login info join!
Forums > Photography Talk > wedding guests with same/better gear Search   Reply
first23456last
Photographer
Stephen J Moss
Posts: 28
New Windsor, New York, US


I'm a student at the New York Institute of Photography. They have a saying at NYIP... "It's not the violin, it's the violinist." Point is: If you know composition, and take good photos, your work will outshine other peoples gear.
Jan 20 13 04:12 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Randy Henderson Images
Posts: 778
Springfield, Missouri, US


I don't shoot many weddings any more, but I used to consult with the couple a few weeks in advance, and advised them that the quality of the pictures was in direct proportion to the courtesy of the guests.  I recommended that this accompany the invitations.

"We are thrilled for you to share our special day with us.  We have hired a professional photographer to record every aspect of what we think will be a magical experience.  With that in mind, we ask our guests to be courteous with their use of personal cameras and recording devices.  Bear in mind that raising a cell phone camera over your head during the ceremony, or positioning yourself behind us during a special moment may interfere with the contracted photographer.  We ask that our friends keep their personal photos discreet."
Jan 21 13 08:04 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Leighthenubian
Posts: 2,749
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


I shot a 50th wedding anniversary on Saturday evening. During 4 hours of coverage I counted 10 top level cameras (20 guests). The couple are in their 70's with 3 kids...the majority of the guests were professionals (lawyers, teachers etc).

The lowest camera was a Fuji Xpro...
Jan 21 13 09:03 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
JoshuaBerardi
Posts: 613
Davenport, Iowa, US


If I was to worry about such a silly thing, it would be that someone at the wedding is wearing the same shirt as me. I found out no one looks like Waldo at a wedding...well, including me. But, still I found this out.
Jan 26 13 06:41 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
P-Studios
Posts: 1,359
Hayward, California, US


can i see some of the 6400iso shots please
Jan 27 13 05:27 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
T Urban Photography
Posts: 267
Somerset, Pennsylvania, US


It's going to happen, don't sweat it.  When I was shooting weddings, I hung out at a wedding photography forum and I'll never forget one photographer posting a shot of the bride's father at the wedding shooting with his with own digital Hasselblad H3D.
Jan 27 13 06:38 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Zack Zoll
Posts: 2,274
Glens Falls, New York, US


Andy Durazo wrote:
I was told I couldn't take any pictures at my cousins wedding because I had brought my Hasselblad. The paid "professional" threatened to leave if I took any pictures.

I usually bring my Hassy to outdoor weddings.  It's a fun camera to use, and I'm only going to take 20-30 photos tops anyway.  But some photographers are pretty tetchy about that stuff, and all you can do is remember that it's not YOUR day, and hope you brought along a pocket camera.

I once went to a destination wedding for my then-girlfriend's bother.  She and I had a lot of vacation time saved up, so we packed the car and made a week of it.  As I was getting out of the car at the ceremony, the photographer was walking past, and noticed my D70 and my 80-200 f/2.8, and told me she didn't want anyone else using a professional camera.  I pulled out my F4, and asked if a film camera was okay.

So I took snapshots at the wedding with my F4 and an 85 f/1.4.  MUCH less professional.  But I stayed out of the way, didn't get involved even when I thought it could be done better, and even though I thought that my images were better than the pro's, I didn't send them to the couple.  Why piss in their Cheerios?

Michael Pandolfo wrote:

I'll amend that a bit.

"Individuals who are self-conscious about their penis size and photographic skills should compensate for that by spending more money on their equipment and vehicles."

This was a couple pages ago, but I still wanted to comment on it.  You really should dress well and care about your appearance - it's not an ego thing.  But there is a limit.  You shouldn't ever be better-dressed or flashier than the groom, or the bride if you're a woman.  That means for guys, no tuxes unless it's an incredibly formal wedding.  No three-piece suits, bright pocket squares, pocket watches, or other flashy jewelry unless it's a formal wedding, you're doing it for your friends, or both.  I'm not sure what the rule is for ladies, but I should think that wearing a skirt, instead of pants or a dress, is probably the way to go.

The car isn't as important, since more often then not nobody is going to see it.  It doesn't need to be flashy, but it should be something that would fit in at a professional office parking lot.  You'd look like a jerk showing up in a Bentley (assuming anyone even saw you), but at the very least all the body panels need to match, and there shouldn't be any rust or peeling paint.

It's not your job to impress people.  It's your job to fit in.  And since most people dress up for weddings and wear some of their nicest clothes, that means that you should too.

