Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Getting into Wedding Photography?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 4:26:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hi All,

After taking some amateur photographs for friends weddings I have produced
some very pleasing results which has encouraged me to develop my skills to
become a professional wedding photographer.

I am already highly proficient in Photoshop and PSP thanks to a design
degree but I only started taking an interest in photography a couple of
years ago.

I have enrolled in a diploma course run over one year starting in September
which I hope will improve my shots but I am keen on anyone elses advice on
what to do and what equipment to start building up.

I am currently using a 300D with the EF-S 17-85 lens as I feel it gives a
good zoom range for wedding situations. The wide angle is useful for group
shots and the zoom is good enough to get up-close and personnal candid shots
of people some distance away. A prime lens would probrably be best suited
to the staged shots but I don't have one yet.

My complete list of equipment at present is:
EOS 300D
EF-S 17-85 1:4.5-5.5 IS
Kit Lens (EF-S 18-55 1:3.5-5.5)
EF 35-80 (This lens in conjunction with the one above act as a backup for
the 17-85 lens)
4 x CF cards (1GB, 128mb, 64mb, 32mb)
1 x Microdrive 2.2GB
1 x std battery
Basic Tripod
Old (1970's) Flash (Which I can't get to work with the 300D very well
at-all)
Laptop & card reader

I think the essential additionnal items of equipment I would require prior
to taking on a wedding are:

Another body (Incase of equipment failure), pref 20D or 350D for the extra
functionality and Res
Additionnal (charged) batteries &/or a pro battery pack
A Cannon EX flash (any suggestions)

In the long run and as my skills develop I would like a full frame DSLR but
I think a 300/350D is adequate for the time being, provided they don't want
prints any bigger than A4.

Any thoughts or ideas would be gratefully recieved.

Thanks,

John

More about : wedding photography

Anonymous
August 19, 2005 4:26:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

John Ortt wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> After taking some amateur photographs for friends weddings I have
> produced some very pleasing results which has encouraged me to
> develop my skills to become a professional wedding photographer.
>
> I am already highly proficient in Photoshop and PSP thanks to a design
> degree but I only started taking an interest in photography a couple
> of years ago.
>
> I have enrolled in a diploma course run over one year starting in
> September which I hope will improve my shots but I am keen on anyone
> elses advice on what to do and what equipment to start building up.
>
> I am currently using a 300D with the EF-S 17-85 lens as I feel it
> gives a good zoom range for wedding situations. The wide angle is
> useful for group shots and the zoom is good enough to get up-close
> and personnal candid shots of people some distance away. A prime
> lens would probrably be best suited to the staged shots but I don't
> have one yet.
> My complete list of equipment at present is:
> EOS 300D
> EF-S 17-85 1:4.5-5.5 IS
> Kit Lens (EF-S 18-55 1:3.5-5.5)
> EF 35-80 (This lens in conjunction with the one above act as a backup
> for the 17-85 lens)
> 4 x CF cards (1GB, 128mb, 64mb, 32mb)
> 1 x Microdrive 2.2GB
> 1 x std battery
> Basic Tripod
> Old (1970's) Flash (Which I can't get to work with the 300D very well
> at-all)
> Laptop & card reader
>
> I think the essential additionnal items of equipment I would require
> prior to taking on a wedding are:
>
> Another body (Incase of equipment failure), pref 20D or 350D for the
> extra functionality and Res
> Additionnal (charged) batteries &/or a pro battery pack
> A Cannon EX flash (any suggestions)
>
> In the long run and as my skills develop I would like a full frame
> DSLR but I think a 300/350D is adequate for the time being, provided
> they don't want prints any bigger than A4.
>
> Any thoughts or ideas would be gratefully recieved.
>
> Thanks,
>
> John

I would suggest checking locally with photographers who do weddings.
See if one of them will take you on as an assistant to one of their regular
photographers. This is a lot to the business that can best be learned on
the job.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 4:26:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <4305bf6f$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net>, John Ortt
<johnortt@noemailsuppliedasdontwantspam.com> wrote:

> Any thoughts or ideas would be gratefully recieved.

Professional photography is not about the hardware. You would do well
to learn about lighting and posing, get the damned light off the camera
and use at least two lights for formals...and then learn about
business.
Related resources
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 4:26:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

About equipment...
Get more CF memory...you won't have time to upload pictures from CF
to PC fast enough at times. And be sure to upload two copies of
pictures taken into two different places (may one set on a USB
harddrive) for redundancy.
Get a flash unit which can be used with a Quantum Turbo battery or
equivalent...you need your flash to recycle FAAST, not wait for the
damn thing all the time for another shot.
Get a rotating flash bracket which will position the flash unit HIGH
above the lens so that shadows are hidden behind the subject (and not
visible out to their side!), and which allows the flash to be rotated
to stay above the lens even when you change from landscape to portrait
layout for the shot.
Get a flash unit which you can slave to the light on camera, mounted
on a light stand and set to be the highlight, so you can use the
on-camera as fill.
Get a radio slave, or you will have family and friends triggering
your on-stand flash and eating up its batteries!!!
Get a handheld flash meter to do incident light readings rather than
trying to use reflective readings which are so easily fooled by white
wedding dress or the dark tux for your portraits. (Yes, you can shoot
and look at histograms and then adjust, but it is faster to pre-meter
for formals and portraits and set things right the first time!!!)

