></em> and also <strong><em>aggressive</em></strong> in setting the <strong><em>multiple tasks</em></strong> to address your purposes. <br /> <br /> An idea for your consideration (not the first time mentioned and this or similar always gets a laugh)<br /> <br /> <em> “I’ll go for a long walk in a populated area with two cameras and I will ask everyone I meet if I may make a Casual Portrait of them and I will engage those people and I will create a rapport with each of them and I will not be satisfied unless I get at least one good photo of everyone I engage and I will further contract to send each of them a beautiful Post produced copy of that Portrait within 24hrs”. </em><br /> <br /> If you make and take on several exercises like the above: then you will have worked on: <br /> your physical endurance; <br /> your mental endurance; <br /> your people management skills; <br /> your candid portraiture skills; <br /> your post production skills; <br /> your ability to work under the pressure of time; <br /> your marketing skills <br /> – and you will have learned a few more things about yourself and your skills too.<br> And most importantly - you will have done no harm.<br /> <br /> Now for the blunter bit: I have thrown similar exercises out there to Students during classes – a lot laugh. Not many take up the challenge; of those that do, not many choose to do it twice.<br /> <br /> How much gas do you have in your tank and how much wind in your parachute?<br /> Are you really ready to jump off that cliff - or not?<br /> <br /> WW</p>

<blockquote> <p>"Note your camera came packaged as a kit with a zoom lens 18mm thru 55mm."</p> </blockquote> <p>Did it? The OP might have bought a body only. The OP does not indicate that they have the kit lens.</p> <p>WW</p>

<blockquote> <p>I can be a bit of a control freak about my work.</p> </blockquote> <p>People Management Skills (or sometimes people avoidance skills) are usually an integral element to a successful wedding photography business.</p> <p>WW </p>

<blockquote> <p>What would you do? (I have not tried phone calls as I figure they will not take my calls if they are not answering my emails. Also, to be honest, I would find it humiliating!)</p> </blockquote> <p>To be blunt: I would have tried phone calls before extensive emails because if I cannot get face to face to read body language, then for me the next best is to hear the nuance of voice to best understand the exact meaning and the content of a conversation.</p> <p>To be blunter, one cannot afford the luxury of the emotion of “humiliation”: it is business, not romance.</p> <p>On the face of it, I agree that I probably would have shoot the outside of the building had I already been on site or in the near vicinity anyway.</p> <p>Bottom line: I think you need to telephone the decision maker, put pressure on whomever answers the phone to get through (unlikely to be the decision maker who answers phone) and nail down a day of commitment for payment. If the payment does not come through on that day or if you cannot get a commitment then I would walk.</p> <p>From what I understand of the situation I might have walked earlier.</p> <p>WW<br> </p>

<p>The 18 to 55 zoom lens which is sold as a 'kit lens' with that camera would serve well for your purposes and would not be expensive.</p> <p>WW</p>

