laronge photographie coutu
-
Posts
148 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by laronge photographie coutu
-
-
<p>From what you described, you're not equipped (equipment, staff and experience) to make this worthwhile trying to print onsite. If you can't have photos viewable and printable shortly after shooting them (i.e. less than an hour), don't bother. My suggestion is instead of trying to print onsite, you get a SmugMug or other photo sales site. Print cards that direct people to the web gallery and give the cards to everyone you photograph. Say on the card that the photos will be viewable the day after the event. At the end of the event, go home, edit your photos and upload them. You can sleep the next day while people are looking and hopefully buying your shots. Also, some people may not have the time to spend or remember to seek you out at the end of the event to see their photos. Instead, they can see them at their leisure.</p>
-
<p>Why not just look at your contract for the names and addresses of the church and reception location?</p>
-
<p>Put your money in the bank and rent. Rent a 5d or 6d with a 24-105 f4 and a speedlight. This will give you two usable set ups. Then as you mature as a wedding photographer, you will learn exactly what gear you need to fit your style and can gear up for the following season. Also, keeping the money in the bank allows for an emergency that you might not have anticipated like your computer or vehicle dying, both things that are crucial to a successful wedding photography business. </p>
-
<p>Which system do you have more lenses, flashes and accessories for? That would be my determining factor. Both the 6D and the D610 are great cameras and the difference really comes down to the photographer's abilities.</p>
-
<p>Shows just how much professional wedding photographers gouge their clients.</p>
-
<p>Do it in writing!!!</p>
-
<p>Stay away from Printroom A.K.A. PPSI. I used them for years very happily until they started to stop paying commissions. I was able to get all except ~$65.00 that they owed me but it was very time consuming. Their customers service, including the paid customer service, drifted into non-existence. A Google will demonstrate that I'm not alone in this opinion.</p>
-
<p>You really need to do some searching on here and you'll find the answers to a lot of your questions and find the list of must have shots.</p>
<p>Work with the B+G on the shot list.</p>
<p>As far as equipment, it doesn't really matter as long as you have enough gear to ensure you will get through the wedding without failure (i.e. backup gear). Your 7d and two primes can easily cover a wedding. You may want to add a telephoto if you're going to have to shoot from the back of the church and/or a wide if you need to shoot a large group in a small area. If you don't have these constraints, then I wouldn't bother adding the lenses. As a new wedding photographer, I'd suggest you keep your gear as simple as possible so you're not concentrating on it instead of the wedding.</p>
-
<blockquote>
<p>I imagine the photographer thought long and hard before posting the video. He doesn't appear to be the reckless type, at least from looking around his site, but you never know, do you? :-)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I suspect he has some local knowledge but I think calling out another local studio publicly seems petty to me. If his purpose was truly to educate brides in a general sense, which is fine because misrepresentation unfortunately does go on in the wedding photography world, he would have not just used examples from one photographer and probably wouldn't have identified them. </p>
-
<p>I wonder if the photographer who made the video knows for a fact the images were stolen. It's very possible both images were shot by the photographer displaying them. In the first example, where the photo was on another studio's site, it could be that the photographer worked for that studio and has since moved to another studio and is simply showing a shot he shot while working for the first studio (very possibly with permission). The second image the photographer who made the video claims is a stock photo and shows it on a stock site. It's very possible and plausible that the photographer being accused of stealing, shot the image, put it in his portfolio and placed it at a stock house.<br>
<br />The photographer who made the accusations may be opening himself up to a liable lawsuit. </p>
-
<p>I came across this blog post via Alltop. One thing to note is that the photographer being called out for stealing is in the same area as the one calling him out. It's an interesting approach to trashing your competition. </p>
-
<blockquote>
<p>I thought I did everything right before I took my first paying wedding client</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Ken,<br>