About technique and business...
Get to the point where technically everything is instinctive...so
that you don't have to slowly think of how to best handle a certain
lighting situation, and how to best pose people so they don't look fat.
You will have NO TIME to puzzle your way thru.
Be nice, not overbearing. It is THEIR wedding, after all, not
YOURS! I hate photographers who are overly obtrusive and too
controlling. So do the wedding party!!!
Get to know the timing and sequence of weddings. That will help
you to plan for what's next, not react for what's next. And it will
also help you to be the Guide, as all too often the MC/DJ is a fool who
only knows how to cue up the next song, and as the photographer you are
expected to know what comes next (to guide the party thru the sequence)
For weddings of cultures you are not familiar with, ASK IN ADVANCE
for the wedding party/family to tell you what happens and when, where
you need to be ready to grab shots.
Provide a list of possible shots to the bride at time of booking,
ask her to indicate which shots are important to get, and then be sure
you FOLLOW the list and do every one of the shots she asks for!
When you can, shoot at least three of each shot...someone is always
blinking, drooling, or looking stupid.
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 4:26:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Expect payment problems - unless you get up-front payment! One of the
guys on my street dabbled in wedding photography - and constantly got
burned by nonpaying clients; he ended up with quite a fleet of used
cars he took in compromise payment from them.

Browse this gun show for FREE! Shop the
http://stores.ebay.com/INTERNET-GUN-SHOW
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 6:08:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>My standard, back when I was shooting more regular, was 1/3 due at
>signing, 1/3 due on the wedding date, and the final 1/3 to get the
>proof book.

That was my payment staging as well, when I was still doing weddings
regularly.
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 7:08:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ok, Joseph and Canongirly have both slapped my wrist for not having a proper
flash on my 300D :) 

Does anyone have any suggestions please?

Should I go for a Canon or should I try a respected (but cheaper)
alternative such as Sigma?
Do I buy new or should I try Used equipment?
I have heard a lot of talk about the 300D being very fussy wrt flash
photography....what does this entail?

Another thing mentioned was to "get the flash off the camera". By this I
assume they mean to use a flash on an arm so that the light doesn't bounce
straight back into the lens. What is the best way of doing this?
On older cameras I have seen ruberised cords which connect to the shoe and
allow the flash to be up to approx 1m away but newer setups are using the
remote controlled flashes which I assume work on radio control and as such
should be able to work much farther away.

In short what are my options, how much will each one cost and what will each
allow me to do?

Thanks in advance,

John
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 7:08:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 15:08:56 +0100, "John Ortt"
<johnortt@noemailsuppliedasdontwantspam.com> wrote:

>Ok, Joseph and Canongirly have both slapped my wrist for not having a proper
>flash on my 300D :) 
>
>Does anyone have any suggestions please?
>
>Should I go for a Canon or should I try a respected (but cheaper)
>alternative such as Sigma?
>Do I buy new or should I try Used equipment?
>I have heard a lot of talk about the 300D being very fussy wrt flash
>photography....what does this entail?
>
>Another thing mentioned was to "get the flash off the camera". By this I
>assume they mean to use a flash on an arm so that the light doesn't bounce
>straight back into the lens. What is the best way of doing this?
>On older cameras I have seen ruberised cords which connect to the shoe and
>allow the flash to be up to approx 1m away but newer setups are using the
>remote controlled flashes which I assume work on radio control and as such
>should be able to work much farther away.
>
>In short what are my options, how much will each one cost and what will each
>allow me to do?
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>John

Either stick with Canon, or go with one of the wedding/pro specialty
units (I used Quantum T2's, when I shot film and they still work, in
Auto mode, not TTL, with my D100). BTW, you need at least 2 of them.
The Quantum's, with Turbo battery, where around $600 ea, and that was
10 years ago. On the other hand, I use a Nikon SB28dx, filled with the
latest 2500mAH NiMH's, and can generally get through a whole event on
one set of batteries. That said, I ALWAYS carry at least three extra,
fully charged sets with me.

There are a bunch of brackets out there, and virtually every
wedding/event photographer will have his camera on one. IMO, Newton
and Custom Brackets make the nicest. For handheld use, the flash
rotator variety is fine, but for your group shots, you are going to
want your camera on a tripod, and will need a camera rotator type
bracket.

Its totally "mickie mouse" to shoot groups without a tripod. While you
are posing the group, your assistant moves the camera/tripod, and
frames the shot. When you step back to the camera, all that should be
left to deal is confirm focus, and take the shot. If its taking longer
than that, you wedding party is going to get impatient. Typically, I
had 30 minutes, after the ceremony, to take anywhere between 60-90
shots. At least 1-2 rolls of the bride and groom together, and the
rest of the various groups that were agreed upon. The post-ceremony
groups are the most stressful part of the day. Everybody wants to get
out of the church/facility, and get to the party and nobody has any
patience. However, you better get this part right because at least 50%
of your sales will come from this perioud of shooting.

BTW, you haven't even talked about a backdrop and portable studio
lighting kit. Some brides like this look, and sometimes weather and
circumstances conspire and you will have to use one regardless if it
was the first choice. Also, the guy I used to shoot for and I offered
"free" engagement photos, generally shot in the studio. Great way to
show them your work, and see what they are like to work/interact with,
and real cost to you is minimal.

As it has been said before, find another pro, or two, to assist. You
might also find yourself shooting for that person after a year or two
of assisting.

