daniellane

This EXACT problem with the EXACT same lens happened to me. With my brand new D300.

 

The fix for me was simply to snap a photo, out of focus or not. It has worked perfectly after that first shot.

Under NO circumstances would I alter my payment clause, nor is there any reason to speak with the client's lawyer about that. Actually, at the point the clients started referring their lawyer to me, I'd most likely be inclined to sever the relationship with the client.

 

Follow the advice in Michael Port's book "Book Yourself Solid," to wit: "Choose your ideal clients so you work only with people who inspire and energize you." People who say, "talk to my lawyer" don't inspire me.

 

I do think that some revision of the "schedule conflict clause" is in order.

My boss, and a good friend had the opportunity to take an "Intro Flight" in an

F-16. (I'd kill to be able to do that.)

 

At any rate, he asked that I capture the event. I've never shot such a thing

and I had no idea what was supposed to happen. I'm a firm believer that putting

yourself in challenging circumstances helps train you for weddings. So here are

a couple of the series shots.

 

Comments always welcome.

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/slideshow?folder_id=777542

You might have a look at You Select It.

 

http://www.youselectit.com/home.php

I would add that a first timer should not have a wedding as their first event photography session. Shoot your company awards ceremony, a retirement party, anything with a schedule.

 

Assuming the appropriate knowledge of your equipment and basic skills, ORGANIZATION is one of the great beasts of wedding photographers. You should have a plan, and a basic outline of when you are going to shoot what. A 6 hour wedding & reception passes very, very quickly. Without organization, your head will be spinning with no devil to blame for it.

Of course, the 17-55 will work quite well on the D3's DX mode. So it's not like the lens is suddenly obsolete.

I personally use the Flip-It. But my question to you is, since the Demb product folds neatly out of the way, why not keep it on for the time when there is nothing to bounce off of? I promise, this WILL happen.

 

That feature is one of the main reasons I bought the thing.

I would suggest Pudding Creek. I think it's just after Ft. Bragg There's a very nice section of beach there.

<br><br>

<a href="http://www.daniellanephotography.com/cali"><u>Photos 2-7 of this set</u></a> were taken there. Even if you shoot the bridal there, it's worth a day trip.

Steve Corbett wrote:

 

"or even bouncing the flash off a 45 degree card like the Demb Flip-it gives an unnatural "blasted" look, creating harsh reflections off shiny skin, producing harsh shadows behind, and does nothing to use the reflective surfaces of a room to soften the light. Bouncing off a ceiling is better, but produces shadows in eye sockets."

 

This is ENTIRELY contrary to my experience with the Demb Flip-it. If you are using the Flip-it and getting black eye sockets, then I think that it is a proper usage issue.

 

That said. My bracket stays at home, on its dusty shelf.

The D50 is compatible with Nikon CLS, but only with an SU-800 or an SB-800 on board. The D50 does not have the "Commander" flash mode that the D70/200/300 has.

 

As to your problem - with the flash set to TTL, what happens when you shoot straight into a mirror.

I would suggest that you give the Demb Flip-It a look.

 

http://www.dembflashproducts.com/flipit/

 

I've used it at a number of events and I have been very happy with the results.

Conrad Erb +1.

This is why payment conditions are stated clearly in the contract, and why I go over those terms with the client in detail.

 

1. 25% non-refundable booking fee.

2. Remaining balance due two weeks before the event.

3. If no payment is received, I will show up at the event and give the couple the option to keep my services - for cash. (I'd also probably take a check, but would do nothing with the photos until the check clears.) I would do nothing at the event until paid.

 

Clients will expect you to uphold your end of the contract, they should do likewise.

I'm taking a guess that you are using Lithium batteries. If I recall correctly lithiums have a temp sensor in them that shuts them off if they get too hot.

 

I might suggest that you increase your ISO to help your flash unit stay cool.

An example might be helpful.

This is a tutorial series for Lightroom 1.0 (I am not affiliated with the site in any way.)

 

http://www.whibalhost.com/_Tutorials/Photoshop_LR/01/

 

It is worth the time to go through if you're thinking about getting Lightroom.

 

As a side note, let me say that I originally had no use for LightRoom. In fact, since I had PSCS2 I really thought that there was no need for it.

 

So I D/L'd the free trial, and saw the above tutorial.

 

LightRoom has since increased the efficiency of my work flow enough that it has replaced PS for 90% of my post processing.

Lanes Axiom of Customer Photo Choice:

 

Given any set of photographs - regardless of the size of the set - in which one photo is defective in some manner, clients will invariably choose the defective photo as their MUST HAVE.

