gina_marie1

Hi Amy,

 

That's great that you took a class, it really helps you get acquainted with shooting manually. Just take those little darlings with you and practice shooting with the techniques you learned and you'll start becoming more and more comfortable with it.

 

You may want to do that a while before investing in a flash. But one way to help cut costs is buying used equipment from reputable sources (like the classifieds here & on FM boards).

 

Good luck and happy shooting!

Except for the cropping & editing Showit Web would do that easily: http://www.showitfast.com/

 

Again, it does not perform image editing but once you point it to your folder of images, you have a slideshow up & running on your pc in a matter of minutes.

If the 2nd question is WHICH of the 2 preferred (besides the original question asked)...I like the 2nd design but don't like the vertical layout of text.

 

And yes...the first instantly came off as peacock feather.

Have shot engagement photos at Disney Concert Hall with no problems. Can't remember where...but I did see a photo of a bride & groom in their wedding attire there on a photographer's website.

 

I would think as long as it's not super busy and it's just a couple people you can get away with it.

Hi Steve, congrats on your first Wedding (paid or not). The fact is that some couples just plain do not have the money or don't want to spend the money for an experienced photographer. Not saying I agree with their thinking, but someone has to shoot it right?! I think you did a good job capturing the details (the ring, the favors, dress). Also there's just something about the couple w/ the bubbles..it was a nice moment and I'm sure they'll be glad to see they have a nice picture of it.

 

I would also like to see the original portrait of the bride holding the bouquet, it looks like a beautiful photo and in the original color version, perhaps her facial features will stand out more rather than the bouquet..which would make a wonderful portrait. In the future, maybe a pose with her extending the bouquet toward you, while she is blurred w/ shallow DOF might be a better choice for selective coloring. Maybe it's old and overdone already, but as a recent bride myself...another fact is they like to see at least one or 2 of these selective color shots. I would also take care when doing them, to have the color slight, not too bright.

 

I'm not a seasoned pro, but would recommend shooting from some different angles/perspective. Tilt shots can look great when not overdone and not done on every photo..so why not download a copy of Adobe Lightroom (I found the easiest to experiment with cropping) and use their crop feature on some of these shots to either level the horizon or even tilt the angle further and see how it appeals to you. You may like a couple tilted and next time you can try shooting it that way straight from the camera.

 

Good job

We just recently bought the book 'Business Legal forms for Photographers' by Tad Crawford. Looks like lots of good stuff to start with, which you can modify to your liking. Great thread though because there are some things that have now become standard in contracts that don't seem to be mentioned in the book. Such as the late album penalty by Anne, and another mentioned in other threads about being the exclusive professional photographer for an event. I'd like to see some wording suggestions on that.

Why not everyone just be allowed to shoot as they wish without being judged.

 

From a beginner's perspective: I used to read these boards before I purchased my first digital SLR in August. Some posts sounded as if shooting and processing RAW was comparable to rocket science. I shot one day in JPEG and then decided to shoot RAW from then out, I figured it was like learning to drive..start with a stick shift (which was presumed to be more difficult) & driving an automatic would be a breeze. I use ADOBE Lightroom to view the RAW files, make basic adjustments w/ WB and contrast, etc. but also to get the style that I prefer..increased color & saturation, direct process. As a beginner, I did not shoot RAW because I figured "shoot now, fix mistakes later." I shoot it because from what I learned, RAW files =more information and more information= better. The fact that you had more flexibility for mistakes was a bonus. I took a class and from day 1 the instructor said only shoot in manual, no TV, no AV, no P mode and as a beginner, that is how I learned and improved..the fact that it was RAW or JPEG didn't matter because post processing was more for artistic vs. 'fixing' the exposure. Of course, I'm still learning and so when I do make a mistake with an exposure or WB needs to be adjusted..I'm glad it can be 'fixed' in RAW just as I'll be thankful for it when I'm a seasoned pro, because everyone makes mistakes now and then.

Wow, thanks everyone for sharing and the advice! There is really a great group of people on photo.net and I thank you all.

 

Honestly, one of the reasons we decided to rent the 70-200 was because just about *everyone* on another board (that I used to visit before finding photo.net) swears it as a MUST for wedding photographers. I guess I figured I had to see what the fuss was about, but maybe I'm just not that type of photographer at this early stage. I am an artist at heart, and am definitely learning & improving technique but I also love working on artistic shots, experimenting with DOF and composition (like on our latest shoot- seeing what I can capture at Union station with very little light). I could not imagine getting some of the fun shots I got if I had to use that gigantic lens!

