david_sparks2

Just go for the Nikon 17-55 2.8 lens. Trust me on this one...you'll save more money in the long run! And you'll never wonder if your pictures would have just a bit more pop or better contrast/sharpness if you had bought the Nikon instead of an alternative.

According to this Pop photo article ( http://www.popphoto.com/blogsandcolumns/4386/editorial-diy-publishing-with-mpix.html ) they use the Kodak Nexpress system.

 

John, you should have tried 100# or linen paper. I think pearl paper is a specialty paper and makes pictures look...weird...for lack of a better term. I thought photo quality at a typical viewing distance was fine (book in your lap) but up close (less than 1 foot) it didn't look as sharp as some inkjet prints I've seen. Although the MPix book will outlast those inkjet prints I'm sure! And who inspects pictures that close other than us photographers?

 

Using a Eye-one Display 2 calibrator and HP w2207 monitor I was able to achieve a photo book that damn-near matched what I saw on my monito...color and contrast-wise. I really couldn't be happier at this price point!

I ordered my first album from MPix and am impressed. I am a stickler for photo quality and I think the colors on their press books looks better or at least equal to their Kodak prints.

 

As far as sharpness the paper doesn't equal prints. I don't even think that's possible as prints are chemically made and books are printed with dots. But I will say from a normal viewing distance of 1-2 feet (looking down in your lap, say) you will be hard pressed (no pun intended) to find the difference between this book and one you pick up at Barnes and Noble.

 

If you're near-sighted like myself and can view objects in focus closer than a foot away then yes the pictures are a little fuzzy but when I put my glasses on and view them they are perfectly fine.

 

Text is sharp and jaggy-free.

 

Binding? Well, I can see the strings on the black separater page but one the book is opened...I guess if you smash you pages down flat you may be able to see them but I am being really delicate with my $50+ book!

 

By the way the gold foil stamping on black suede looks very classy! If you want something better for your clients you'll have to charge more. For the vast majority of people out there who just want something different they will love it. Everyone I've shown my album to really liked it a lot as well. I just wish they made book jackets like WHCC!

Keith,

 

You are getting the run around from these potential clients and I would cut your losses now. Let's look at a few points:

 

- Originally she loved your work and wanted to book you. She gave a specific budget and later retracted it.

 

- She asked for a discount without also compromising on lowering package options. Friday wedding or not do you slack off on your work on Fridays?

 

- She grilled you on the phone for an hour. I have spoken with potential clients on the phone for this amount of time before but it's usually a "getting to know you" type call where we end up talking about TV shows and other things off-topic. Don't ask me how that happens but it's usually those clients who are easy to get along with at the actual wedding. If I were grilled on the phone like that playing 20 questions (or 150 questions, as it may be) I would have politely hung up the phone. You should never feel like you are being interrogated about your work.

 

- She insulted you by asking you to plagiarize another photographer's work. If her jaw dropped to the floor then she should have went with him/her and been done with it. And it's yet another demand in a long list of demands. You did respond properly with this request.

 

- 3 hour meeting??? I've never had a meeting last longer than an hour! What took so long?

 

- The language "putting the wedding on the back burner" is an exact "string along" line. I wouldn't doubt other vendors are getting the same message and they are probably rolling their eyes at her at this point.

 

 

My advice? Cut the cord. As others have said your gut instinct should be followed and even though I've been photographing weddings for a short time it has been my experience that couples who are hard to deal with before the wedding do not get easier afterwards and are usually worse/find something to complain about/ask for a discount on/threaten to sue you. I haven't had the latter happen to me yet but I've definitely turned down clients before because I got a poor vibe from them.

I just have to say it...these things are just pests. They've ruined otherwise

great shots, are there a lot for processional shots and really are just plain

annoying. Obvious exit ways that feature exit signs are like those coffee lids

that say "Caution: Liquid is HOT".

 

Who here also has some hate for these things? To keep the discussion relevant,

what do you do to avoid them/do you bother with any clone stamping?

I have the eye-one Display 2 and love it! It was easy to use and it works. $230 or so from BH Photo.

Hopefully this will be quickly picked up in Google for anyone having issues like have. This resolution was already mentioned but here it is, for search queries:

 

Windows Vista gretagmacbeth xrite Eye-one Display 2 i1 Display 2 display2 Nvidia foreware conflict taking takes over driver drivers calibration workaround resolution fix

 

Instructions:

 

1. Set your monitor to its factory settings and NVidia's Desktop Display controls to their defaults. In the NVidia Control Panel look in the upper right portion for "Restore Defaults."

 

2. Run monitor calibration as usual. At the end of the calibration you should notice a difference in the Before and After.

