scott_page

A question for Mary (sorry to take over the tread but it might help clarify things). Mary, I shoot with a 1V also and a 550EX. I understand that in outdoor conditions, this flash automatically dials down about 1.5 stops to balance with ambient light. So are you saying that you subtract an "additional" 1 to 1.5 stops over and above the reduction already applied by the "smart" flash? Or are you using a "dumb" flash that does not do this auto-reduction?

 

Thanks.

Cameras are not allow because 1) the place is sacred, and 2) many events that occur there (besides weddings), are very sacred. Temple marriages are very simple ceremonies. The document signing (required by law of course), the ring exchange, and the kiss, are not really even part of the "sacred" part of the Temple marriage, but are conducted if the couple wishes, because its a tradition everyone expects. My thinking is that to tell the story without a huge gaping hole where the ceremony goes in a non-Temple marriage:

 

1)a few shots of the couple going in, waving goodbye to the people that can't enter with them (those without Temple enterence documents) but that will be waiting for them to exit;

 

2)recreate the feeling of the document signing, the ring exchange, and the kiss with some closeups taken at the reception;

 

3)then shots of the couple walking out and greeting those waiting for them.

 

There is really nothing in "re-creation" of those few events that should be considered offensive by anyone. And with close-up type shots, the "feeling" of the acutual event should be possible. There is really nothing else that I can think of that could be re-created even close to acuratly and that would not offend.

 

So I do not think there will be anything wrong with the above. But it is a pretty thin story as they go and doesn't lend itself to the wedding photojournalism approach. I'm hoping for some "love story" ideas to add some un-posed "meat" to the mostly posed around the ceremony. Otherwise the album will be divided up as a bunch of posed family pictures at the Temple of the already married couple, then the typical formal poses of family with b&g and the reception. Then FINALLY, some photojournalistic images around events at the reception.

 

I realize that this type of marriage really does not lend itself very well to the photojournalistic/candid storybook, photoessay approach. But I'm looking for ideas.

 

The Temple buildings themselves tend to be rather beautiful. And the grounds are often very garden like with nice landscaping filled with many flowers. So there is opportunity for architectural detail type shots to add to dress element shots, close up of the brides shoes, etc. Maybe it is enough.

I love the storybook style, the wedding photojournalism style. To me

this style provides the most interesting albums. Traditional albums

are nice but rather boring to look at. I realize that many or most

clients also need posed in-color shots as well to satisfy the needs

of the wedding party members for classical portraits.

 

Here is my quandry - how to shoot a story when you can't shoot the

most important part of the story. "What do you mean", you ask? I

live in Utah; the center of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday

Saints, whose members are more commonly known as the Mormons or LDS.

Mormons can be married in the traditional manner that you are all

accustomed to, but at least half or more, choose to be married in one

of the many Temples scattered around the world. The "Temple"

marriage is the "preferred" way for those that meet the strict

worthiness standards to enter the Temple.

 

The problem for the wedding photographer is that cameras are strictly

forbidden inside the Temples. That's right, you can only shoot the

unmarried couple going in and the now married couple coming out.

Wedding dresses and the standard tux are NOT worn going in (just

standard church clothes), however, they are typically put on inside

the Temple's dressing rooms for pictures to be taken outside the

Temple. So the photography at the Temple is just about all

outdoors. There are a few "inside" places such as foyers and

hallways that aren't actually within the Temple where shots of the

couple can be taken, but these are generally not large enough or

appropriate for the whole wedding party. Typically, the b&g and

family are photographed outside around the Temple and on the

beautiful flower-filled grounds of the Temple. These shots out of

necessity are traditional posed shots (you have anywhere from 3-8

bridal parties all waiting to use the Temple steps and grounds for

pictures) taken in mostly the same locations.