 

I guess I should thank my lucky stars for my wonderful little Tammy (got it used on FM) for it seems to clearly be a great copy and is actually what ignited this decision to get another lens..my husband and I both like shooting with it so much we need to find a suitable or even better companion. (and I love the wide-angle, so I guess I'm lucky that it won't mount on my husbands 10D.)

 

I think I may end up renting the 24-105, I disregarded it because it was F4 and the majority seem to advised to stick with at least 2.8 but the range sounds perfect for what we like to shoot.

 

For those who wonderd why not get a prime, it seems our shooting style tends to lean toward zoom lenses (or maybe we're just both lazy..lol). We both seem to find the 50 1.8 we have, though delivering nice images, too limiting with on location shoots, but great in a studio enviroment.

 

If anyone has wedding images shot with a 24-105 F4, please send me a link..I'd love to see samples of what can be achieved with it.

 

Thanks!

Gina

Darcy, thanks for the input on that. Yes, I generally tend to shoot wide open, especially w/ portrait work for the shallow DOF and usually don't have a problem w/ results on my lenses but I guess a day 1/2 rental is definitely not enough time to accurately judge or get used to adjustments need for the L lens. I'll have to go back through the images we shot and see if most of the out of focus shots were at 2.8.

 

I sure noticed one thing, that focusing on the L's sure was silent..which is a good thing right? lol

Yes, that makes sense- noise difference was a result of our test shot done with the widest aperture on telephoto, only..3.5 compared w/ the 2.8 so the noisier image was underexposed one of the non-L lens. I thought perhaps the 'L' might have a little factor on that, but from what I've read, the camera quality is the major factor re: noise?

 

This also probably sounds really silly, but I'm going to a photography workshop for a few days and I'm guessing I may be the only photographer there without an 'L' lens. Oh well :)

 

We definitely need a new lens regardless, as we both like to shoot the 28-75 range and we have a couple of weddings we're assisting in the spring. Guess I'm just not sure if it should be an 'L' now.

Hello, a bit of a follow up to an earlier post about needing an extra lens to

share between myself & husband.

 

After reading the helpful replies to my previous post, we decided it may be

time to take the leap and make an investment in at least one 'L' quality lens.

(FYI, our current coverage: 30D, 10D, EF 50 1.8, EF-S 10-22, Tamron 28-75 2.8

EF 70-210 3.5-4.5)

To help our decision, we rented a 24-70L 2.8 and 70-200L 2.8 (non-IS). Of

course right off the bat we could see a huge physical difference with the

solid, larger 'L' lenses.

 

24-70: We truly could not tell a difference in the image quality between the

Canon & the Tamron. And in some images, the Tamron actually had better

contrast and was sharper.

 

70-200 2.8: The obvious improvement here was the ability to open up to

constant 2.8. Didn't notice a big difference in color & or sharpness, though

there was less noise.

 

Also we experienced a higher percentage of missed, blurry shots with the 'L'

lens, perhaps due to unfamiliarity with this grade of equipment?

 

My guestions:

1)Is there a technique to using these Lenses? For instance, since they are

heavier, maybe the higher percentage of out-of-focus shots was due to getting

used to heavier equipment? Or, perhaps we weren't used to such silent

focusing, though I do make a habit of being sure my focus point hits in the

viewfinder.

 

2)Is the main difference between the 'L' lens and say..a good copy of the

Tamron 28-75 a stronger build and weather proof?

 

3)Might the rentals have been less quality due to being used more often than

non-rental lens?

 

3)Is there anyone else who has experienced similar results?

 

To be clear, we were happy with our final results..we just thought they would

be better than images with our other lenses and it seems our Tamron 28-75 and

Canon 10-22 get just as good images in regards to sharpness and color. I'm

sorry if any of this post is redundant, it's just that we are taking our entry

into this business very seriously and need to buy another lens this month. We

thought the best investment would be an 'L' lens after reading all the raves

and after hearing stories of people blasting wedding photographers who don't

use 'L' lenses..but now with a lot of money on the line for a new business,

I'm more confused than ever after our rental experience.

