stu_nowlin

<p>If by commssion you mean hours and proofs, I offer that. I also offer packages. And a DIY option. At the moment my business has neither clients nor phone calls inquiring about weddings. The overall economic outlook in my area is not the best but falling into a wedding consumer black hole is more than I expected.</p>

<p>In general, given the evolution of bodies and lenses, I think money is better spent initially on great pro lenses. The bodies are always getting better but the optics do not see that dramatic increase in quality.<br>

Then get the D700. A great body. It has the D3 chip that delivers great IQ whereas the D300 does not.<br>

Stu</p>

<p>"With a crop camera the single best lens for wedding photography is a 17-55mm f2.8. A 24-70 is much too long on a crop camera and the Canon version is unreliable with many wedding photographers forced to use the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 to get reliable autofocus with their 5D cameras."<br>

I have not found this to be true at all. The Canon 24-70 / 2.8 works great with my 1D3 at weddings. I did have to get the calibration right on it to use the 2.8 but it is a very sharp lens that delivers in low light. (The 24-105 / 4 on the other hand does not work as well in low light reception hall situations. In that case I just put on the 24-70 and go.)<br>

The 580 EX I (or II now) has just enough power for all lighting needs at weddings for me. I would recommend this as your primary light.<br>

The ST-E2 is unreliable in some situations since it is optical rather than RF. I would get the Pocket Wizart TT1 and TT5 combo and have reliable light indoors as well as out. The latter can also sense signals even if they are buried in a Wescott Halo light modifier whereas the Canon ST-E2 is hopeless in this situation.<br>

My absolute favorite wedding portrait lens is my 70-200 / 2.8 IS. It works everywhere and delivers stunning images with IQ second to none.<br>

Stu</p>

From shooting years ago with manual Mamiyas to my current Canon 1Ds/1D3s I have used whatever tool was needed for the situation. P ("professional" mode, I hear) rarely produces consistency and requires more PP for me. Sometimes the action is so hot and the light so variable that I do use P and depend on the engineering to get me close to my exposure / WB parameters. I use M when I can for consistency. Creative shots usually require other solutions.

 

I have never shot a scripted wedding. They have all been fun, always get my creative eye working overtime and very fast-paced. I guess those Chicago brides are zombies.

 

Sometimes wedding work reminds me of the old joke about anesthesiology, there is a lot of time when not much occurs punctuated by moments of sheer terror.

 

Stu

Judgment is always difficult with murky situations. I normally follow Brooks' example. I temper this, however, by running the ISO up to reduce the flash output (or shut it off entirely and shoot at 6400 hoping for the best) which makes me more likely to not be noticed. I do not, under any circumstances, disregard church policy, whatever it might be, concerning photographing during the ceremony.

 

Discussions with the clients before hand greatly reduces the chance of extreme embarrassment for anyone. Ansel Adams commented, in another context, quoting Blaise Pascal, "Chance favors the prepared mind." Let your clients know how you shoot and ask for their approval.

 

Stu

I think the answer partly depends on how creative you wish to be with your layouts. I've noted that the really great magazine designers use InDesign. I am learning that but I am using PhotoShop in a free-form way now. It is easier to get accurate color with traditional photographic papers using profiles in PhotoShop. However, with the new press printed products I think InDesign will probably be one of the creative choices for photographers in the future.

 

I try to make my albums as client-centered and imaginative as I can. Brides seem to really like this. I much prefer this over template driven software. It might be slower but the end product is innovative and enchanting.

 

Stu

Shooting RAW and about the same number of shots that you do (1,000+) per wedding I use LR 1.4.1 (am migrating to 2). It saves me an incredible amount of time working up proofs for the client and for my web site.

 

All images I put in albums and sell are further refined with PhotoShop CS3. I can create incredible images here but it takes time and this care with final images pays off with the prices I have established.

 

The RAW processor (my choice is LR, but it may not be your choice) prepares an acceptable proof. Only PhotoShop gives me the quality and individuality I demand for all my clients.

 

Stu

Two comments:

 

1) The WSJ reported that some trader in these financial instruments made 3.4 BILLION in ONE year. This guy is probably one of the ones crying that the sky is falling hoping to re-sell these bad investments to the treasury and bill YOU.

 

2) The Gary Fong LightSphere worked well for me between 1 and 10 meters. Outside that range I had to go to other options. His videos showed him working within this range as I remember. If you shoot weddings by yourself, as I do, and you need soft light, you need natural light most of the time. I am migrating to control by the Canon 580 EX (decidedly NOT the II version without the mechanical switch) and Quantums with the Norman 19" soft box.

 

Stu

I save all RAW. I convert all RAW to DNG and save them as well after running them through Lightroom so I have my initial edits and the final picks. I store them on TWO sets of DVDs, from two different manufacturers, just in case dye lots are not reliable.

 

I save all PSDs (layered) and JPEGs (for printing) from edits to DVDs.

 

If I need to reprint I have the JPEG. If I need to make a change I have the PSD. If I want to go back and start over I have the DNG. I might need to rob something off of an unchosen file (get eyes from someone that had them closed on my DNG, for example, and copy them onto the DNG file) I can go back and scrounge for that.

 

Stu

I've had superb luck with White Glove First Edition Book albums. They are guaranteed for life. The presentation is simply fabulous. They make sure that it is printed correctly. If there is a color correction problem they contact you prior to printing. That is NOT true with commercial labs.

 

If you want a reliable press printed product for an inexpensive album, and you do ALL of the color correction, density, etc. so that it will look great, American Color Imaging in Waterloo, IA does a great job. I have had several "less expensive" press printed products and they all look fantastic. They are guaranteed for 30 days. (They just announced a new lay flat design that I am going to try next.) The caveat is that you do YOUR job correctly.

 

Stu