DLGlos
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 7:15:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"John Ortt" <johnortt@noemailsuppliedasdontwantspam.com> wrote in message
news:4305e5a1$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net...
> Ok, Joseph and Canongirly have both slapped my wrist for not having a
> proper flash on my 300D :) 
>
> Does anyone have any suggestions please?
>
> Should I go for a Canon or should I try a respected (but cheaper)
> alternative such as Sigma?
> Do I buy new or should I try Used equipment?
> I have heard a lot of talk about the 300D being very fussy wrt flash
> photography....what does this entail?
>
> Another thing mentioned was to "get the flash off the camera". By this I
> assume they mean to use a flash on an arm so that the light doesn't bounce
> straight back into the lens. What is the best way of doing this?
> On older cameras I have seen ruberised cords which connect to the shoe and
> allow the flash to be up to approx 1m away but newer setups are using the
> remote controlled flashes which I assume work on radio control and as such
> should be able to work much farther away.
>
> In short what are my options, how much will each one cost and what will
> each allow me to do?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> John
>
>
It's a good thing you're sitting down already, because the cost of equipment
might knock you off of your feet. We have found, for the best, most
consistent results, that the Canon flashes don't do the job, nor do Sigma,
Sunpak, etc. E-TTL II is the culprit, not only with your 300D, but with our
20Ds. The best flashes we've found for the job are Quantum T4d, with Turbo
battery packs. The combination runs just a tick under $1000. Each. And
you need at least 2 battery packs for each flash, at $500 more, per. The
bright spot in this is, if you live in a metropolitan area, these things are
often available for rent, for about $25 a day.
And, when Canongirly said, "Oh and yes GET THE DAMN FLASH OFF THE
CAMERA..jeez." she meant you need to buy a flash bracket to lift the flash
off of the camera's hot shoe. The best one we've found, at least for the
price, is the Stroboframe Pro-T, which will pivot the flash to keep it over
the lens when you switch from horizontal to vertical orientation. About
$100. This one is the least expensive one that doesn't put the controls in
an awkward position when the camera is held vertically, unlike the
FlipFrame, which will put the shutter button at the bottom, or cover the
controls on the grip, if you have one.
Also, f2.8 lenses are a necessity, something we've learned by experience.
We didn't think so, at first, but we found out. We've also found that zooms
are better than fixed focal length lenses in practical use, counter to what
many have said.
Our equipment list for a wedding is as follows:
Canon 20D (2)
Canon D30 (1) backup
Oly E-10 (1) backup
Canon 1n (1) in case we feel a need for film
Canon 16-35 f2.8 L (1)
Sigma 17-35 f2.8-4 (1) backup
Canon 24-70 f2.8 L (2)
Tokina 28-70 f2.6-2.8 (1) backup
Canon 28-135 IS (2) 'cause ya never know, and for backup cameras.
50mm f1.8 (1) (soon to be replaced by an f1.4) need for speed
Quantum T4d flash (2)
Quantum Turbo battery (4)
Canon 420EX (1) backup
BP 511 batteries (4) spares
Reflectors
Ladder (works great for group shots.)
Assorted screwdrivers, pliers, electrical cords, etc.

And we sometimes carry two battery powered, portable 300w/s studio strobes
and portable backdrop stand with a couple of cloth backdrops, depending on
the venue and the job.


Canongirly's suggestion that you get a job as an assistant to a wedding
photographer was a good one, and it is a very common way to get started in
the business.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 7:19:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> I would suggest checking locally with photographers who do weddings.
> See if one of them will take you on as an assistant to one of their
> regular photographers. This is a lot to the business that can best be
> learned on the job.

I did considder this Joseph but I didn't think anybody would be interested
as they would potentially be giving away all their trade secrets and maybe
one day creating a competitor!

I suppose I might well get taken on pro-gratis as Canongirly suggested which
would suit me fine.
I might also be able to give something back as I'm pretty swish on Photoshop
if I do say so myself and I could potentially do page layouts and or web
content for them.......

Hmmmm....think I'll be picking up the phone tomorrow :) 
August 19, 2005 7:28:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

1. Don't carry a spare camera body, carry TWO spare camera bodies! I learned
this lesson the hard way. I grant you the odds of two bodies going down on
the same shoot are pretty long, but it CAN happen. Keep one LOCKED in the
vehicle (OUT OF SIGHT) and the other either on your person or with your
assistant.

2. You can't have too spare many batteries. See http://www.aljacobs.com ,
some of the best flash rigs and batteries around. Lots of great advice too.

3. Once you are done being an assistant to a wedding photographer, hire one
of your own. Better yet, hire two and let them compete for the position
(with LOTS of POSITIVE feedback and encouragement). Alternate them at shoots
until you find one who is RELIABLE.

4. Never forget St. Murphy and his laws, if you do, he is sure to show up
with his tricks.

5. Sometimes you just have to shoot film. I know lots of people on the list
will disagree ,but digital photography, in my opinion, still has a bit of
growing up to do. Mind you, I shoot mostly digital, the cost savings are too
great too ignore. Also sometimes customers EXPECT a medium format camera,
especially customers who "know" just enough about photography to be
"dangerous". My big old honkin' Mamiya RB67 has made some GREAT portraits in
situations where the digital would not have performed nearly as well.
Granted I don't haul it out to often but it IS reliable. One of our local
churches looks more like a CAVE than anything else and they DO NOT allow
flash!

6. HAVE A CONTRACT !!!!! Spell it out, spell it ALL out, every last detail.
You'll thank me later.

7.Don't be afraid to charge the BIG DOLLARS for your work. It's amazing how
much "better" the SAME picture looks when the customer is paying "real"
dollars instead of bargin prices.