 

Answers to questions above and any experiences to share are greatly

appreciated.

-Gina

Thank you Anne & Katy for the suggestions. I decided for now, to price similar to a special we are offering for engagement/family shoots, since it would be about the same time spent on coverage (w/ less processing time). It's going to be a home which should work well for bounce flash, but I'll bring my 50 1.8 to try some shots without too.

 

Also decided to get a book recommended in previous posts regarding contracts & forms for photogs, since I haven't really nailed down my contracts yet anyway.

Hi, someone has inquired on photography services for a bridal shower. Is this

common? We have decided on an early/promo pricing structure as we are building

our business and portfolio but didn't configure services like this and I'm

curious what others do. Would you charge similar to an engagement or portrait

session? By the hour? or something else??

 

What type of contract or agreement if any do you use for a party like this?

 

And something else I hadn't thought about...if it will be indoors I am still

learning flash techniques, guess I'll have to take that into consideration.

 

Thanks for your advice,

Gina

Looks like I found the answer at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF-S_lens_mount

 

10D is only compatible w/ EF. It's okay, not sure we want a variable since we prefer 2.8...if anything would like the ability of F4 constant.

Hi David, I'm not sure about that...the 10-22 EF-S will not mount onto our 10D, we also read this on compatibility charts before purchasing but got it anyway for the 30D.

 

Is it just the wide angle EF-S that does not work on 10D? Can anyone that owns 17-85 EF-S w/ IS confirm whether they have mounted it on a 10D? If so it may be an option for us.

 

Thanks,

Gina

Yes, he does use the 10D while I shoot with a 30D. We don't expect to upgrade his camera anytime soon..it was a great used find for us and perfect for him since I'm the 'techy' between the two of us and usually use the more complicated gear.

 

We would like something to swap lens so neither of us are restricted, maybe should have mentioned that before but lots of great suggestions here.

 

Conrad, have you been able to compare the EFS 17-85 with the Tamron? It's too bad EF-S won't mount on my husband's 10D because it would give him the ability to go wider since he can't use the 10-22 unless we swap cameras.

 

I guess these compatibilities and INcompatibilities are all a carefully thoughout conspiracy to get us to fork out more $$ :)

Thank you, clearly showing the best work is a common practice and I will now start and STAY with that practice. This is actually from a shoot I offered to do for FREE in exchange for usage in my online portfolio. Since the couple couldn't afford engagements till then it was a win/win situation. I gave 35 final processed images on cd (nicely packaged in a custom photo label and web slideshow), but then she asked to see all the photos.

 

Thank you for your advice. The couple was nice and fun to work with and I was tempted to send a couple of improperly lit, blurry photos but I'll let my words rather than images explain why they only see their final, processed images.

Thank you all for so many great suggestions. I'll research more on some of these lenses. Really like the option to open up to 2.8 so 24 or 28-70 sound very appealing, although I'm replicating our focal length of the Tamron and with our budget now, seems hard to justify unless the color and sharpness are leaps and bounds above the Tammy?

 

The reach of the 24-105 f4 L sounds appealing, and with IS, I guess is a help in low light with still subject. However so pricey and losing a stop compared w/ the 24-70. I'll search previous threads on these 2 as I'm sure they have been compared to in past posts. Also will look into renting a 24-105 at my local Samys store.

 

Question:

1)Ratings on FM for Tamron 24-135 f/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical (IF) Macro quite high, does anyone have experience with this lens?

 

James, the 17-85 might be an option except that now my Husband uses a 10D and he wouldn't be able to use that lens (I'm assuming since he can't use the 10-22 EF-S?) BTW.. you mentioned your new xmas present, here is a site with lots of wide-angle wedding photos http://www.revephotography.com/ and another photographer who used to work with them, http://www.shawnstarr.com also has many photos with it. He was our wedding photographer as a matter of fact and from a Brides perspective, when used properly those wide-angle shots are jaw dropping!

 

Thanks again all, look forward to any more comments.

Well another shoot today and we seem to find more and more we mainly use our

Canon 10-22 and the Tamron 28-75 2.8. The others, 70-210 3.5-4.5 and 50 1.8

just don't seem to give us the saturation & color and are far too restricting

for our style of shooting. We are still new and have yet to shoot our first

solo wedding gig, but we figure the 70-210 will still come in handy for

ceremonies from afar & candids.