You did. It wasn't your equipment that made the shoot successful, it was you. Your experience and ability to adapt to whatever situation is thrown at you is what allowed you come away with great images. Far too many new photographers get hung up on equipment and prioritize it over experience. There is no combination of equipment that will save the day without the photographer knowing how and when to use it properly.</p>
-
<p>There are three aspects of professional photography:<br>
1. Technique (exposure, equipment, composition, etc.)<br>
2. Business (accounting, marketing, customer relations, etc.)<br>
3. Knowing the subject of your specialty</p>
<p>Aspects 1 and 2 are readily taught and mastered in a school/classroom environment. Aspect 3 can only be learned and mastered in the field. There are great photographers that shoot sports that would be terrible wedding photographers (assuming they didn't take the time to learn #3). Likewise, there are great wedding photographers who couldn't take a good sports photo if their life depended on it. This is where the master - apprentice relationship comes into play.</p>
<p>The first wedding I went to as a photographer was in 1993. At that time I had a well established commercial photography business shooting action sports. I went to that wedding as a second shooter and did that for two years before going solo. It was during that time that I learned #3 about wedding photography. Things like wedding customs of varying religions and how to deal with a nervous bride or drunk guests are only learned by experience and/or the master - apprentice relationship.</p>
<p>I don't advocate shooting for free to get experience or to build a portfolio. I believe that the value you put on your work is the value your customers will see in your work. In the case of shooting free for a friend, you are not devaluing your work, you are giving your friend a very valuable gift.</p>
<p>Just because you shoot a wedding for a friend for free doesn't mean you're obligated to shoot free for friends of friends even if they ask. My unsolicited advice to the OP (or anyone in this situation) on shooting for free would be: 1. request of your friends that they never disclose (even to other friends) the arrangement between you and them and 2. if friends of friends (ones who you wouldn't normally give a very valuable gift) ask you to shoot their wedding based on what you did at the first wedding, you charge them. You set a fair price based on your experience, location and logistics of the shoot and deliverables, put it in a contract and deliver 110%. Doing this will put you on the right path to being a successful professional wedding photographer.</p>
-
<p>There's nothing wrong with a photographer (amateur, wannabe pro or pro) asking for advice and there's nothing wrong with more experienced photographers (including pros) giving it. The wedding photography industry has constantly been in a state of flux ever since someone decided they wanted pictures of their wedding. The experienced helping the inexperienced has been a tradition in many fields. If you think that by helping someone who is less experienced will lead to them taking all your business or destroying the industry, you are either 1. paranoid, 2. not that good at what you do or 3. both.</p>
<p>Yes -- Shooting for free or cheap in many cases hurts the photography industry including the photographer doing it. But, there are other cases where it doesn't, like shooting for friends (as the OP stated he was doing).</p>
<p> </p>
-
<p>1. That graphic as been around for a few years on many photo blogs and forums. I didn't create, I linked to it. You may not like the wording in the chart but, it's message is accurate.</p>
<p>2. "Am I adequately equipped for my first wedding?" is a very novice question. If fact, if you're asking it, you're probably not qualified to put a once in a lifetime affair in your hands. Every wedding photographer has to do a first wedding on their own at some point. The truly equipped one's will have apprenticed/assisted/second shot with an experienced wedding photographer to gain the skills and knowledge (including what equipment to use) to avoid their next forum post title being, "I messed up, couple wants a refund, what to do?"</p>
<p>3. "Equipped," your word,not mine, does not just have to refer to equipment, it can also refer to knowledge, physical ability, mental wherewithal, etc. Perhaps, being new to wedding photography, you didn't realize this and thus your aggressiveness toward my answer.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><blockquote><strong> Moderator Note:</strong></p>
<p>The point has been made and reiterated, that experience counts for much. The point has also been made that the Original Post was specific and about gear (cameras and lenses etc)</p>
