art_tatum

<p>Best photo of the lot.</p>

<p>It's in the page title typically found in the source code but your site is entirely flash so you'll need to look in your template admin info.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>I liked your photography but I wish I could have seen more. I was viewing the site on my Mac Book Pro using Chrome first and then Safari and it was a messy endeavor. Some images took way too long to load (on a fast connection) so long I thought the page was not loading. Perhaps your images are too fat... low res them. Also you spelled portrait wrong (portriat) in title bar of all your pages.</p>

<p>They look like a couple that I would like to have dinner with. It would be nice to know if they had feet.</p>

<p>Mitch if you had read it right before commenting you would realize that Matthew was commenting that the photographer (race unknown) had the wedding group (Asians) facing into a setting sun which caused them to squint. Everything is still right in the Bay area.</p>

<p>He has been a member here since 2004 <a href="../photodb/user?user_id=890505">LINK</a></p>

<p>All my images for my clients are available as a ZIP download from my server/site. I stopped sending out DVD's two years ago.</p>

 

<p>Is Brett Buckley the 'friend' or 'unofficial' photographer? Is it Brett?</p>

 

 

<p>Nathan you win the 'furthest from original I am going to really mess this image up' award. I don't imagine you were serious. Were you?</p>

<p>Most times when I see people try to 'correct' an image in this forum it ends up looking worse. This thread was no exception. There is no accounting for peoples/clients tastes, but there is such a thing as too much.</p>

<p>I got nothing from this posting. A fact less, silly rant.</p>

<p>If you haven't already, turn on the grid in your view finder and use it to line up horizons.</p>

<p>I agree with Craig and I suspect many others here that take pride in the profession probably concur as well. Here are your own words Jenna...</p>

<p><em><strong>I was totally out of my element and realized how much more I had to learn about photography.</strong> A lot of my <strong>photos turned out blurry or out-of-focus </strong>and I think it's because I made the mistake of having my aperture open to wide, messing with the depth of field, because I was so focused on letting in as much light as I could.</em></p>

<p>If what you write is true you should <strong>not be charging </strong>until you are 'into your element'. You asked for advice and that's mine.</p>

<p>1.) U.S. and Italy.<br>

2.) Private.</p>

<p>How does any of this really matter?</p>

<p>This smacks of an advertising hijack. Is this you Ted? (if I am wrong it's Googles fault)<br>

<strong>Ted Suss</strong><br>

<dl ><dd >Sales Manager at Neil Enterprises</dd><dd>Greater Chicago Area | Photography</dd></dl><dl ><dt >Current:</dt><dd >National Sales Manager-Professional Photography Division at Neil Enterprises, Founder at <strong>Prism Photo Seminars</strong></dd><dt >Past:</dt><dd >Owner-Photographer at Prism Photo</dd><dt >Education:</dt><dd >Rochester Institute of Technology</dd></dl></p>

<p>This is a no brainer. Just do it. I 'invest' 2x that amount every month in various ways to promote the business.</p>

<p>Your web site is... a web site. It works well and it didn't blow up while I paraded through your images. But what you should know (and probably already do) is that you have 'it'. Great captures and restrained editing. Nice. </p>

<p>Forever.</p>

<p>As they say on Family Feud... 'good answer' (although often they are not) but Rob you nailed it.</p>

<p>I have three VR lenses that I leave on all the time and I have for years and tens-of-thousands of photographs. All three are doing great.</p>

<p>Bad idea number one:</p>

<p><em>"I then plan on going to the local bookstore and placing them in some wedding magazines."</em></p>

<p>Good idea number one:</p>

<p>Advertise with Google Ad words.</p>

<p>You could start to buy your clients hard drives and throw money away or you could have better post production practices. If your typical weddings yield 20-30GBs then the wedding must be three days long. The simple and quick solution is to use Lightroom 3.0 for ALL your post-production.</p>

<p>Take the money. I don't draw lines between family and others and I charge for everything, all the time. This way I don't have any fuzzy zones and for the most part people respect this choice. It's just business baby.</p>

<p>If possible get up above the group, have them cluster close and look up. At the end of the day it's all about the faces and recognition of who was there.</p>

<p>You are over thinking this one, it is an easy decision given what you wrote,</p>

<p><em>'I am building back my word of mouth marketing from the ground up'</em></p>

<p>I see this as an opportunity. No discount (petty) or charging for your 3 images. Send her the images she requested (no charge of course) with your watermark in place. Let her know that she can use the images only if your watermark remains intact and visible.</p>