Jan 27 13 07:09 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mcary
Posts: 1,803
Fredericksburg, Virginia, US


twoharts wrote:
supposedly the x-pro1 is based on a leica which is not a toy camera so far as i understand it.

Of course Leicas are toy cameras!
Just look at the size of the M9 vs  the D4 or D600 with a battery grip on it, how can you call it anything but a toy camera?
On top of that have you seen those tiny little lenses?

Jan 27 13 07:10 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
FJR Photography
Posts: 6,576
Pekin, Indiana, US


Faces2Die4 Photography wrote:
You couldn't pay me to shoot a wedding.  smile

+1000,   been there, done that, not again.

Jan 27 13 07:15 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jay Farrell
Posts: 12,999
Nashville, Tennessee, US


I could care less. Not impressed with some guest who tries to pontificate because they have more camera than they know how to use. They hired me, I'm doing the job, I don't give a shit what they have or do as long as they don't interfere with my work.
Jan 27 13 07:23 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Erik Ballew
Posts: 712
Westminster, Colorado, US


I wont worry, until Uncle Bob can sync my settings and trigger my lights.  Until then, I'll be getting better photos, than him.
Jan 27 13 07:35 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
redbanana
Posts: 775
Lexington, Kentucky, US


I'm actually a little shocked at the number of photogs in here who take any of their gear to a wedding they aren't paid to shoot. Maybe I'm different but I wouldn't do it because I don't want to carry around gear when I don't have too lol.
Jan 27 13 07:57 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Phil Drinkwater
Posts: 4,714
Manchester, England, United Kingdom


twoharts wrote:
shot a wedding last night and one of the guests noticed the wife's x-pro1 and showed off his new fuji x-e1 and then said his normal camera was a D-800 but he didn't feel like bringing that along. i asked him if he shot professionally and he said he did it just for fun. he didn't interfere or anything but it's hard to outgun the guests these days unless you have like  a D4. during the cake cutting there must have been 20 guests shooting although they did let me get my shots.

we did some shots with a Bel Air in the dark and the x-pro1 again outperformed my canon 5D MK II at ISO6400. and it's not even full-frame. fuji did something special in making that sensor.

just seems like within a few years if everyone is running around with X-E1 class cameras then they can get good shots in the dark, too. so a "pro" will have to distinguish themselves through other means than camera technology. but maybe that has always been the case.

I think that has always been the case, although I also think pros have been able to differentiate themselves with technology. It's only now that guests are starting to be able to shoot in very low light.

In terms of tech though I still have the lenses - 50L, 135L, 15mm fisheye in particular - that give my shots a very different look, in good or low light. Off camera flash is one other differentiation.

But still it's about the photographer and what and how they shoot. Social photography will always be about this.. getting the most from people.

Jan 27 13 08:26 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Dan Brady
Posts: 605
Perth, Western Australia, Australia


I want a fuji x-e1. just for general use
Jan 27 13 09:40 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
David Westlake
Posts: 1,515
Mansfield Center, Connecticut, US


This is nothing new. I shot weddings back in the 70s and 80s where a guest showed up with a Hasselblad. I've also been invited to a couple of weddings where the couple asked me to bring a camera and take a few shots. I showed up with my Rolleiflex  or my Hasselblad and the paid photographer was using a Mamiya. Like that line from The Godfather; "As long as his business doesn't interfere with my business I wish him well....".
Jan 27 13 09:59 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Managing Light
Posts: 1,826
Salem, Virginia, US


Photosbycj wrote:
I'm actually a little shocked at the number of photogs in here who take any of their gear to a wedding they aren't paid to shoot. Maybe I'm different but I wouldn't do it because I don't want to carry around gear when I don't have too lol.

The last wedding I was at - a relative of my wife's - I left my gear at home.  The 'official' photog was young, much the same age as the bride and groom.  He was more interested in smoozing with the large number of great-looking girls who were there having a great time.  It was excruciating watching all the wonderful opportunities for memorable shots being passed by.

Jan 27 13 10:18 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
CDP Photo
Posts: 2,094
Brooklyn, New York, US


Andy Durazo wrote:
I was told I couldn't take any pictures at my cousins wedding because I had brought my Hasselblad. The paid "professional" threatened to leave if I took any pictures.

Funny! Yes indeed if you want to stand out bring a Hasselblad, especially a V series film Hassy with  bare bulb/reflector style flash. I've done it and the paid digital photographer drooled and his photography major college student assistant was all over me with questions and photography talk whenever she got a break.