 

No shots of the b&g getting dressed;

No shots of the first kiss;

No shots of the ring exchange;

No shots of walking down the aisle (which isn't done anyway);

No shots of document signing;

No shots of the cerimony; and,

No shots of the church offical who is performing the wedding (you

will in fact not even see this person before, during, or after, and

neither you or the b&g will know who it is that will perform the

marriage).

 

Rather boring. So any thoughts on how to tell a story when much of

the story is hidden? I guess you could recreate simulations of some

of the shots; ring exchange; document signing; first kiss as a close-

up. You obviously can't re-create the setting so these re-creations

would be intended to be depictions of the actual event in order to

tell the story. They would likely have to be done at the reception

location.

 

You may be able to get dressing-type shots at the reception which is

usually much later in the day. The reception is where most of the

visible action is going to take place. You could I suppose take

shots of the b&g getting ready to go to the Temple, but know that the

Temple events are usually in the morning with the reception in the

early evening. So you would have a VERY long day if you tried to

cover it all.

 

After all that explanation so that you understand the difficulties -

do you all have any thoughts on how to "tell a story"?

 

Maybe an early focus in the album could be on the pre-wedding day

couple. Where they met or got engaged, favorite places to spend time

together, etc. But it seems these "engagement" type shots would have

to be rather planned and posed and would require location shooting

and a lot of extra time from the photographer.

 

Catholic and Jewish weddings seem alot more interesting to me to

photograph, but being a Mormon myself and living in this community, I

will likely get alot more Temple weddings than anything else.

 

Your ideas would be most appreciated.

You could also produce two albums; one with your "story" selection, and the second album of other seemingly less-important candids. Or, one album with the "story" at the front, layed out in a artistic manner, then at the back, maybe separated by a vellum sheet, pages of left-over shots arranged in a simple manner of 4-8 or so per page.

 

This "album" could be printed in a low-rez manner if you are designing on the computer, this proof-album can be presented to the b&g for approval along with a CD of all the shots (those left after first editing for technical quality), then if there is some shot that they just have to have in the album that you did not include, then they have some opportunity for input.

 

I suppose this could result in them wanting to mess with your careful design. Would have to try it an see. But I suspect that if your are good at all with design, they will love your choices and not mess with it much. This maybe an easier method to sell than a strict "I do it all" style.

 

Thoughts?

Marc,

 

From the website referenced above:

 

"In testing just completed I have discovered that glass and UV blocking glass do not stop the fading it tends to proceed along at exactly the same rate behind glass, both plain and UV blocking. The test took six months and showed no benefit in using glass to stop the fading, however glass does protect the print from pollutants in the air.

 

Of course matting in acid free matts and then framing your works under glass is advisable and perhaps a necessity. Plain hardware store glass however affords you little protection from light damage and the more expensive 97% UV blocking glass gives only about 5% and perhaps up to 10% protection ( tests are being conducted at this time). You might try asking for the "Museum Grade" of this type of glass, it affords more protection but is hard to find as framers usually do not carry it. You can calculate and add those percentage of time to our longevity estimates depending on the glass you are using. Glass bascially keep the image from atmospheric contamination. But you can accomplish this same atmospheric protection by varnishing your prints as well."

Album looks terrific - more details please on construction. Has anyone here looked into the Stonehinge system for self-made albums on inkjets? If so, please comment. I really want to produce single and multiple image pages in storybook fashion, then bind them somehow. But the current book binding vendors, like White Glove Books, are just to expensive for my market.

Timber�s thread on controlling the customer�s picture selection got

me to thinking and the following ideas developed:

 

I'm working through this philosophically and trying to decide what

kind of wedding photographer I want to be. Do I want to do it just

for the money (that's a joke...what money? In my area most pro's

start at about $495-$695 for a 1 hour wedding and top out at under

$2000 for a huge 2 photographer-all-day-multiple-location affair).

Do I want to be the most artistic and skilled wedding photographer

that I can be? Taking classes, analyzing other's work, taking the

kind of client's that like the kind of shots that I like to take,

etc.? Or do I want to be something in-between?