<blockquote> <p>Curious......<strong>you said this would take 1 hour?</strong> How do you figure?</p> </blockquote> <p>No.<br /> It was not my meaning to suggest that you will do the headshots in one hour.<br /> <strong>Sorry, I was NOT clear enough conveying my message.</strong> I was using hyperbole. The key phrase in that paragraph is <strong><em>“. . which won't happen.”</em></strong></p> <p>*</p> <blockquote> <p><strong>How much time realistically would you allow for each person? </strong>I plan to be set up and ready to go and whiz through them, but <strong>I was still counting on allowing 3-4 hours</strong>......<strong>shooting each subject 3-5 minutes, including set-up time and moving people in and out.</strong> Is this realistic? Or too much time? Since I've never shot anything like this before, maybe I have an unrealistic expectation.</p> </blockquote> <p>I agree with that overview. <br /> Realistically, I think that your three minutes to five minutes for each person <strong>is a good beginning point without more information</strong> – BUT – I think that your mathematics are in error . . .<br /> 3 minutes per times 75 equals: 3hours 45 minutes total (without stopping)<br /> 5 minutes per times 75 equals: 6 hours 15 minutes (without stopping)<br /> So, <em>‘<strong>allowing 3-4 hours’ </strong></em><strong>is an underestimate of the total time</strong>.</p> <p>***</p> <p>I think that the key factors toward how long it will actually take <strong>to make a good outcome</strong> are:</p> <ul> <li> <p>How efficient is the <strong>herding and delivery</strong> of the Subjects - this might be your task, it might be the organization’s task – it might be a bit of both your and the organization’s tasks and it also depends on the compliance and discipline of the Subjects. If it is your task or even partly your task to herd the Subjects then you NEED an assistant to do that. I have no doubt about this point.</p> </li> <li> <p>How efficient you are at <strong>repeatedly managing the prep for</strong> and then <strong>making</strong> 75 headshots – this point is NOT only about your photographic ability, in fact it is less about your photography and more about your people management and interpersonal communication skills as you need to be as fresh as a rose when you greet Subject #50 as you were when you enthusiastically met Subject #1</p> </li> </ul> <p>On the first point, as it seems that you have good communication going with the organization, then HOW the Subjects are to be organized and who is responsible, can be nailed down beforehand. My experience is that one does need a separate person who does that job AND who is efficient with exercising the skills required for the job of efficiently managing large groups of people, for examples: an experienced school teacher; a person in authority at the organization; a traffic cop; a drill sergeant . . . etc. <br /> Also on the first point it depends on what type of organization it is and how enthusiastic or ‘in need’ are each of the Subjects individually or collectively, for example if it is a School Graduation for the year book each kid has a vested interest to look good in the year book; or if the shoot goes towards advancement and/or advertising of a professional group – (for example an Orchestra going on tour), then each Subject has a vested interest in the outcome because it means money in their pocket. I have found on the whole most people when in ‘the group’ (even school kids if the school acts professionally ), act reasonably professionally if there is a vested outcome for themselves and/or the group.<br /> Also, perhaps the biggest factor is: whether or not there will be alcohol served to the Subjects.<br /> <br /> *<br /><br /> <br /> On the second point, you can prepare: I think that one first step of prep is finding out why the organization was unhappy with the previous Photographer. <br /> Another bit of advice is do not endeavour to shoot for a long period without a break. I do NOT mean take a 5 minute smoko each hour, but I do mean take about 20 seconds REGULARLY to get your head clearly in the correct mental state to manage the next person <strong>who has been waiting in line. </strong><br /> That 20 seconds can be veiled with some physical action like adjusting the flash or bending over your camera bag and fiddling – just enough time to close your eyes and re-group one’s grey matter – anyway that’s what I do.<br /> Also, over an extended time one does need to attend to toilet matters, well I do, because I drink a lot of water when working. Water is very important, but will not outline my views on the links between physical and mental efficiencies and hydration levels . . . anyway you probably need to have a plan for how to manage a toilet stop, or two, or three. <br /> <br /> *<br /> <br /><br /> There are quite a few older threads (especially in the Wedding and Social Events Forum) that you might want to read for you to get a general overview of this type of work. A couple of Key Phrases to use for a searching would be: “Photo Booths”; “On Site Printing”<br /> Here is a recent one: <a href="/wedding-photography-forum/00chKv">http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00chKv</a> <br /> <br /> Good luck.<br /> <br /> WW</p>

