surfidaho

Howdy!

Here's another good quote:

Available light is any damn light that is available! - W. Eugene Smith

My only ironclad rule about flash is that I never use it during an indoor ceremony. Many guests take their cue from the photographer, and if my flash goes off, then the guests will assume it's ok for them to start popping away as well.

I generally use studio flash during the formals, because I do believe that formals should be the absolute highest quality possible. But that's just me. Your mileage may vary.

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

Miriam, if the person who signs the contract and the person who puts up the money are different people, you can get into some very serious problems with regards to who you really have to satisfy.

It's traditional for the Bride's family to cover most of the cost of a wedding, so quite often the MOB is the person who signs and pays. That said, it's a good idea to involve both the payer/signer and the B&G in the negotiations, because the parents may sign up for things that the B&G may have an issue with. If the B&G are long distance, do it through a conference call.

Example: Let's say you negotiate a one and a half hour engagement session and all formals before the ceremony with the MOB.

Later, the Bride calls up and wants a four hour engagement session with split formals on the day, without paying any more money for the additional level of service. In this situation, you are caught between two people. You can tell the Bride "No, you have to pay extra for that", but then the MOB calls you up and begs you to give in the the Bride's demands so she can keep peace with her daughter. You then have to be tough with the MOB, which is unpleasant, and can be avoided by keeping everybody in the loop at signing.

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

"Professional" means you make money. "Proficient" means you deserve the money you make.

I was professional when I took my first dollar from a customer. I hit proficient about a year after that. ;^<)>

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

I have found that if people really have a strong opinion one way or the other, they will be sure to let you know.

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

I think you might have a future, but I would take it slow. Sign on as a second shooter for somebody else before you shoot any more weddings on your own.

As for your portfolio, the compositions look fine, but overall your images are a little dark for my preference. It makes them look a little moody. If you lighten up on saturation and exposure (which is easily done in raw) it would make them appear a little more festive.

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

Juan said:

"I guess all will be solved once I get out from the idiot modes".

Not entirely. You will simply be empowered to solve the problems by taking full advantage of the flexibility your

camera offers. I have no doubt that after you study your manual, and read up on basic photography, you will take

to it like a duck takes to water.

JGT. PS, is it hard for a camera/lens to achieve good focus on a subject far away (30ft) when shooting at let's

say 28mm and F4 or so?

Nope. And for future problems of this nature, let me refer you to the online depth of field calculator:

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Please note that for any focal point, most of the zone of focus will be in front of that point, and two thirds

behind.

Let's use the example you described above. If we plug in those numbers (and your camera) into the DOF calculator,

we get:

Near limit 15.9 ft

Far limit 257.9 ft

Total 242 ft

In front of subject 14.1 ft (6%)

Behind subject 227.9 ft (94%)

Hyperfocal distance 33.9 ft

Circle of confusion 0.019 mm

If we distill this, it means that if you focus on something 30 feet away at f4 with a 28mm focal length,

everything from 16 feet away from you out to infinity will be in focus.

Which means that unless you hit something else by accident, you can't miss.

Hope this helps!

Paulsky

Howdy!

Here's a few no brainers:

Buy the 50mm f/1.8. Everybody should have one for the money.

Walkabout with the rest and decide for yourself. My personal favorite of the bunch you already have is the 28-135mm. Most people who say image stabilization is not a great advantage have never used it before. It totally rocks, particularly if you like caffeine.

One tip about image stabilization on the 28-135mm: It's first generation, and cannot tell when it's on a tripod. Therefore, you need to make sure image stabilization is OFF when using this lens on a tripod. If you don't, the lens will actually try to correct for motion that is not there, and introduce vibration.

Later lenses can detect lack of motion from a tripod mount, and shut down the gyros when mounted on a tripod.

When you have more money, get some L glass, or the 17-55mm f2.8 IS. You will be blown away by the difference in quality.

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

I sincerely doubt you have any focusing issue with your camera or lens.

I am going to suggest a revolutionary procedure, which I do not believe anybody else has yet suggested, and has

always worked wonderfully for me.

1. Read your instruction manual from cover to cover. Study it as if you will be tested on it. Practice using the

information on each page with your camera.

2. If you still do not understand something, look for the answer online.

3. If you cannot find the answer online, ask us, but quote the page number in the manual you are having trouble

with so we can better understand the issue.

I guarantee you that once you follow this simple procedure (which seems entirely alien to most men) you will

understand your camera and it's operation much better.