<p>The words contained within the graph; are the words of the author of the graph. The graph itself serves to illustrate a point. It should be taken as accepted that no malicious intent, general or specific, was intended by linking to the graph.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>Nota Bene: NO FURTHER COMMENT FROM ANYONE - concerning the word used in the graph and/or ANY general OFF TOPIC discussions pertaining, or not, to that graph; or discussion of others' motives for posting, will be tolerated.</strong></p>
<p>Contributions pertaining to the original post and general advice, (apart from such reiterating that “experience is worthwhile”) would be welcomed.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Thank you in advance for your cooperation</p>
</blockquote>
-
<p>There is sound advice in both my previous post and Ian's post. But, I'll rephrase mine and just answer the question, "Am I adequately equipped for my first wedding?"<br>
<br />Yes, you have an impressive list of equipment that should be enough to cover most situations encountered when shooting a wedding. </p>
<p>http://www.honghuazheng.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/A-photographers-learning-curve.jpg</p>
-
<p>You have plenty of equipment but that doesn't make you adequately equipped. Experience does.</p>
-
<p>iDVD is gone, Steve Jobs decided that since he won't be making anymore DVDs you shouldn't either. You can use DVD Creator or Toast to burn DVDs.<br>
<br />As far as making the slideshow, check out Photo to Movie for an inexpensive but still fairly comprehensive solution or you could use a video editing program like Final Cut Pro or Premiere. iPhoto and iMovie could also be used but the controls are limited.</p>
-
<p>This is a must read for all those who want to be a professional wedding photographer.</p>
-
<p>You should have raised the issue with the bride when she informed you about the other photographers. Instead you told the bride, "it shouldn't be an issue." The wedding is over, get over it and learn from your mistake.</p>
<p>Also, you shouldn't assume the other photographer offers prints at a cheaper price, you should assume a "friend of the family" photographer will just give the bride the files. This is the reality of wedding photography in 2013.</p>
-
<p>The EF-42 is a good flash and it offers swivel as well as more power. The downside of it with the XP1 or XE1 is the size. It's a full size flash and is very top heavy on the camera (the 285s are too) so for long shooting sessions it's a little awkward. I've found that the high ISO of the cameras is so good that you can use a smaller flash just for some fill.</p>
<p>The older Viv 285, 285HV are a problem and will fry a camera, the newer 285HV is not a problem. By older I mean more than 10 years. There's tons of internet posts about this and how to test your flashes sync voltage, just Google if you're not sure. </p>
-
<p>Jon,<br>
I use the EF-20, it's a cheap (overpriced) peace of crp compared to other flash units from other manufacturers. But, compared to the EF-X20 it recycles faster, costs less and bounces. Most of the time I use it straight with flash exposure compensation set to -1 just to fill in shadows. I'll also use it handheld off-camera Zack Arias style with the Canon remote ttl cord. On a rare occasion where I know I'm going to be bouncing and need a more powerful on camera flash, I'll use a Viv 285 set to automatic. While it's not TTL, it still does a great job.</p>
<p>As far as "full frame" that's just a term used for comparison and marketing purposes. Generally, "full frame" is considered 36mmx24mm. You're incorrect about no digital cameras being full frame. The sensor in the Canon 6D is 36mmx24mm, the Nikon D600 is 35.9mmx24mm. There are definitely advantages to full frame cameras especially in the wide end of the focal lengths and also for obtaining shallow DOF. There are also advantages in crop sensor cameras in the long end of the focal length range, the physical size of the cameras and the cost of the cameras. All that's important is the final image quality.</p>
<p>There's no perfect camera and there's no best camera (excluding the one that's with you). The photographer's technique and adaptation is way more important. </p>
-
<p>Jon,<br>
I do use them almost exclusively at weddings. My Canons (all pro level) are now backups except if I need a 300 for down the isle shooting. I have no problem with the speed or focus of the camera. It's a tool and if you learn to use it properly it's an awesome tool. Most of the negative chatter on the web comes from people who never shot professionally with film cameras (especially non-af cameras) and rely on the automation of DSLRs to compensate. <br>
<br />IMO the OVF is worth the extra money. However, the EVF on the XE-1 is better. In a perfect world, one of each is ideal. You put the 35mm or 18mm on the XP! and the 60mm on the XE1 and have a great set up. <br>
The other thing I like about the XP1 over the XE1 is the size. The XP1 is a little larger and fits my hand better. </p>
-
<p>I use the X-Pro 1 and probably use the OVF 80% of the time. </p>
Can I make money from featuring weddings?
in Wedding & Event
Posted