 

3. The important step: Find the CalibrationLoader program. By default it is at Start meu>Computer>C:\Program Files\GretagMacbeth\i1\Eye-One Match 3\CalibrationLoader . This is the program that Windows Vista loads at startup and it is also the settings which the NVidia software overwrites.

 

Create a shortcut on your desktop (or wherever you want) that points to the Calibration Loader. By default it's "C:\Program Files\GretagMacbeth\i1\Eye-One Match 3\CalibrationLoader\CalibrationLoader.exe"

 

So, any time you boot your computer up or restart it, you just need to remember to double click on this shortcut and you're set! About 6 days of aggravation led to this post/knowledge. Wheww!

I am having the exact same problems too. Brand new Windows Vista machine with NVidia 8500GT and calibrated with the i1 Display 2.

 

After running calibration for the first time everything looks great. But as soon as the computer is restarted or shut down and booted back up NVidia takes its greedy claws and resets everything. Argh!

Thank you all for your great responses. I will admit my relative did at the time make me feel *a little* guilt but she is not a business owner. She is an employee at a place that has great benefits, etc. etc. She is also at a job where, although the work is difficult, the job market is rather saturated.

 

When I think about the special skills it takes to actually deliver good photos which come from years of experience, trials/tribulations and a little bit of natural talent, that's what people are paying me for. These aren't just photos...they're memories of people's lives that they and their children's children will cherish.

 

I've seen the work of others who charge less or charge the same and I know I am priced accordingly. In some respects I see photographers who charge too much. Color casts, uncreative compositions, poor backgrounds, etc. And that's what's on their main web page...I don't want to even see what the rest of the set looks like!

 

I definitely won't be charging any less but it's just nice to get some reassurance from others in the field.

The other day one of my relatives found out how much I charge clients and

started going on about how that's unfair to bride's who can't afford me but like

my pictures. I quickly shot back with "It's nothing personal, just business. If

they can't afford me than I'm sorry. I'm not the right photographer for them."

Basically they were suggesting I should charge around the same price that I did

when I started my business. A price that I could NOT live off of!

 

The portfolio building is over. I have photos to prove my worth to newer clients

with bigger photography budgets. After business expenses/taxes/whatnot you

realistically cannot afford to "be nice" about price anymore.

 

I have also had people tell me I am priced affordably compared to others in my

area. And the clients that I book at my current price seem much more interested

in my style/work/quality than the ones who were just hiring me when I started

because of price. And I'll tell you I feel much better about these clients

because of that. Even the ones who did hire me early on who wanted me for my

pictures (they said) I ended up really getting along with at the actual wedding.

And since they felt comfortable/trusted my professional abilities I was able to

deliver beautiful photos for them. The ones who had price in mind, even at the

appointment, seemed to rush the photos/not really care what I got. And it

unfortunately shows in the work. Not always or perhaps not apparent from others

but my gut tells me I could've done better.

 

How do you handle these types of situations? This is considered a "specialty"

field and those who are good at what they do should price themselves

competitively. After thinking about this while typing this post, I've come up

with two good analogies to use next time:

 

There are tons of bands out there but how many can sell platinum amounts of

records and put thousands of asses in the seats? Out of those, who gets paid

more? They do the same work (play music/entertain) but they are at different

levels.

 

Or better yet, my car analogy. You aren't going to get a Lexus for the price of

a Toyota! Just because the car buyer falls in love with a car, I will bet my

camera equipment that dealers will not drop their price below cost unless they

are going out of business or some other reason like that.

This is always an interesting question. We as professionals look at photos differently than clients do. It's easier for both groups to agree on what constitutes a "Great" photograph. But it's another thing to decide the keepers vs. the ones you delete/throw away.

 

There are obvious pictures to trash...faces blocked by arms, flash didn't fire properly, lots of blinkers in the formals...etc. But I am always surprised with prints clients choose. Ones that I was on the brink of deleting and now am glad I didn't.

 

So...what do I do? I deliver about 550-600 photos on average. I do give away a DVD but also include prints in my packages. I feel I've been paid well enough to do my job and that those are the couple's/family's photos to have and to hold until death do them part (sorry, lame joke!)

 

We as professionals may only want to show our best work to our prospective public but a lot of photos that we may consider "mediocre" are just what our clients want. Why? Because it's the people they know in those photos that matter. And that's a big reason why some, although a lot of us hate it, request table shots.

 

The other way I look at it is I am being paid more or about the same as guys who haul big heavy equipment and break their bodies down so when they're retired they are aching and/or have some kind of career related health issues. That's a pretty darn good deal to me. I'd rather take some photos that I don't particular have much artistic input/skill into but at least I don't have to risk a hernia on the job.

