justin_hall

Don't forget the exchange rate Steve, 2 dollars to the British Pound makes things very expensive for you Yanks!

If I can be of any help (I live in England) let me know.

j

It's understandable though.

The voices in my head also tell me to do similiar things.

Stalking one couple is nothing, I'm currently working on 8 couples at the same time. Now thats commitment.

don't touch it... don't even think of lifting a mouse...resist the temptation of tweaking...

your site and work is top notch - outstanding quality, and CREATIVE in a sea of blandness!

good luck to you, you deserve it.

j

Pro's and Con's.

Both are small and portable, well built with good customer service - the IBM is

more expensive though.

Both have similiar spec, CPU, GPU, memory and hard disk - both run Santa Rosa

chipsets.

Apple has OSX Leopard and the ability to run Mac only software like Aperture.

Apple can also dual-boot to Windows XP/Vista.

IBM is built like a tank - you can throw it down the street, it will get up -

dust itself off, laugh at you and then run off with your wife.

IBM has better durability and the best keyboard on the market - plus loads of

addons and upgrades.

Apple makes you look like a cool creative person.

What would you go for?

I provide proofs online within 48 hours max, most weddings will have their proofs online by the breakfast morning, portrait shoots are mostly same day.

CD - if requested is delivered within 7 days and an electrnic copy of a photobook provided at the same time. Final delivery of the finished book within 28 days.

Personally I don't understand why photographers hang around for days or weeks (even months), just get it done I say! Then you can close the book and move on to the next job.

I would encourage hotpants for the ladies and thongs for the men.

Oops - sorry, wrong forum....

I like looking a little more creative and artistic, people understand that and sometimes expect it - I certainly don't want to show up looking like an accountant. How dull. I don't mean an orange shirt with red shoes, maybe nice jeans and a black shirt - we won't be in the photos afterall...

Hi Juliet,

I tend to do good business by just selling my time and CD's. This is mostly because I'm just too impatient to manage the whole proof/selection/lab business.

My pricing model is higher on the hours to compensate so my portrait sessions typically cost 200 pounds (roughly 400 US dollars).

It works for me - maybe I could make more from prints but I'm not sure its worth the hassle?

j

Steve,

"Real style comes from within you. Craft makes it possible to manifest your style." - I agree.

"Doing a lot of cross-processing is not style. It's a cheap trick."

I disagree with this Steve, and I think this contradicts your first statement too. Its all part of the craft.

Any technique that allows you to achieve your goal is viable in my opinion. Artists have always used different techniques to achieve their goals. I imagine that if the public knew some of the techniques used by the grand masters they may feel cheated.

The use of camera obscurers, assistant artists (who did much of the work) etc.

There is nothing wrong with technology helping with creativity. Polaroid used technology to create instant photos. These are now seen as retro-classics which professionals know how to exploit.

At the time, SLR and Medium Format snobs (threatened by the possibilities it presented complete amateurs) rebelled and probably referred to them as "cheap tricks" ;)

I believe that all photographers would greatly benefit from learning about lighting, aperture, ISO, shutterspeeds etc. Saying that, there are plenty of old-school film photographers who could learn a lot more about composition, people and art.

Like it or not, technology has enabled the masses to exploit their creativity and share their work with the world (be it writing, photography, music etc) and this must be a good thing.

It does step on the toes of those who feel it should be reserved for the elite few with education, equipment, money or maybe 30 years worth of invested career at stake...

Your comments to me have a ring of resentment to them, and you come across as a film snob who will berate anyone who dares use "inferior" digital.

I love 35mm film, medium-format, lomo, polaroid and digital. I've even used a camera phone before. I believe my talent (what talent I have) is independent of the format I use.

You also mentioned your top picks for the most trivial shots. They are certainly the most seen shots - because this is what happens at weddings! You site is full of the same shots everyone else takes.

They may be trivial to you, but they are deeply important, special and unique to our clients.

I recently shot a dark winter wedding and was very worried about it, in the end I shot with two cameras. The first was set to 800-1600 ISO (I kept swapping) and shot at f2.8.

My other camera I used flash that I bounced off the wall behind me at ISO 400-800.

The non-flash shots were much better I think. I shoot Canon not Nikon but would think the same applies.

I think its a brilliant question to pose Steve.

You could argue that it is very easy for amateurs to pass of their work as being professional by calling it photojournalistic in style.

Being a photojournalistic seems to imply shooting available light with low-light lenses and no flash, without the hassle of arranging lighting or poses (which is in fact what I do!)

People tend to like things that are different or unusual, PJ has become the norm I think which means that traditional, film based photographers may become more in demand.