8. HAVE FUN! I've been to weddings that seemed more like a funeral than you
can imagine. However YOUR mood will often reflect in your work. The
"interchange" between photographer and subject is vital to getting the right
"look". If every body is having a blast it WILL show in the pictures. Happy
pictures mean LOTS of sales after the fact, not only to the happy couple,
but also to friends and relatives.

9. NEVER let go of the originals or the copyrights. If they absolutely
insist then don't be afraid to price it as close as possible to what you
expect to make in after event sales. These sales "down the road" are the
gravy that makes all of this trouble worthwhile, don't give it away cheap.

10. Deal with the BRIDE and ONLY the BRIDE. Wedding coordinators are NOT
photographers. Relatives are usually not photographers. Ministers are not
photographers. This is "her day" and the Bride should know exactly what she
wants and what she should expect from you. When things go wrong the
transformation from "blushing bride" to MEGABRIDE THE DESTROYER can be an
amazing and fearsome experience. Being prepared and communicating are the
only ways to prevent this transformation.

11. Shoot LOTS of pictures ALL the time, even of other stuff. Practice makes
perfect and being QUICK with your camera is essential to grabbing those
fleeting moments at the wedding.

12. Canon and Nikon are both great. Though I think current crop of Canons
are superior. However I use Olympus equipment. First because their cameras
are DURABLE, second because the price is right. For now, for me at least,
they do a fine job. Once the digital camera industry has matured a bit more,
say four or five years, I will likely switch to a Canon or Nikon though I
hope their prices come down to something more reasonable.






"John Ortt" <johnortt@noemailsuppliedasdontwantspam.com> wrote in message
news:4305bf6f$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net...
> Hi All,
>
> After taking some amateur photographs for friends weddings I have produced
> some very pleasing results which has encouraged me to develop my skills to
> become a professional wedding photographer.
<<<< snip
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 7:34:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 19 Aug 2005 11:04:00 -0700, "editor@netpath.net"
<editor@netpath.net> wrote:

>Expect payment problems - unless you get up-front payment! One of the
>guys on my street dabbled in wedding photography - and constantly got
>burned by nonpaying clients; he ended up with quite a fleet of used
>cars he took in compromise payment from them.
>
>Browse this gun show for FREE! Shop the
>http://stores.ebay.com/INTERNET-GUN-SHOW

My standard, back when I was shooting more regular, was 1/3 due at
signing, 1/3 due on the wedding date, and the final 1/3 to get the
proof book. NEVER EVER release images prior to payment in full, no
matter how much they balk. Kroger's and Walmart won't let out of their
stores without paying; why should photography be any different.

Final rule, from a local good guy that I used to assist, NEVER EVER
shoot a wedding for a relative.
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 7:34:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"DLGlos" <dlglos@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6qccg1tkgeqf5eodr49boa949k5tln2m6o@4ax.com...
> On 19 Aug 2005 11:04:00 -0700, "editor@netpath.net"
> <editor@netpath.net> wrote:
>
>>Expect payment problems - unless you get up-front payment! One of the
>>guys on my street dabbled in wedding photography - and constantly got
>>burned by nonpaying clients; he ended up with quite a fleet of used
>>cars he took in compromise payment from them.
>>
>>Browse this gun show for FREE! Shop the
>>http://stores.ebay.com/INTERNET-GUN-SHOW
>
> My standard, back when I was shooting more regular, was 1/3 due at
> signing, 1/3 due on the wedding date, and the final 1/3 to get the
> proof book. NEVER EVER release images prior to payment in full, no
> matter how much they balk. Kroger's and Walmart won't let out of their
> stores without paying; why should photography be any different.
>
> Final rule, from a local good guy that I used to assist, NEVER EVER
> shoot a wedding for a relative.

We get a deposit on the contract signing, balance due at the rehearsal.
Alleviates getting money on the wedding day. And, if we don't get paid, we
don't have to show up and work...
My wife's cousin required final payment on delivery of images, but he has
about 5 jobs from nearly two years ago, and more, pending because they never
got their proofs. So he never got paid in full.
My dad once said, "The best way to lose a friend is to shoot his wedding."
Words to live by...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 20, 2005 12:08:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

John Ortt wrote:
>> I would suggest checking locally with photographers who do
>> weddings. See if one of them will take you on as an assistant to one
>> of their regular photographers. This is a lot to the business that
>> can best be learned on the job.
>
> I did considder this Joseph but I didn't think anybody would be
> interested as they would potentially be giving away all their trade
> secrets and maybe one day creating a competitor!
>
> I suppose I might well get taken on pro-gratis as Canongirly
> suggested which would suit me fine.
> I might also be able to give something back as I'm pretty swish on
> Photoshop if I do say so myself and I could potentially do page
> layouts and or web content for them.......
>
> Hmmmm....think I'll be picking up the phone tomorrow :) 

Don't do it for free. I would have never hired anyone if they were
offering to do it for free. As an assistant you should be performing a
useful task and you deserve your pay. (if you think you are worth nothing,
why would you think anyone else would think any different?)

The photographer knows that some people who start with them will go into
business on their own. The established pro has the advantage over you in
that they are known, people tell other people they are in the yellow pages
etc. They are not too worried about you taking their business and to do
their business they need people working for them. They likely will hope you
will learn enough to go it alone and then they can take you on as the
photographer rather than the helper.

Be honest with what you know and what you want to learn. Listen to
what they teach.