Fair Use provisions allow for usage of copyrighted materials for purposes of critique. So if you really wanted to, EC, you could post a few samples from your wedding photos that you weren't too fond of.

I know exactly what you're saying. Hiring decisions should be based more on technical and artistic competency than on equipment. I recently had a would-be second shooter submit a portfolio to me. He has better equipment than I do but he does not have a great eye. I had to politely turn him down. In his email to me he proudly proclaimed his ownership of the 5D and EOS-1Ds Mark II with L lenses. But his pictures were not that great so none of the equipment mattered.

 

I'm not sure where this attitude comes from. After all, second shooters are often paid about 1/4 to 1/8 of what the main photographer is making per gig. I wouldn't expect someone who is making say $300 that night to own the same equipment that I am making, say $1,400.00 after expenses. And on top of that I can write my equipment off on taxes and they can't.

 

I understand brand differences (Nikon vs. Canon) for compatibility issues (hardware and software). I guess it's because the employee market allows for it. Personally I wouldn't use my most expensive body/lenses on a gig that paid me way less than I am usually making. F that! And by F, I mean forget!

Which version do you all recommend? Are the 1 and 2 the same DVD (Masters of Wedding Photography) or are they filled with fresh content?

Original post: "I would handle the photo refinishing and prints myself.

 

Other post: "The original (proofs) jpgs corrected and I will handle the rest with the client. "

 

So, which is it? Photo refinishing = corrected jpegs. You probably could find a photographer to work relatively cheap if all they do is show up and hand over RAW files. But color correcting all delivered proofs takes a lot of time and time = money.

The behavior of the videographer is disgraceful. The guy is acting like a child who won't go to school because you don't buy him a Ninja Turtle lunch box or whatever.

 

His attitude/words really show incompetence. Event photography/videography requires you to constantly adjust for the given situation. That's part of the fun too! We rarely work in ideal situations but come out with nice results that often times make venues/events better than they actually were.

 

True professionals keep their cool and work around obstacles without thinking twice about them. The water throwing incident...I wonder if anyone got that on tape? It sounds like good times! ;-)

 

I'm sorry you had to go through this experience. Even if you do eventually receive a refund I would bad mouth this guy on wedding forums such as theknot and here. That is of course if you don't sign a NDA. Your only saving grace is to let others know about this guy before they end up empty-handed/disappointed as well. From the sounds of it "the Non-Disclosure Agreement won't matter" he may be bowing out of the wedding business soon. That's a shame that you had to work with him during the decline of his career.

I have rechargeable batteries that I purchased over 6 years ago going strong again. They weren't exactly put under heavy use (portable CD player, remote controls, pocket tape recorders) but as they aged they were losing their charge. I owned a Rayovac 1 Hour Charger.

 

Flash forward to 2007. I purchased a MAHA MH-C800S eight cell smart charger. It's quite a bit more than your normal chargers that you can pick up at Wal-Mart but let me tell you it's worth it.

 

The main reason I wanted this charger was because it has received rave reviews online about "topping off" batteries nearly perfectly. It has a quick charge mode, slow trickle charge mode and conditioning mode. That last feature really piqued my interest.

 

I threw the old AA's into the charger right when it came to my house. I deep cycled them (it took a good 12 hours). When they were finished I put them in my portable CD player to test them. The batteries that formerly only showed up as 50% on the battery gauge now were at 100%! Worked...as...advertised. As per the manual, conditioning should be performed about every 10 charges.

 

I ALWAYS use slow (soft) charge mode. The batteries do not heat up (which can ruin them) and that is the "top off" mode. I always get a ton of juice and only require 3 sets of batteries per wedding. Even then my flash is still going pretty strong. These batteries should last quite some time thanks to MAHA!

 

For the record, I'm using Duracell 2650 mAh and Energizer 2050 mAh batteries. And that Rayovac 1 hour charger? I haven't used it since...

Since a lot of you are afraid of posting your experiences with Bella I can only assume it's mostly negative. Lawyers aren't going to hassle you if you post positive comments or your reputations won't be tarnished if such posts are under your name. By the way, it's only libel if it isn't true!

 

Any way, I would say they're an okay company to work for (from what I've heard) if you aren't interested in doing your own marketing or if you have dates on your calendar to fill. The problem is you lose that personal contact with the couple because some times you may just be given an address for the wedding ceremony and reception site.

 

I like to discuss details with my clients. Where they'd like me to stand during the ceremony...what shots are most important to them...and in general just getting to know them better so they are more comfortable with me when I'm aiming a lens at them. In may be psychological but I think it shows in my photos.

