patrickdoddsphotography

<p>Thanks for your post Anne - it was just what I needed to hear today! Glad things are going so well for you and good luck with your future work. </p>

<p>I'm with those suggesting you should run not walk. Mostly it's the 40% rule that does it for me - anyone who sees photography as purely a numbers game is going to cause you problems I think. </p>

<p>Athena - have you read Jasmine Star on becoming a wedding photographer? I know this isn't what you want to do but her thoughts might nonetheless be of some use to you: </p>

<p>http://www.jasminestarblog.com/index.cfm?postID=1764&the-photo-business-learning-curve</p>

<p>She's not to everyone's taste but there is no denying her positivity and commitment. </p>

<p>Thanks William - I've been, and remain, guilty of way too much time spent online and do not get enough face-to-face interaction with others. In many spheres, not just this one, it would be good for me to get out more and meet people. </p>

<p>An interesting thread and Athena - I'm impressed you are still reading and still fighting to do these weddings considering some of the advice you have been given! With regard to this advice, I'm a fairly new wedding (amongst other things) photographer myself and I'd be interested to know how to go about getting someone as a backup for <em>me</em>, as the photographer, which is recommended in a post, above. Insurance, two bodies, spare batteries, cards etc (some overlap in lenses, but I don't carry two copies of each - can't afford to, and besides, I literally couldn't carry all that weight - I'm one of those three 2.8 zooms people): all these I understand and have reasonably well covered. But someone to cover for <em>me</em> if I am ill has been a question I've had for a while and one for which I don't have an answer. Perhaps getting to know a few more photographers is likely the answer (joining an association?) but if anyone has more thoughts about this particular aspect of a** covering, I'd be very pleased to hear it! I'm honest when booking weddings and tell clients that I don't have a backup photographer, though I also say that I'd have to be very very unwell indeed before I'd even consider not fulfilling my responsibilities. <br>

I hope this isn't butting in on your thread Athena. As I say, I don't have much experience, but from the little I do have I would say that being a bit nervous is a good sign - it doesn't mean you shouldn't do it, but really, it is only when you think about all the things that could go wrong that you realise the enormity of what it is you are setting out to do. Another thing that rings true from what has been said, above, is that you are often taking pictures for many more people than the bride and groom and this can lead to difficulties. With this in mind, if you are making up contracts I'd strongly recommend including something along the lines of the fact that you NEVER share all the photos you take and that you cannot guarantee to get all the shots requested (things happen, timings go out of whack, one person changes their mind...) and, if the wedding is a reasonable size, nor can you guarantee you will get shots of all the people in attendance (group shots, perhaps, excepted, though even then Uncle Ted pops off to the bathroom and hey presto, someone's complaining!).<br>

Anyway, sorry if this all adds to the doom and gloom - it really isn't meant to :-) - weddings are beautiful occasions and the feeling when you nail a shot you are pretty sure no one else would have seen or anticipated - well, that's part of what keeps me going back for more. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Any chance this release will be bug-free and stable on Mac? I loved the files I could get from this programme when it worked but eventually the crashes were just too time consuming and I gave up on it. </p>

<p>Mark K - that is beautiful. I'd also put it on my wall, no hesitation.</p>

<p>I'm not the most experienced wedding photographer out there (!) but I've regularly used the 105 and have found it very useful; I've also found that it does focus hunt a bit, but then in my experience so does my 24-70. All this on a pair of D700s BTW.<br>

Would I like a bit more reach? Sometimes, certainly, but the size / weight issue puts me off a tad, not just from the POV of carrying such a lens about, but more importantly from the POV of my style of photography - I like to get in close with people if I can, mix it up with them a bit, get a bit of contact between myself and them and then hopefully get to the point where they no longer care if I am poking a lens around - and then the pictures flow.... <br>

<br />Of course, YMMV :) <br>

<br />Good luck however you go. <br>

Patrick </p>

<p>I quite like it. A little bit over-saturated but otherwise yep, I'd keep it. Interesting bouquet by the way - it suggests a stylish wedding? </p>