--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit
Anonymous
August 20, 2005 12:16:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

John Ortt wrote:
> Ok, Joseph and Canongirly have both slapped my wrist for not having a
> proper flash on my 300D :) 
>
> Does anyone have any suggestions please?

I am out of the business so I don't really know the models. However the
wedding photographer needs POWER and FAST RECYCLE time and more RELIABILITY
than you are likely to find. That means you carry two of everything.
Murphy Law applies here.

BTW when I was working in the retail end at a large department store the
daughter of the VP got married and they hired the store photographer to
cover it. They sent one of their better photographers to cover it. They
should have sent two and one of them should have been a non-drinker (anyone
hiring a wedding photographer would consider a non-drinker an asset.). The
guy got drunk and shoot 8 rolls of film on the same roll.

I got the job of working with the mother of the bride (wife of the VP)
to put together an album. After collecting each and every photo taken by
anyone we were able to put together a good, not great album.

>
> Should I go for a Canon or should I try a respected (but cheaper)
> alternative such as Sigma?
> Do I buy new or should I try Used equipment?
> I have heard a lot of talk about the 300D being very fussy wrt flash
> photography....what does this entail?
>
> Another thing mentioned was to "get the flash off the camera". By
> this I assume they mean to use a flash on an arm so that the light
> doesn't bounce straight back into the lens. What is the best way of
> doing this? On older cameras I have seen ruberised cords which connect to
> the
> shoe and allow the flash to be up to approx 1m away but newer setups
> are using the remote controlled flashes which I assume work on radio
> control and as such should be able to work much farther away.
>
> In short what are my options, how much will each one cost and what
> will each allow me to do?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> John

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit
Anonymous
August 20, 2005 1:47:01 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <4305e5a1$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net>, John Ortt
<johnortt@noemailsuppliedasdontwantspam.com> wrote:

> Another thing mentioned was to "get the flash off the camera". By this I
> assume they mean to use a flash on an arm so that the light doesn't bounce
> straight back into the lens. What is the best way of doing this?
> On older cameras I have seen ruberised cords which connect to the shoe and
> allow the flash to be up to approx 1m away but newer setups are using the
> remote controlled flashes which I assume work on radio control and as such
> should be able to work much farther away.

You need the camera to be on a tripod for formals & use 2 lights in a
simple, basic lighting setup to give professional lighting.
Anonymous
August 20, 2005 9:44:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 15:15:25 -0700, Skip M wrote:

> "John Ortt" <johnortt@noemailsuppliedasdontwantspam.com> wrote in message
> news:4305e5a1$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net...
>> Ok, Joseph and Canongirly have both slapped my wrist for not having a
>> proper flash on my 300D :) 
>>
>> Does anyone have any suggestions please?
>>
>> Should I go for a Canon or should I try a respected (but cheaper)
>> alternative such as Sigma?
>> Do I buy new or should I try Used equipment?
>> I have heard a lot of talk about the 300D being very fussy wrt flash
>> photography....what does this entail?
>>
>> Another thing mentioned was to "get the flash off the camera". By this I
>> assume they mean to use a flash on an arm so that the light doesn't bounce
>> straight back into the lens. What is the best way of doing this?
>> On older cameras I have seen ruberised cords which connect to the shoe and
>> allow the flash to be up to approx 1m away but newer setups are using the
>> remote controlled flashes which I assume work on radio control and as such
>> should be able to work much farther away.
>>
>> In short what are my options, how much will each one cost and what will
>> each allow me to do?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>>
>> John
>>
>>
> It's a good thing you're sitting down already, because the cost of equipment
> might knock you off of your feet. We have found, for the best, most
> consistent results, that the Canon flashes don't do the job, nor do Sigma,
> Sunpak, etc. E-TTL II is the culprit, not only with your 300D, but with our
> 20Ds. The best flashes we've found for the job are Quantum T4d, with Turbo
> battery packs. The combination runs just a tick under $1000. Each. And
> you need at least 2 battery packs for each flash, at $500 more, per. The
> bright spot in this is, if you live in a metropolitan area, these things are
> often available for rent, for about $25 a day.
> And, when Canongirly said, "Oh and yes GET THE DAMN FLASH OFF THE
> CAMERA..jeez." she meant you need to buy a flash bracket to lift the flash
> off of the camera's hot shoe. The best one we've found, at least for the
> price, is the Stroboframe Pro-T, which will pivot the flash to keep it over
> the lens when you switch from horizontal to vertical orientation. About
> $100. This one is the least expensive one that doesn't put the controls in
> an awkward position when the camera is held vertically, unlike the
> FlipFrame, which will put the shutter button at the bottom, or cover the
> controls on the grip, if you have one.
> Also, f2.8 lenses are a necessity, something we've learned by experience.
> We didn't think so, at first, but we found out. We've also found that zooms
> are better than fixed focal length lenses in practical use, counter to what
> many have said.
> Our equipment list for a wedding is as follows:
> Canon 20D (2)
> Canon D30 (1) backup
> Oly E-10 (1) backup
> Canon 1n (1) in case we feel a need for film
> Canon 16-35 f2.8 L (1)
> Sigma 17-35 f2.8-4 (1) backup
> Canon 24-70 f2.8 L (2)
> Tokina 28-70 f2.6-2.8 (1) backup
> Canon 28-135 IS (2) 'cause ya never know, and for backup cameras.
> 50mm f1.8 (1) (soon to be replaced by an f1.4) need for speed
> Quantum T4d flash (2)
> Quantum Turbo battery (4)
> Canon 420EX (1) backup
> BP 511 batteries (4) spares
> Reflectors
> Ladder (works great for group shots.)
> Assorted screwdrivers, pliers, electrical cords, etc.
>
> And we sometimes carry two battery powered, portable 300w/s studio strobes
> and portable backdrop stand with a couple of cloth backdrops, depending on
> the venue and the job.
>
>
> Canongirly's suggestion that you get a job as an assistant to a wedding
> photographer was a good one, and it is a very common way to get started in
> the business.
Skip, you forgot the necessary extra bit of equipment - The artic to carry
all the gear round.