I shot three rolls of key moments, he shot 1500 frames.

A Bronica is good too and easier to handle.

Jan 27 13 04:57 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MMR Digital
Posts: 1,662
Doylestown, Pennsylvania, US


It's a fashion statement for those who own them and use them in the arena.

I see cameras, my GAWD, cameras, carried on hips around here all the time- fashion statement (the best of the best). There's a lamborghini- happens once every two weeks- fashion statement.

To OP: It means uncle Fred did good.

Did he dive under the bride when they did the garter toss? Bonus points for the shot posted here.
Jan 27 13 05:23 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lovely Day Media
Posts: 3,836
Vineland, New Jersey, US


I know I'm late to this thread, but this is my 2 cents:

  As everyone knows, cameras don't take pictures.  Photographers take the pictures.  Cameras just record the information.  Some cameras do a far superior job than others at recording that information but it always comes down to who is pressing the shutter button and what their skill levels are.

  For instance, I have zero problem saying I'm still in the beginning stages of development.  I shoot with a now old Canon Rebel (it was new when I got it).  I like to think I get some great shots and even some good ones but there is a learning curve and I'm still on it. 

  That said, at the last wedding I went to, 3 things stuck out in my mind.  First, the official photographer had a lot of equipment that was far superior to my stuff (he had more than one body set up around the church on tripods for different angles and things).  Unfortunately, when they started the people walking down the aisle, he was outside smoking a cigarette so he missed at least a dozen shots that I got as a guest.

  Second, the bartender refused to serve me any alcohol (open bar) because they are "not allowed to serve professionals".  At the time, I didn't consider myself a professional (I still don't unless I'm trying to sell my services ... in that case, I'm just trying to get paid and not necessarily a lot of money).  After a conversation, I convinced the bartender that I am *a* photographer but not *the* photographer.  The drink was for someone else, anyway.

  Finally, there were other people with SLR cameras and some were as nice or nicer than the one the official photographer used.  Those people didn't have seemingly hundreds of lenses with them, nor did they have brackets and other things that make small but important differences. 

  Being new to the wedding "business", I got some good shots.  I got some crappy ones, too.  The point, though, is that part of being a pro (my opinion) is having nice equipment when it's necessary.  Another part is knowing how to use said equipment to its best advantage.  The last part is being able to be in the right place at the right time to capture the "winning" image.  Winning, to me, means this is one that will stand out in a person's mind.

  As cameras get better and cheaper (more bang for the buck), I think it'll get harder and harder to distinguish oneself, but a pro will always be more reliable than anyone else.
Jan 27 13 05:23 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Ally Moy
Posts: 404
Morris Plains, New Jersey, US


Even if one of those hobbyists happens to be quite talented you will be the one handing them professional prints and album in your style which they chose and hired you for. That is a great advantage. Hopefully, an advantage that will be remembered more than the hobbyist friend's tagged wedding photos on facebook; even if they are good.
Jan 27 13 08:05 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jim McSmith
Posts: 755
Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom


I did a wedding with a Zenit when one of the guests had a Canon 1DS.
Jan 28 13 04:49 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mcary
Posts: 1,803
Fredericksburg, Virginia, US


My view on taking picture at wedding that you're not the official photographer are very simple.  Its fine as long as you stay out of the F*#king way and don't draw attention to yourself.  The minute you've violated either of these simple rules you need to put your camera away simple as that.
Jan 28 13 06:16 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mountainview
Posts: 42
Nottingham, England, United Kingdom


This may sound simplistic but I believe it to be true.... anyone can take a picture, with any type of camera, but it takes skill to capture the moment.
Jan 28 13 08:56 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Richard Klein Photo
Posts: 174
Buffalo Grove, Illinois, US


@Ted Wen: I have shot nearly 2000 weddings in my career dating back to 1971.  I never had a problem with guests shooting over my shoulder, or even copying my setups for groups, etc., as long as no one ever made me wait for them to shoot.  I work fast and don't wait for onlookers ever.  But one thing you did, crosses the line in the sand for me: triggering the photographer's slaved strobes so you could get some shots using those lights.  To me, that is a deal breaker.  If I had seen you doing it, I would have told you that one more shot by you using my lights, results in me packing up.  I surely would have told the the bride and groom about what you did.  My contract plainly states that I am the exclusive photographer along with other caveats.  Now I am not so stupid or naive to not know that Uncle Bob and Aunt Betty, plus Jane and John Doe will be shooting with their cameras as well during the event.  To those folks, they can't get what I do, even if they get super shots that I can't because I can't be in 5 places at once.  But when someone like you deliberately uses my gear without my permission, for whatever purpose you have, there is no justification for it.  I would venture to say that most professional photographers I know would react the same way.
Jan 28 13 09:55 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Strobist DeLux
Posts: 69
Los Angeles, California, US