 

Do I want to be the "be all" photographer that meets the needs of

everyone, shooting as many weddings as I can, mass production,

typical JC Penney's studio quality? Or do I want to be a low volume

but high quality shooter with a unique style that not everyone

likes? But a style that satisfies me artistically, while producing a

product that thrills the selective client that is attracted to my

unique vision. Or do I want to be something in-between?

 

Wedding photography is photojournalism. It is also portraiture.

There is portraiture that basically accurately shows the likeness of

the subject but little else. Then there is portraiture that presents

ideas about the subject; shows personality; tells you something about

the person; makes you want to know more about them. You know what

I�m taking about, you�ve seen the difference. Photojournalism can

just report the facts but it can also tell a story. A wedding can be

a photo essay with skill and planning.

 

I've looked at dozens of books on wedding photography...I've looked

at dozens of local studio album examples. A great many shooters

appear to be artistically "dead", going through the motions,

producing cookie-cutter albums. Then there are the few that you can

just tell from their work that they actually LIKE shooting weddings.

Maybe they just like photographing people; maybe they like the

romance of weddings and like being around couples in love; maybe

weddings help them to feel young; maybe they like the challenge they

find working under pressure; who knows? But the point is, they seem

to like shooting weddings, it shows in their work, and I suspect that

they are happier and possibly more successful than the other guys.

 

How about you out there? What kind of wedding shooter are you?

Bored or having fun? Are you a wedding hack, or a skilled craftsman,

or an artist? Do you LIKE shooting weddings? If so, why? What do

you get out of it? What do you do in ensure that you continue liking

it? How do you stop the bordom so many shooters come to with

weddings? How do you keep your images fresh and exciting? Your

thoughts please on my ramblings.

"Why control something somebody else is paying dearly for?"

 

Because they are paying dearly for it and they don't know what they are doing in album design. You hopefully do and have studied album design, studied juried albums submitted to competition, etc. They are not paying you to just rent your equipment and right index finger. They are paying you to give them a great album that brings tears of joy when they look at it. If you have any photographic talent, you should also have more artistic-design skills than most of your customers. If you have no interest in the final product, I'd say just adopt the "hand over the film at the end" approach and move on to the next job. Much easier that way. If you do care about the finished product, it seems that Marc's approach, that is controlling the album to the end, makes good sense.

 

"If they haven't got the taste or sense to pick photographs, they probably can't pick photographers either."

 

I'm not sure what you mean by the above comment. A great many clients likely do NOT know how to pick a photographer. Likely choice is a combination of price, word-of-mouth recommendations, and gut reaction to seeing albums. I'd guess that many if not most are clueless as to really comparing the style, image quality, artistic ability, etc. of photographers. I agree, they likely can't really pick either one very well. So what is your point and does it matter?

 

"Or just tell them that with the 25% of the bad shots you culled, you took 25% off the fees."

 

Ummmm, OK...is that supposed to be a snide comment of some sort. Do you really show them ALL the photos that you shoot, including your out of focus, little Johnny picking his nose, Bride scratching her ass, lighting gone wrong shots? Or are you going to tell me that every picture you shoot is technically perfect and artistically perfect? Again, if you really don't care about the client, the photos, the album - then it is just a job to you and you might as well just hand over the film and suggest that Wally World has the best pricing for developing your K-Mart brand film. And why spend much on equipment. A point and shoot with built-in flash shooting no-name brand 800 ASA film will do just fine. Even better, just shoot with disposables that way you don't have to carry anything away from the shoot.

 

Ok, I got a bit carried away with the last few sentences. But that is the extreme end of the spectrum. Total control over the finished product at one end and don't give a rat's ass at the other end. So decide just where you are on that spectrum then structure your service level accordingly.