--
Neil
Delete delete to reply by email
Anonymous
August 20, 2005 9:49:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Neil Ellwood" <carl.elllwood2@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:p an.2005.08.20.05.45.57.329253@btopenworld.com...
> On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 15:15:25 -0700, Skip M wrote:
>
<Snipped>
>> Our equipment list for a wedding is as follows:
>> Canon 20D (2)
>> Canon D30 (1) backup
>> Oly E-10 (1) backup
>> Canon 1n (1) in case we feel a need for film
>> Canon 16-35 f2.8 L (1)
>> Sigma 17-35 f2.8-4 (1) backup
>> Canon 24-70 f2.8 L (2)
>> Tokina 28-70 f2.6-2.8 (1) backup
>> Canon 28-135 IS (2) 'cause ya never know, and for backup cameras.
>> 50mm f1.8 (1) (soon to be replaced by an f1.4) need for speed
>> Quantum T4d flash (2)
>> Quantum Turbo battery (4)
>> Canon 420EX (1) backup
>> BP 511 batteries (4) spares
>> Reflectors
>> Ladder (works great for group shots.)
>> Assorted screwdrivers, pliers, electrical cords, etc.
>>
>> And we sometimes carry two battery powered, portable 300w/s studio
>> strobes
>> and portable backdrop stand with a couple of cloth backdrops, depending
>> on
>> the venue and the job.
>>
>>
>> Canongirly's suggestion that you get a job as an assistant to a wedding
>> photographer was a good one, and it is a very common way to get started
>> in
>> the business.
> Skip, you forgot the necessary extra bit of equipment - The artic to carry
> all the gear round.
>
> --
> Neil
> Delete delete to reply by email

It all fits neatly in the back of our Dodge Durango, which otherwise, given
the price of gas, would have been traded for something a little more, ahem,
economical. And we occasionally have an assistant to run this stuff back
and forth between vehicle and location, believe me!

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 20, 2005 11:02:45 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Randall Ainsworth wrote:
> In article <4305bf6f$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net>, John Ortt
> <johnortt@noemailsuppliedasdontwantspam.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Any thoughts or ideas would be gratefully recieved.
>
>
> Professional photography is not about the hardware. You would do well
> to learn about lighting and posing, get the damned light off the camera
> and use at least two lights for formals...and then learn about
> business.

As usual Randall has posted a clearly invaluable reply!
He is of course absolutely right. Why buy a camera when you have so many
other fine tools available to make Wedding pictures? Did Rembrandt use a
camera?

I'm not sure what sort of light he uses to make his photos with.
Probably the light from his bright ideas. It would match his thumbnail
dipped in tar approach to answering your question.

--
Douglas,
You never really make it on the 'net
until you get your own personal Troll.
Mine's called Chrlz. Don't feed him, he bites!
Anonymous
August 20, 2005 11:02:46 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <4306490f$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, pixby
<pixby_douglas@hotmail.com> wrote:

> As usual Randall has posted a clearly invaluable reply!
> He is of course absolutely right. Why buy a camera when you have so many
> other fine tools available to make Wedding pictures? Did Rembrandt use a
> camera?
>
> I'm not sure what sort of light he uses to make his photos with.
> Probably the light from his bright ideas. It would match his thumbnail
> dipped in tar approach to answering your question.

I used Hasselblads and AC-powered studio lights (for formals). But (I
hate to say it), there's no magic in the Hasselblads.

The OP posted a laundry list of hardware and that's nowhere near as
important as knowing how to use it properly and knowing how to run a
business.
Anonymous
August 20, 2005 1:37:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <4305bf6f$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net>,
"John Ortt" <johnortt@noemailsuppliedasdontwantspam.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> After taking some amateur photographs for friends weddings I have produced
> some very pleasing results which has encouraged me to develop my skills to
> become a professional wedding photographer.

Google for "wedding photography." There are several online discussion
groups on that subject where you can get tons of helpful information.
Your equipment list is extremely lacking if you want to become a
professional wedding photographer. You need at least two camera bodies
(in case one fails), multiple lenses, and you need to invest in some
better lighting.

You should also set up a business plan and firm policies for payment and
decide what your rates will be.
Anonymous
August 20, 2005 8:35:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Shawn Hirn wrote:
> In article <4305bf6f$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net>,
> "John Ortt" <johnortt@noemailsuppliedasdontwantspam.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> After taking some amateur photographs for friends weddings I have
>> produced some very pleasing results which has encouraged me to
>> develop my skills to become a professional wedding photographer.
>
> Google for "wedding photography." There are several online discussion
> groups on that subject where you can get tons of helpful information.
> Your equipment list is extremely lacking if you want to become a
> professional wedding photographer. You need at least two camera bodies
> (in case one fails),

You mean WHEN one fails don't you?