In looking over the metadata in Lightroom, it appears that my most used lens is the 70-200 f/2.8 VR.

 

..By a rather large margin. I love that lens.

Thank you for all of the information. I do apologize in that I think I may have made myself sound as though I just pulled the camera out of the box from Best Buy.

 

In my post I mentioned that the question assumed that I had adequate shutter speed. I did, however, fail to mention that I was shooting at 800 ISO on a Nikon D200 with the 85mm f/1.4 and an SB800 flash. No doubt that would have been nice for you to have known prior to giving your time. Sorry I left that out.

 

Again, thank you for the information. A bit more work is clearly needed on my part.

Having looked at the photos, a couple of things jump out at me.

 

I would suggest a pre-shoot consult to discuss clothing. Generally, shorts, and tank tops simply do not look very good in engagement type photographs. His shorts in this case, are a little unsightly, and her bra hanging out from her shirt looks a bit sloppy.

 

It also looks like your white balance is substantially off. If you were shooting raw this is an easy fix.

 

Your composition leans a little too much toward the centered look. You might try a search for the "rule of thirds" to help add variety to the composition.

 

The last thing is that I am not getting any emotional connection between this couple. This often times is not the photogs fault, as some people just don't do well in front of the camera. I find that in a lot of posed shots, the subjects seem to lose their personality in favor of the rigidity of the "pose."

 

At times, asking the couple to just have a little walk and ignore you for a while, can help. Get her to talk about their first kiss. Something that brings the focus back to their relationship, rather than the camera.

 

I looked at your "little people" photos. Those are much better. I have this feeling, from comparing the photos, that you were a whole lot more at ease shooting the kids photos that shooting this couple. You've got to be as relaxed as you want your subjects to be.

 

Just my 2 100ths.

I've posted this elsewhere, but many minds, many views..

 

Been doing a good bit of experimenting recently with flash techniques. I am

specifically interested in candids and "getting ready" shots.

 

As I read more and more, I keep seeing the same thing (more or less), to wit:

 

- Camera on manual set to..

- Meter ambient - 1 to -1 1/2 EV

- Flash bounced, EV dialed in as needed ( In addition, I'm using a flip-it.)

 

I am assuming, and perhaps wrongly, that by "meter" the photogs mean the

camera's meter. I find it difficult to imagine they would be using a Sekonic

all the time. It seems that this way, the photog would spend a lot of time

adjusting settings.

 

So if the camera's meter is what they are using, what is wrong with:

 

- Camera set to A or AV /w Rear Sync

- Flash, still bounced, set to TTL. (EV dialed in as needed)

 

Assuming that the ambient meets the 1/focal length rule for shutter speed, what

is the difference? What is the flaw in this method?

 

I've tried this method in a variety of lighting from florescent to daylight, and

the results seem pretty good. I've also placed a victim... er.. subject in the

role of "getting ready" and those results look pretty good.

 

I know that testing isn't the same as a live shoot, but it would seem to lessen

the amount of work a little bit.

 

I now stand ready to be chastised for my unfathomable ignorance.

I am a bit curious. For all of the Strobist freaks, (of which I am one. I never miss a post) how many weddings has he shot?

 

I see a great number of people sternly warning against the unspeakable evils of "on camera" flash, but when shooting candids, how do you avoid it? How practical are cardboard snoots (I've got four in my bag mind you) when Aunt Hagatha from Montana will barely stand still for a photo long enough for the AF to lock, much less wait for you to set up your "off camera" light stands?

 

If you're talking Formals, sure, everything's on the table there.

 

"On camera flash", done properly, is perfectly valid that can produce excellent results.

 

http://weddingphotographyproject.wordpress.com/2007/05/02/

 

Direct, on camera flash, which I think most people are referring to when they think of "on camera flash" is another matter.

I'm doing a wedding next month with very strict rules. Photogs must remain in the back of the church. I'd LOVE to be able to shoot as David Schilling or Steve Dohring suggests. Sounds ideal.

It is my understanding that at the long end, the 70-300 ED is always a bit soft. (Mine always is. Tripod - beanbag - f/11 - good light - doesn't matter.)

 

However, in the middle of the range, say 70>x<200, the inexpensive 70-300 is pretty sharp.

 

That said, the 70-200 f/2.8 VR is my current favorite lens. It is very sharp at all apertures. It's pretty much spoiled me.

I've often used OptikVerve free CS plugin. http://www.optikvervelabs.com/

 

I haven't toyed around with the conversion in LR much but considering Steve's results, I'll have to re-visit that.