In other words, if all else fails, read the directions. ;^<)>

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

Studio lights are wonderful, and can make a huge difference in the quality of

the formals, but only if:

- You know how to use them.

- You have the time to use them properly.

- You're indoors, there's no wind, or you're not using large modifiers.

It helps immensely if the B&G are willing to do all the formals ahead of time.

I keep it simple by bringing only one studio light and a large beauty dish

diffuser.

This last Saturday, I was in a room with an white angled ceiling, so I just

pointed the studio light at the ceiling (no diffuser) and bounced the light all

over the place. This has the same effect as opening up a huge skylight in the

ceiling. I was able to shoot at ISO 100, f/5.6 with no problem, and the pictures

turned out great.

You can use the same trick for the reception if you have Pocket Wizards or other

reliable radio triggers, but be sure to sandbag at least one leg of the flash

stand.

When I can't bounce, I place the studio light with the beauty dish directly

above my camera about eight feet off the ground, and just slightly to one side,

pointed down at the subjects. You can do the same thing with an umbrella.

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

Nothing comes between my lens and the subject unless I'm after a specific effect.

For closeup shots, I use a Canon 500D closeup filter. For wide aperture on a sunny day, I use an MRC 4x ND filter.

For lens protection, I use lens hoods.

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

Another vote for Proshow Gold.

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy Dustin!

Have you tried posting in this forum as "Second Photographer Available, Bay Area"?

Another option is to both search AND post under both services AND gigs in

craigslist.org. That's where I found my last second photographer.

Or you could just drive twelve hours to Boise, and work with me. ;^<)>

Regarding insurance: If you pay a very low monthly fee for advertising on

wedj.com, they offer both business liability insurance as well as equipment

insurance for exceptionally low rates. I find a lot of leads through wedj.com,

and they have a Gigbuilder management system that automatically tracks my

availability and lets customers know if I am booked or not, and if I'm

available, it asks for Name, Phone Number, E-mail, etc. It's pretty easy to set

up. If you want to see how it works, click on my name, go to my web page, and

select "Availablity".

Finally, you nailed the liability paragraph to a "T". I have the very same one

in my contract.

Good Luck!

Paulsky

Howdy!

I didn't go to school for this either, and I share your opinion that it's not really necessary. But I do have one question:

Were you highly sought after in IT after only two troubleshooting experiences?

I suspect not. I suspect you relied heavily on mentors and coworkers to gain the experience that you are now highly sought after for. Therefore, even though you don't want to hear it, I would strongly suggest that you tag along with an established pro as a second shooter for a few weddings before you strike out on your own.

You'll still make some money. Not as much as you would make doing a wedding on your own, but at least you won't have to give it all back if you make a bad mistake. ;^<)>

Even more important than pricing is a limited liability clause in your contract. The PPA contract has this very elaborate "act of God" paragraph. It's very flowery and legal, but the gist of it is that you are never liable for more than the cash value of the clients original order. That way you cannot be sued for tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars for failing to deliver good photos.

You should also carry business liability insurance, in case someone trips over a tripod or light stand.

Tuppence,

Paulsky

Hi Sanya!

The Canon 17-55 2.8 IS is maximum f-stop 2.8 with image stabilization. I consider it indispensable for weddings on a cropped frame body, and I take 70% of my shots with it. That should be the first lens you buy.

I take the other 30% of my shots with the Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS. I also used to own the non-image stabilized version of the same lens. The non-IS version is sharper wide open, but I greatly prefer the versatility of IS. I found the non-IS version impossible to handhold in all but very bright sunlight.

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

Walter Degroot said:

"THAT IS unless some previous photographer or videographer acted like a clown and made it HIS day not theirs".

That is precisely the point. The rules are usually there because somebody did.

I look at rules as just another creative challenge. It's my job as a professional to get the best results possible while conforming to the rules of the establishment.

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

Mary, I'm going to post a link to a wedding shot from a balcony with a 70-200mm lens for instructional purposes.

www.lesboisphotography.com/PatrickAndShara/?show=070217_163122_1.html

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

Most establishments that have "no movement rules" allow people to shoot the processional from the front with full flash, then everything else from the back with no flash once the ceremony starts.

I would shoot from the balcony. You don't have to worry about large hats, you've got the best seat in the house, you don't need ultra-closeups for the ceremony, and recessionals photographed from the balcony are awesome.