> multiple lenses, and you need to invest in some
> better lighting.
>
> You should also set up a business plan and firm policies for payment
> and decide what your rates will be.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit
Anonymous
August 20, 2005 8:35:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Randall Ainsworth" <rag@nospam.techline.com> wrote in message
news:200820051243077920%rag@nospam.techline.com...
> In article <iZINe.4357$ja7.3320@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com>, Joseph Meehan
> <sligojoe_Spamno@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> You mean WHEN one fails don't you?
>
> In 20+ years of doing wedding photography, I can't recall an occasion
> when a piece of equipment failed - camera, flash, whatever.

The only time I've had something flat out fail was a Quantum flash module,
something one doesn't usually carry a spare of.
That excludes photographer failures, however. And, sometimes, I have a
spare one of those... <G>

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 20, 2005 11:59:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <200820051243077920%rag@nospam.techline.com>,
rag@nospam.techline.com says...
> > You mean WHEN one fails don't you?
>
> In 20+ years of doing wedding photography, I can't recall an occasion
> when a piece of equipment failed - camera, flash, whatever.

That's because you use Macs, right?
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird
Anonymous
August 20, 2005 11:59:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <MPG.1d7155c0f2d5832f9898fd@news.verizon.net>, Brian Baird
<no@no.thank.u> wrote:

> > In 20+ years of doing wedding photography, I can't recall an occasion
> > when a piece of equipment failed - camera, flash, whatever.
>
> That's because you use Macs, right?

No, it's because I used quality equipment, took care of it, and kept it
in good shape.
Anonymous
August 21, 2005 12:34:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Randall Ainsworth wrote:
> In article <iZINe.4357$ja7.3320@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com>, Joseph Meehan
> <sligojoe_Spamno@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> You mean WHEN one fails don't you?
>
> In 20+ years of doing wedding photography, I can't recall an occasion
> when a piece of equipment failed - camera, flash, whatever.

I have had 4x5 shutters fail, 2¼ flash sync fail, a dozen or so flash
sync cords fail, lots of batteries of all shapes and sizes, and one
electronic flash that decided to short out he trigger voltage to the frame
(that was a real shock) film mis-loads (got to have a second body handy and
loaded). For my own wedding, the camera a 2¼ had a un-noticed failure and
all shutter speeds were giving something like a ¼ second. At least a few
turned out.

Over all, on a professional level, I can only remember one serious loss
of a wedding due to equipment failure but a number due to photographer
failure.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit
Anonymous
August 21, 2005 11:47:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 05:49:37 -0700, Skip M wrote:

> "Neil Ellwood" <carl.elllwood2@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> news:p an.2005.08.20.05.45.57.329253@btopenworld.com...
>> On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 15:15:25 -0700, Skip M wrote:
>
> It all fits neatly in the back of our Dodge Durango, which otherwise, given
> the price of gas, would have been traded for something a little more, ahem,
> economical. And we occasionally have an assistant to run this stuff back
> and forth between vehicle and location, believe me!
I should think that he is run off his feet and the bones in your fingers
are showing through:-)
--
Neil
Delete delete to reply by email
Anonymous
August 21, 2005 3:21:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>>In 20+ years of doing wedding photography, I can't recall an occasion
>>when a piece of equipment failed - camera, flash, whatever.
>
>
> The only time I've had something flat out fail was a Quantum flash module,
> something one doesn't usually carry a spare of.
> That excludes photographer failures, however. And, sometimes, I have a
> spare one of those... <G>
>

Boy, we wish we had your guys' luck. We've had lots fail. We do video
now, and even more stuff to fail, like when power fails in church, and
we are plugged in so we try to avoid battery failure :-) Plenty of
skylight, so ceremony continued. Fortunately wife had battery close by,
so she didn't miss much.

And then there is the still photographers, who, even after being warned
where our unmanned cameras and tripods were, proceded to stand right
smack in front of them :-(
Anonymous
August 21, 2005 3:21:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <cS1Oe.19$Ox3.7665@news.uswest.net>, Don Stauffer
<stauffer@usfamily.net> wrote:

> Boy, we wish we had your guys' luck. We've had lots fail. We do video
> now, and even more stuff to fail, like when power fails in church, and
> we are plugged in so we try to avoid battery failure :-) Plenty of
> skylight, so ceremony continued. Fortunately wife had battery close by,
> so she didn't miss much.
>
> And then there is the still photographers, who, even after being warned
> where our unmanned cameras and tripods were, proceded to stand right
> smack in front of them :-(

The majority of the vidiots I used to put up with were amateurs - so I
just stood where I needed to be and ignored them. They were usually
walking around the church during the ceremony anyway.
August 21, 2005 11:19:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Have you considered "Wedding Recording"

Two or three video cams
Tripods, spare battery packs
and
a good video edit/record program/computer.

Set one camera on a tripod, and record the whole ceremony !
"Available light"... no annoying flash.

I've seen wedding albums
and I've seen wedding videos.

The videos are MUCH better.

Everyone watches the video on TV
Everyone gets a copy of the video
The videocam doesn't miss "the special moment"

The only reason they've used cameras at weddings
was because videocams weren't available !