 

Plus, when you're working directly for a client (no middle man) I tend to work harder. Your mileage may vary but perhaps it's because my butt/name is on the line but that's the truth.

Conrad,

 

I'm not so sure about the charging higher prices idea. If that's the case then the gas stations in my city are charging about 10 cents extra a gallon if you pay with a credit card vs. with cash. So...I think you may be wrong on that one.

Is there a part of the contract that talks about negative retention time? For example, "Studio will archive negatives for 3 years after the event date."

I am happy with both. Millers seems a bit more saturated than WHCC but only a tiny bit. I use Millers though.

Rockwell does a very different type of photography vs. weddings. With weddings we often have almost no time to get the shot. Our subjects are constantly changing distances from the lens, so focus and flash output need to be changed on the fly. What this amounts to is our equipment needing very fast and precise auto-focus and auto-flash.

 

Sometimes that auto flash doesn't work perfectly. A lot of DSLRs underexpose and those photos must be exposure corrected after the fact. If you start with the RAW file you can convert that to a pristine JPEG. But if you start with a high quality JPEG you will get more noise in your photo than with a RAW file.

 

The best example that was given in a wedding book was that shooting JPEG is like shooting slide film at a wedding. How many film photographers do you know that shoot reversal film? RAW files are the negative/print film equivalent.

 

The last wedding I did I totally flubbed the candle lighting shot. The candles were positioned by a window and when I shoot with flash my camera is in manual mode. The candle lighting goes very fast as you may know and I couldn't switch settings fast enough. The original RAW file is way overexposed but I was able to bring it down by over a stop. The result is a loss in contrast but the picture is now exposed properly. With JPEG...what you see is what you get. You can boost the exposure with a JPEG but if you overexposure you are S.O.L.

9/15/2007 also was not a good day for me either. Just as I arrived (on time) at the bride's mother's home my phone rang and it was an angry sounding mother-of-the-bride. I told her "I'm out front" and then went in. She was not in a good mood...the rings were missing and I was, in her mind, late.

 

As it turns out, the ceremony time had been pushed up a half hour. I wasn't told this until we were at the ceremony (again, I thought we had a good half hour until "bell time") and OOPS, my flash is not cooperating. I use a flash bracket and had already taken some time to assemble the whole thing. So I had to disassemble it and then put a back up flash and flash cord (I had no time to figure out which was broken), which added more time. At some point during this time I was informed that the ceremony was supposed to start and I finally asked the MOB, "Isn't the ceremony supposed to be at noon?" Her face went from angry to surprised and said, "Oh my...I must have forgot to tell you!" Ugh...

 

The ceremony went well for the circumstances. I didn't have time to test the light (okay, I had about a minute) so I had to wing it during the first few processionals. The pictures didn't turn out too bad...although during the unity candle lighting they had the table positioned right by a clear window and this didn't bode well with my manual flash settings...the photos should be recoverable in PP though (thank goodness for RAW mode!)

 

The equipment decided to start working again at the reception and the rest of the day went fine. But I left that day with a bad feeling because even though the equipment breaking was not my fault I know (and the guests knew) I held up the ceremony. Lesson learned though...verify all times within the last few days leading up to the ceremony!

 

And in case anyone was wondering, I did check my equipment earlier in the day and everything was working fine when doing photos at the MOB's house.

I'm sorry to hear your wedding photographer did not deliver.

 

Lack of experience definitely shows here. It looks like auto white balance was used. Colors with on-camera flash look fine when white balance is set properly...shadows and harsh light are the main problem. And I know that blue-tinted, poor flesh tone look anywhere! And the compositions were more "aim and shoot" then "compose and shoot." There are a lot of lessons to be learned from your photos. I am glad some good can come from them. And thank you for your advice!

 

Other things I noticed:

 

- The photographer didn't move his feet for the candids. Repositioning myself to get the best shot is what I constantly do on wedding days. And it's the reason my feet are sore and why I bump into people (accidentally!) at least a few times during every wedding.

 

- Photo 14...this is quite a touching moment. It's too bad all I see is one eye and one ear on you and your ring bearer. Experienced photographers know to get two eyes in frame and choose one subject that can clearly be seen. Also...too much headroom (the space above subject's heads).

 

- 29: I like this photo. It's underexposed but it has decent composition.

 

Again, thank you Tabitha for posting your wedding photos for all of use to learn from!

Christi,

 

The 10 new photos you posted are really well done! Out of a whole wedding day if you made ~ 75 photos that resemble that...you've done your job.

 

Like another user said...stop charging so low now! You have a proven portfolio of work and can justify higher rates. Congrats!