Later,

Paulsky

Shalom Michelle!

I love the new flower! It's so much prettier! And way less ambiguous!

For those of you who are still wondering what it is Michelle believes in, here's a quote from her website:

"I Do Believe in magic, in love, in fairy tales come true."

And I Do Believe that I have never been more wrong about a person based upon a logo and a motto in my entire life. My heartfelt apologies.

Sincerely,

Paulsky

P.S. For what it's worth, Neil Diamond wrote "I'm A Believer". Yet another Jewish person with a similar motto. ;^<)>

Howdy!

When I look at your logo words, "I Do Believe", followed by a cross-like plant, it looks like a subliminal Christian message, more specifically an advertisement for a televangelist television program.

Perhaps others have danced around that in previous posts, but it looks to me like you are (perhaps unwittingly) trying to advocate a particular religious point of view as part of doing business.

If you are content to limit yourself to The Evangelical Christian Crowd, it might be just the ticket. But as a Jew, I would probably never direct business your way, because I do not want to deal with people who blur the line between having faith and doing business.

I'm sorry if that sounds harsh, but I believe that in our business, it's better to be inclusive.

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

There is another way to compete. Offer packages where you don't have to deliver physical proofs or other such items that lower your bottom line. Most people are more than happy with web proofing nowadays.

I count myself as one of the "rising pros". I shot my first wedding in 2005, but I learn fast, and I'm smart enough to hire second shooters that are at least as good as I am. Still, in my market, I'm considered a high priced independent at $1,400 for a comprehensive package with a $500 (retail) print allowance.

Here's a few things (at least in my market) that appear to drive price down:

1. Lack of a storefront. If you don't have a studio where you can entertain clients, people assume you're going to be less expensive than an established studio.

2. In my area, a large percentage of the population is LDS. Temple ceremonies cannot be photographed, therefore, many people are only interested in reception coverage, with maybe some formal shots around the temple thrown in. This has a tendency to drive overall prices down.

3. The salaries of your neighbors. Wedding photographers in San Francisco tend to make more than wedding photographers in Boise Idaho.

I actually think things have improved a little bit. There were a few $300 "CD only" wedding photographers that grabbed a lot of business in the 2005 time frame, but they quickly went under, and burned a lot of people in the process. Therefore I think the public (at least around here) has gotten very comfortable with the $1,000 - $2,000 price point, which typically doesn't include an album.

I do know that most of the major photography studios around here, such as Dorian, have gotten out of the wedding business, and are seriously considering getting out of the senior portrait business, due to the onslaught of freelancers such as myself. ;^<)>

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

Raymond said:

"I don't think you really need the AB1600. It will be almost too powerful and you will have trouble balancing the exposures".

Raymond, if you're shooting a large group in bright sun from a distance, the AB1600 is barely powerful enough. Here's an example from your own gallery (most of which is very nice by the way):

http://home.comcast.net/~rayt435/content/Sharp_420_large.html

This image certainly could have benefited from more fill in flash power. Even though this is a small group, your on-camera flash isn't really keeping up (unless it just metered the scene wrong).

This is also a circumstance where off camera flash located closer to the subject with a directional modifier such as a LightSphere head on would have helped immensely.

Balancing exposure can be done very quickly using bisection. Start with half power. If too much, cut in half. If too little, increase by half. With less than four exposures, you've nailed it.

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

Lest I be misunderstood, let me clarify:

I use the beauty dish indoors a LOT. I only use it outdoors if I don't need full power from my flash, and the wind isn't blowing.

Here's an example of beauty dish outdoors:

http://www.lesboisphotography.com/jeffandmegan/?show=080531_142204_1_p.html

(Mary, I'm posting a link instead of a picture because I'm at my "day job", and I don't have access to my photo database from here). ;^<)>

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

Tammy, with regards to your comment:

"There goes those referalls!"

I think that most discerning people would consider the source. ;^<)>

Later,

Paulsky

Howdy!

I only use the beauty dish outdoors on overcast days with no wind. If the day is bright, I usually need all the power I can get, and if it's windy, the beauty dish makes a great sail. Then again, so do umbrellas and brolly boxes. ;^<)>

But since Ryan asked about the best all purpose light modifier, I thought I would mention the beauty dish.

If I don't have power nearby, I use two 580EX flashes in slave mode, and a 580EX as my on camera master. I used to use an ST-E2, but I switched to a third 580EX instead.

Later,

Paulsky