<rj>
Anonymous
August 22, 2005 3:44:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Don Stauffer wrote:
>
> >>In 20+ years of doing wedding photography, I can't recall an occasion
> >>when a piece of equipment failed - camera, flash, whatever.
> >
> >
> > The only time I've had something flat out fail was a Quantum flash module,
> > something one doesn't usually carry a spare of.
> > That excludes photographer failures, however. And, sometimes, I have a
> > spare one of those... <G>
> >
>
> Boy, we wish we had your guys' luck. We've had lots fail. We do video
> now, and even more stuff to fail, like when power fails in church, and
> we are plugged in so we try to avoid battery failure :-) Plenty of
> skylight, so ceremony continued. Fortunately wife had battery close by,
> so she didn't miss much.
>
> And then there is the still photographers, who, even after being warned
> where our unmanned cameras and tripods were, proceded to stand right
> smack in front of them :-(

Can you give us a good reason why a video camera or cameras on a tripod
should commandeer key viewpoints to the exclusion of stills photogs who
are being paid to cover the function? On the odd occasion that I ran
into these devices, I ignored them and just got on with my job. A real
pain was when the damned vidcam was in the field of view for my shots.
A stills man takes his shots and moves. He doesn't tie up a viewpoint
and leave his gear in prominent view for the entire function to the
exclusion of all others.

I had a similar problem with sound recording types - microphones in
front of the bridal couple, or on a flimsy tripod, or even dangling from
the ceiling, often with cord and wires cluttering the floors, and
complaints from the operators that they could hear my shutter in the
recordings. I got to the stage where I was just about prepared to ask
the bride if she was having vid and sound recording as well, and then
giving her the choice - them or me.

Co-operation would have been nice, but it was usually every man for
himself, and damn the others.

Colin D.
Anonymous
August 22, 2005 3:44:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Colin D wrote:
> Can you give us a good reason why a video camera or cameras on a
> tripod should commandeer key viewpoints to the exclusion of stills
> photogs who are being paid to cover the function? On the odd
> occasion that I ran into these devices, I ignored them and just got
> on with my job. A real pain was when the damned vidcam was in the
> field of view for my shots. A stills man takes his shots and moves.
> He doesn't tie up a viewpoint and leave his gear in prominent view
> for the entire function to the exclusion of all others.
>
> I had a similar problem with sound recording types - microphones in
> front of the bridal couple, or on a flimsy tripod, or even dangling
> from the ceiling, often with cord and wires cluttering the floors, and
> complaints from the operators that they could hear my shutter in the
> recordings. I got to the stage where I was just about prepared to ask
> the bride if she was having vid and sound recording as well, and then
> giving her the choice - them or me.

I did wedding videos a while back and we always placed the unmaned
camera in an unobtursive and usually high spot.

> Co-operation would have been nice, but it was usually every man for
> himself, and damn the others.

We always got on friendly terms with the stills photographer and would
co-operate with each other.

As for microhones. A lapel radio mic on the groom plus on camera
was all we would use.

-Mike
Anonymous
August 22, 2005 5:11:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"<RJ>" <baranick@localnet.com> wrote in message
news:c5dig1pma76ihsvdl3f13i2eja3i30n6j7@4ax.com...
> Have you considered "Wedding Recording"
>
> Two or three video cams
> Tripods, spare battery packs
> and
> a good video edit/record program/computer.
>
> Set one camera on a tripod, and record the whole ceremony !
> "Available light"... no annoying flash.
>
> I've seen wedding albums
> and I've seen wedding videos.
>
> The videos are MUCH better.
>
> Everyone watches the video on TV
> Everyone gets a copy of the video
> The videocam doesn't miss "the special moment"
>
> The only reason they've used cameras at weddings
> was because videocams weren't available !
>
> <rj>

We are going to have to disagree here.

I have seen loads of videos and liked some, but disliked the vast majority.
Furthermore if I go round to someones house and they offer to get the
wedding video out there is usually an almost inaudible groan from everybody
but the couple themselves.
Although the photo album may get the same response you can go through it as
quickly or as slowly as you want. It's your choice....

I think sometimes wedding videos can be too clinical as they record every
sound and imperfection with the ceremony, your sisters baby crying all the
way through, the brides grimace as the groom shoves the ring onto her
finger, etc.
Photography can capture a series of almost perfect moments which help the
couple to focus on the truly special aspects of the day....and possibly
forget some of the less wonderful moments which there are bound to be in any
ceremony.

I think it would be easier to get into videography but not as satisfying
personally..

Thanks for the suggestion anyway.
September 22, 2010 1:36:44 PM

John,
I would start by taking several courses on portrait photography. Start with a basic course to get the lighting correct. There is a lot to learn about posing, lighting specifically inside large building like the church, taking shots during the ceremony, lighting in the church most have very poor lighting, slave lighting large rooms and during the formal shots after the ceremony, lighting which causes the skin tone color to change, Wedding are more then just candid shots you have to learn the posing. Brides love shots that are more then your basic shots.

Next, I would invest is a good flash system, something better then Cannon which is OK but a system that has as fast of a flash as posible. Quantum flash system with a battery pack is what I was thinking, cost 1200.00

Next, I would say build up your emotional shield and prepare for the female anger and stress at the wedding. The bride's personality and hormones are ragging and she will at the wedding turn into something you may not recongnize and you must be prepared to take a lot of crap from her and her mother. They will ask for different shots before the wedding and change their minds during the wedding causing you to have to think quickly to figure out the lighting and get the shot they want and in time. DON'T OVER SHOOT THE BRIDE she is trying to have fun at her party also she will get very anoid at you and will not buy your pictures if you make her mad and interfer with her event.

Next, I would say keeping your own attention on the job at hand. Its easy to get involved with people asking you about photography and trying to take shots with the guests stealing your shots, taking shots with flash that messing up your lighting.Your job is to make the event and everyone in it look good and that is a tuff thing to do to the satisfaction of the bride, she will be expecting perfection of her perfect life changing event.

Good Luck,
Rob







!