 

We both love the Tamron 28-75 so we need another lens w/ similar quality &

focal length, but I'd like to get something that might add a bit more reach

for more options instead of getting another of the same lens. Any suggestions

or similar experiences? Budget is also a factor, yet we may consider investing

in an 'L' if that is the best option.

 

Thanks for any advice,

Gina

We absolutely love the 10-22 wide angle, the color it delivers is beautiful and it's extreme is especially great for capturing enviromental/location portraits. Unfortunately as mentioned it won't be compatible with a 5D if you plan to upgrade soon. We love that lens so much that if we ever upgrade (not anytime soon) we'll probably just hold on to our 30D for that lens alone.

Not sure if that question was worded the best way, but recently a client asked

to see "ALL" the images from an engagement shoot. I did a search and came up

with something slightly related but looking for some more advice, since I'm

sure this won't be the last time a client asks for this.

 

With the digital age and high capacity cards, we can experiment and try things

out, take more images than usual while testing locations on a shoot..but

unfortunately they don't always work. Of course we want our clients to have

the very best images from a shoot, so what do you say when a client asks to

see an image "by that neat wall or tree" she remembers you taking, yet the

image didn't hold up to the higher quality of the other photos you've given

her?

 

Suggestions appreciated,

Gina

Thank you all for the further comments.

 

Steve, next time I will definitely keep more in mind of the horizon lines more. It's really neat how with each shoot we learn from the little mistakes before and are conscious of it the next time. It's definitely a challenge with these types of shoots, because sometimes you have just a split second to 'capture the moment' and remembering to avoid those mistakes are what makes an awesome wedding photographer from an 'okay' one.

 

Could have easily wiped out the surfers in photoshop (btw..that didn't start out to be a pun..lol), but it's so interesting how everyone has differing tastes. My photography instructor advises it's nice to include the little details because each one adds to the context and helps tell the story. Then again her career has been in photojournalism.

 

This forum is really a great help, love getting all the different opinions and insights & critiques.

Hi Melissa,

 

Thanks! Definitely keep us in mind, and also keep us in mind if you ever need a 2nd shooter :) Actually I learned photoshop from my art/graphic design days so post processing came a bit naturally. But now I do most of it in Lightroom and only occassionaly soft focus actions in Photoshop.

Hi, newbie as well so I can only give you a suggestion of what I would do in this scenario...

Would definitely chalk up the cost to get them recovered. Whether they paid $500 or $5,000 those moments cannot be recovered. I would have been mortified if our wedding images from this past summer were 'lost'. Though it is a huge cost out of your pocket, as mentioned above, the harm to your reputation will cost much more.

 

Good luck and this was a definitely a 'heads up' for us. I just copied our shoots from the last two weeks to DVDs.

Hello everyone, just wanted to share some images from our latest e-shoot, they

are a bit of a turning point for us because we've been going on several

portrait/engagement shoots to add to the portfolio and with each one there are

better exposures, less post processing work and with these, we felt like we

have really started to find ourselves a bit with our direction & style. (Hope

that makes sense!?) The couple absolutely loved them as well. Here is a shot

taken while they treated us to a karaoke duet :) Also, there are some in our

<a href="http://www.pixoflife.com/gallery1/index.html">engagement gallery</a>

(starting with the bottom thumbnail in 1st section).<p>

 

<img src="http://www.pixoflife.com/gallery1/images/monica4.jpg"><br>

Even though we're really happy with these photos, there may be more

experienced photographers with suggestions for improvement, so feel free

to share.<p>

 

Now for a couple of questions, our favorite lenses by far are the canon 10-22

wide angle and the Tamron 28-75. Those two need little adjustments in post

processing. We also have the budget popular 50 1.8, but that length is two

restricting for us. We can't quite afford 'L' lens yet, but we are shooting

with a friend in a couple of weddings in February and are thinking of

replacing our 70-210 3.5-4.5 with something better.<p>

 

How is the 50-150 f2.8? Would the Canon 70-200 f4 be a waste of money since we

might ultimately need the 2.8?<p>

 

BTW...as several of you suggested, we've removed the strands of color from the

site and resized the layout and it definitely helps emphasize the photos more,

so thank you for the suggestion!<p>

 

Thanks for your time and advice,

Gina