<p>That is awesome Garcia!</p>

 

<p>What Bruno said. Wherever you are posting on the internet, it is important to remember that there are real people on the receiving end and, wherever possible, I think there is benefit in tying what you say to your real-world identity and thereby keep it civil and honest.</p>

<p>Thanks for all the responses. I was particularly interested to see, Wayne, that a 2nd shooter had used one exclusively at a wedding. I'm not sure I'd be wholly happy to rely on it, but I'm beginning to think that if I got to the end of the day and felt that I had the job "in the bag" and wanted just to experiment, I'd be happy to give it an airing.</p>

<p>Thanks John. I didn't buy it primarily for professional use, I bought it because it is small and discrete and a lot less bother to haul about than a D700. However, I'm interested to see if it might be useful at times when I am working.</p>

<p>Thanks Starvy. I've actually already bought one (see post), but I'm having trouble getting the best from it at present so won't be using it any time soon. I do wonder, though, if its diminutive appearance and high ISO capabilities, alongside a near silent shutter and fast flash sync, mean that one day I will be packing it in the kit bag.</p>

<p>I've recently purchased a Fuji X100 and wonder if anyone has any experience of using one at a wedding? I'm still getting used to its myriad quirks and foibles, but I'm also still hoping for good things to come. Would others, with more experience than me, consider it to be something they could employ in their equipment arsenal or is it a camera that doesn't bring enough to the table, as it were, to merit inclusion? Clearly I wouldn't take it along until I was wholly familiar with it, but I can't help hoping it is something I will eventually be able to use to get pictures I would otherwise miss / would be unable to take, and that it will thereby add to the service I provide.<br>

Thanks in advance for any advice.</p>

<p>Humour is the way to go I think - keep the session light hearted and I think you might be able to get away with some suggestions. Obviously though there is a difference between positing the idea of rhinoplasty and sponging some gloop off a tie.... :)</p>

<p>I'm starting out and no doubt my methods will get refined with time but at the moment i use a combination of Photoshop CS4 and Nikon Capture NX2 / Nikon View NX. This last crashes regularly but is still useful for some tasks (tasks that in fact might perhaps best be done in Lightroom - more investment in software isn't the way I want to go at the moment though!). <br>

Possibly some of the photos I work on could be batched processed but I'm still not convinced that I'd be able to get the quality I want by going down this route and to some extent I pride myself on working on each picture individually: some only require a minimum of retouching, others get more treatment.<br>

FWIW, I've gone through about 1200 photos in the last week or two and have about 600 more to get through by the weekend from a couple of weddings I've done in the last fortnight. I'm a heavy editor though - only about a third make the final cut; either I need to be more discriminating or my technique needs to improve! Well, in fact of course my technique always needs improvement but I'm sure you know what i mean. Good luck with your edit - I'll be interested to hear how your workflow evolves over time.</p>

<p>Good for you for being so honest with your friends. My thoughts as follows: Light: there won't be enough or there will be too much.</p>

<p>That would bother me too Paul. It is analogous to a shop that I pass every day on my way to work that for a good number of years was emblazoned with a huge yellow sign saying "Closing Down: Everything Must Go". The shop was still there this morning, a decade on. If I could have mustered up the energy to call the relevant council and tell them about it so as to put a stop to it I would have done but I couldn't and didn't; similarly, if there were an easy way of getting a photographer not to cheat (assuming this is what is happening, although you admit you can't prove it), I'd do it. As to methods of achieving this, sorry, I can't help you; likely someone here will be able to thought I should imagine.</p>

<p>Sorry Harry, no offence, but that link "How to critique a photograph" could easily be entitled "How <em>not</em> to critique a photograph". I mean, c'mon, a <em>formula</em>?</p>

<p>So Rae, how did the next wedding go? Better than you feared I hope and your nerves proved unfounded?</p>