I certainly hope so, I feel that traditional photographers (who understand lighting, poses, managing groups etc) are very much undervalued and photographers/clients are too hasty in writing them off.

I would love to provide both services and learn both styles of our trade.

Firstly - let me be clear that I do not condone this other photographers aim to potentially benefit from your experience and hardwork. I think he has been unprofessional and rude and can understand your frustrations.

Saying that I'm with Ian and El Fang, I don't rely on print sales as part of my income and personally don't like wedding photographers telling me, as a guest, what i can or can't photograph.

This is a couples special day, when its my special day I want as many photos as possible. If a guest shows up with a 1D MkIII and a 50mmf1.2 at a wedding i'm shooting I get them involved - turn it into an advantage. Hell I even take photographs on guests cameras for them!

Eric A - you said "I think your options for a remedy were lost when he wasn't removed the event or restrained from using his camera. ".

Are you serious? A guest being thrown out or restrained? All because you want the "exclusive" to sell photographs?

A couples special day ruined by another bossy photographer "controlling the shots" and making completely inappropriate demands of guests - in the name of making as much money as possible?

This type of attitude is given many wedding photographers a bad name and I feel very strongly about it.

Personally I think the days of "exclusive" rights by professional wedding photographers has had its day.

I run a very transparent, open and honest policy on pricing my services. 99% of my clients get the negatives and I tell them they pay over the odds when they buy from my site. Surprisingly I still get many print sales with many clients telling me "you deserve to make some money on them".

Recently I even did a gig for a family of professional photographers who wanted the negatives, they STILL purchased photos online.

Lets remember whose day this is... the Bride, Groom and family.

Kimberley - I loved your reply, its nice to see film snobs are alive and kicking.

Normally I would recommend trying something before writing it off but, in your case I think you would really struggle to adapt to digital. Stick to your trusty film.

Candie, just out of interest how would the method of FTP/file transfer affect the pictures?

Do you mean the level of jpg compression or something?

I think part of the Zen idea is that anything you desire will ultimately disappoint you. Whether its a car, a house, a lover or a Eos 1D with a 50mm f1.2 lens.

Its true in a way. Anything you lust after, which you get - will let you down on some level, will disappoint you or won't quite live up to your expectations.

A wealthy friend of mine recently told me how he sold his Lamborghini for $300,000 because it was a "bit bumpy to drive and too small" yet he worked all his life to buy one.

I've learnt from 2007 that I shouldn't judge myself by others, by what they can do or what they have. What happens, happens. I'm grateful for everything I have.

I could write a book about all the mistakes I've made - I still come back from every shoot thinking "why did I do that?", or more often, "why didn't I do that?".

Everybody has made excellent posts already, I would probably agree with Shawn Gibson the most. You have to decide whether you are doing this for art or to make a living. It is very difficult to balance both and be satisfied with both elements.

To make a living often means you have to compromise the art, undertake shoots you wouldn't necessarily want to do, take boring shots that don't show off your creativity. But we all have to pay our (sub-prime) mortgages don't we?

If you are doing this part-time, with a main job, then you can be artistic and stick to your guns. As Mike Lotz says, learn to say no - maintain your integrity and credibility.

Last comment would be to stop obsessing about equipment and lenses. I have a couple of cameras with a few very expensive lenses. It's easy to think that buying the next hot lens will radically improve your art. I worked for the first year with a Canon 350D and a 50mm f1.8. I learned a lot working with the constraints of this basic setup and looking back feel that some of my favorite shots were taken with this simple setup.

To be honest you need to keep making mistakes. It really is the best way to learn.

Stunning photos - great site, well done.

j

Way too old. Try golf instead.

Honestly - what a silly thing to say...

Just get out there and do it!

Good luck,

j

p.s. I see you've got yourself one of those new fangled Personal Computers with "The Internet". Whatever next, cell phones?

Anne,

this is an excellent thought provoker that addresses those hidden doubts and insecurities that many of us feel. It also serves to encourage many of us to make that leap of faith more comfortable in the knowledge that someone like yourself has successfully made the transition.

Thanks for taking the time out to write the article. The best of luck to you and your business, I wish you every success.

j

I previously posted a question about shooting a (very) low light wedding in

december and have wondered whether it's worth buying a 40D (I have a 350D and

400D) or buy a 50mm f1.2? (currently have 17-55mm 2.8 IS, 70-200mm 2.8 IS and

50mm 1.8)

They cost around the same you see. Do I get the lens and have extra glass or get

the 40D and have extra ISO, better auto-focus and higher fps?

Would appreciate your musings....

I think his/her success is down to a lot of experience. This is someone who knows their camera inside out, understands light and knows what makes good composition. They obviously have a good way with people too.

It does help that the people and the locations are "attractive".