<p>First question: Does it matter? <strong>What is the brief about initial supply?</strong><br> That is to say – is the basic contractual arrangement (or your intention) that the headshot will be supplied NOT in 3:2 aspect ratio file or for example are you being asked to supply 10x8 prints? If you are contracted to supply NOT 3:2 initially then you need to shoot wide anyway.<br> <br> Second question: If you intend to supply 3:2 aspect ratio initially, <strong>what’s the likelihood of requests later?</strong><br> IF there was the big chance of DEFINITELY getting other orders after the shoot, I would shoot loose allowing for ALL typical sizes, including square.<br> But I would rather have these details of the expected outcomes racked, packed and stacked, BEFORE shooting 75 headshots: because that’s about 1 hour solid shooting and that is only if all the Subjects are herded and compliant and still allowing ONLY 20 seconds per shot each shot (and allowing one extra for safety). . . which won't happen.<br> So after managing, arranging and shooting the “the group shot of 75 people” and then the 75 individual headshots . . . <em>I wouldn’t really want to be sitting down and cropping each file </em><em>just because</em><strong><em> three </em></strong><em>people</em><strong><em> might</em></strong><em>ask for a different aspect ratio</em><em> print.</em></p> <p>Third consideration, you could shoot them all “a little bit” loose just enough to allow, for example a 7x5 and 10x8 orders, later on; but so they still all look OK at the native 3:2 aspect ratio – maybe that’s too fiddly, it depends on the site set-up – and that usually <strong>depends on the background and if you have control of it.</strong><br> <strong> </strong><br> <strong>*<br /></strong></p> <p>What do I do for headshots? Is –<br> a) have total control over the background<br> b) shoot a bit loose to allow for all aspect ratios including square</p> <p>but I hasten to add that <strong>I haven’t shot 75 headshots on the hop</strong>: the most at one session is about a dozen probably fewer, and for a Law Firm etc, to hang as prints on a wall – but the Subjects might have wanted another print for home in a smaller size etc . . .</p> <p>What you are describing is closer to an <strong>“en masse Photo Booth shoot at an event” </strong>– and I have shot those as ‘ready to print in a 3:2 aspect ratio’ – and no cropping in post production.</p> <p>WW </p>

<p>Thank you for the detail. That all makes sense to me.<br> When I had a play with this lens, I was using a tripod and a pair of rails (the photo of the rails that I linked to), but I was shooting inanimate objects and I had a flash rigged up in the style of a mini light box.<br> I have read of people using this hand held technique for snapping bugs, etc, in the field with this lens, but this was the first opportunity I have had to ask some detailed questions of someone who has used this technique, thanks again.<br> WW</p> <p> </p>

<blockquote> <p>It can be hard to hold the camera at the right distance from the subject to get well-focused shots but <strong>I find that if I take enough shots there are nearly always some sharp ones</strong>. . . Here is an example of a shot with the MP-E 65mm,<strong> lit with the MT-24EX,</strong> handheld at approximately 2x.</p> </blockquote> <p>Nice shot. Thanks for sharing.<br> Questions:<br> In this shooting scenario, do you typically shoot single shot mode or continuous mode?<br> If you use continuous mode, how does the MT24EX cycle time factor into that equation?<br> Thank you.</p> <p>WW</p>

<blockquote> <p><strong>"-and-</strong> that further discussion on the issue will not be entertained."</p> </blockquote> <p>+1</p>

<blockquote> <p>It's probably also worth mentioning that the FOB had his assistant taking pictures throughout the day as well… And <strong>all of the requests for all my images are coming through this assistant, not directly from the father. </strong></p> </blockquote> <p><strong> </strong><br> Yes, all those points are worth mentioning.<br> Especially the bolded section, because that is different to what was first stated.</p> <p>Considering both the additional and also the corrected information, I think that it is probably best to just fulfil the terms of your contract in the most professional manner possible.</p> <p>WW</p>

<p>I think that there will NOT be much of a problem if we just get the idea going and change the hosting site or other minor matters as the weeks of the trial continues.<br> I think that there is enough of a scaffold to start the thing going and, on the other hand we could sit around for weeks discussing how to get it right "in theory". It is not as if there will be any great failure if it is a bit rocky for the first few attempts.<br> That’s not a nasty comment. I am like that generally with any idea: I want to get a rough but well thought out scaffold and test it sooner, rather than later. I think that we are at that stage now.</p> <p>WW</p>