 

To Marc,

 

If you are still reading this thread, what to you think about my approach in presenting a larger album than the client contracted for, designed by me, then asking the client to work with me in trimming it down (or better yet, paying more to keep all the images)? It seems to me that is much better than the traditional approach of having the client build the album up. Instead of trying to "sell up" more pictures to the client, it seems to be a psychologically shift in the photographers advantage to ask the client to take away great images. They may decide that it is easier to come up with more money than to do without those pages.

Wow Mike..."On the bus" is wonderful! Where can I get a 5x7? scott@networld.com

I have not shot any weddings to date so take this for what its worth...but, How about selling the customer a package with so many page sides, some are 8x10, some are smaller, along with mixed-image pages.

 

You, the artist/craftsman, layout a mock album with the best selection within their purchased number of sides, then add maybe 30-100% more mixed-image size pages (provided that the quality/quantity is there). Present the client with a pdf or other electronic album or print a low res "proof" album and present it with the additional price per page (along with tiered discounts for larger numbers of pages). Then ask the couple to remove pages that they don't want (if they want to stay within the original budget) along with helpful hints from you for the least important pages. If they want to see more images, you could also print out low res proof pages of your "rejects" (not the images unworthy of the client seeing them to to technical mistakes, but those that just don't work as well as what you have included in the mock album).

 

Seems to me that this approach would:

1) Provide the chance for increased sales;

2) Allow you most of the creative control over the album;

3) Still give the client creative input;

4) Allow the client to feel that are getting a lot of images to pick from;

5) Speed up the final album production.

 

What do you all think? I like Marc's approach to presenting the client a designed album, but must balance that approach with my area of the country which is one of the worst there is for pricing. A great many couples wouldn't accept a high initial price, but may have a hard time letting go of great images once they see them.

Scott,

 

You were simply out of line in your rude comments. Thomas WAS trying to be helpful. He DID go out of his way to explain why he loves the Pocket Wizards. I don't see anywhere that he made judgements as to your financial health or lack thereof. It appears that you are a tad touchy out your financial status. You are the one that made judgements, you are the one that was being rude, and you are the one that should apologize.

 

If you did not like his advise, then you should have thanked him for his effort, then ignored the advice. But to slap him down for his advice portrays you as a small-minded, mean-spirited, immature brat, likely just weaned off his momma's tit, without enough self-possession to be gracious to someone's well-meaning advice. Now I'm not saying you ARE those things, just that your comments make you APPEAR to be those things.

 

I looked at your website and price list (nice pictures and nice website by the way). Your prices are about 3 times the going rate in my area. Your packages start at $2250? Around here experienced pros with nice studio's start coverage (fewer hours to be sure) at $600 and a comparable package to yours at half your cost or less. You don't appear to be the "starving artist" that your angry post portrays.

 

Have a nice day.

My first wife and I were married for 17 years and had 4 kids together. We could not afford a "good" wedding photographer and hired a cheap part-timer. One of his flash units failed and he did not notice. Consequently, most of the shots were unuseable.

 

My wife died at age 34. What I wouldn't give for some good photos of our wedding day. Fortunatly, she went to a quality studio photographer for bridal shots. I contacted the photographer (who had closed her studio and moved out of state) and told her of my wife's death. She hunted through her old files and found the negatives from the bridal shoot. She was kind enough to send them all to me, free of charge. Those negatives are now "gold" to me and my kids and they are the only decent pictures we have of her (my wife was camera shy and never wanted her picture taken).

 

Never underestimate the value of quality photography on a wedding day and think twice and three times before throwing out 20 year old negatives or digital files. You never know when a family might really need duplicates of those old shots of yours.

I don't have an answer, but a question...

 

When digitally shooting a large catalog, such as his 1900 piece shoot, would you shot in RAW mode or a jpeg mode? I'm sure it depends upon clients needs, but if the client wants "ready to publish" pics, would a photographer really want to post-process 1900 shots? I've never done any commercial work so just wondering about the workflow on a big cat shot like this. Thanks.