Photosbycj wrote:
Wedding guest crack me up at times. I had one bust out a D4 on me and tried talking up his gear over mine while in front of the bride and groom. He was an uncle through marriage to the groom so I played nice with him even after he kept claiming how crappy the shots from my D700 would be. He even went as far as telling the brides mom not to buy an album because he would give them one free (from his amazing camera) as a wedding gift.

During our print order consultation they brought in the "wedding album" he gave them. Now I do not talk bad of anyone's work ... ever. I won't start today but I will say that thanks to his album I sold three of my own that day lol.

I liked this story.

Jan 30 13 05:25 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Smedley Whiplash
Posts: 17,257
Billings, Montana, US


Not only that, but its foolish to imagine that we are more creative or have a better eye then the guests.

What we do have, is the ability to deliver what we are contracted for, and we could do that any day of the week. In our sleep, uphill in a snow storm, barefoot on broken glass...

Which is something the guests dont have to worry about.

My guess is that 1/2 the guests can cook better than the caterer too, and probably have a fancy convection oven at home, but may not have the interest to do it every day.


I will let you in on my secret though... shoot into the sun with an AB1600 behind you.  Even a D-whatever can't handle that without a PW on it.  Behind me, all I hear is "oh... that turned out bad again..."
Jan 30 13 05:50 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
White Lace Studios
Posts: 1,719
Mesa, Arizona, US


Photosbycj wrote:
Wedding guest crack me up at times. I had one bust out a D4 on me and tried talking up his gear over mine while in front of the bride and groom. He was an uncle through marriage to the groom so I played nice with him even after he kept claiming how crappy the shots from my D700 would be. He even went as far as telling the brides mom not to buy an album because he would give them one free (from his amazing camera) as a wedding gift.

During our print order consultation they brought in the "wedding album" he gave them. Now I do not talk bad of anyone's work ... ever. I won't start today but I will say that thanks to his album I sold three of my own that day lol.

While gear is important your story illustrates that we are hired for our talent, not our equipment. Uncle Bob is always a possibility. and more and more, can be counted on.

Jan 30 13 10:19 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mike Collins
Posts: 1,757
Orlando, Florida, US


A little off topic but if you shoot weddings and your using optical slaves, your just asking for trouble.  I have a feeling quite a few flashes from point and shoots will be going off.  Perhaps even from those not even taking a shot over your shoulder.  They could taking a fun shot in the back of the church of other family members and guests.  And yes, my Wein Ultras will pick up a flash from a pretty good distance.  But I never use them at weddings.  Only if in a studio or place I know no other flashes will be going off.

The only thing to remember between you and the quest with the better equipment is your getting paid.  I hope.  So I really don't care what they have.  In fact they usually do have a better camera.  Yet, here I am with something "not so fancy" and I'm getting paid handsomely using it.  Hmm.  Guess the camera has nothing to do with it after all.  Imagine that.   

Hell, just did a portrait for an oncologist and his wife.  He was telling me about his fancy 1Ds and his collection of L lenses as he ordered the 20x24 wall portrait from me.
Jan 31 13 04:50 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Studio Still
Posts: 226
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


I was at a wedding in 2006 with my new (at the time) Nikon D200.  The wedding photographer came up to me and remarked on my camera telling me how much she wanted one.  We chatted for quite a while about equipment.
Jan 31 13 07:35 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Kenny Dion
Posts: 12
Houma, Louisiana, US


twoharts wrote:
i got caught with the wrong lens on for the garter toss (they had told me we were going outside to shoot the car in the dark so i put on my 50f1.4 and then suddenly they announced the garter toss) and they didn't wait for me to put back on my wide angle lens. weddings kind of take on a life of their own and with so many guests shooting now (sometimes as many as 20) maybe they don't even notice if the "official" photographer is missing.

It sounds to me like you just need some more experience shooting weddings. When I shoot a wedding, I let the planner, parents, bride & groom, or whoever else thinks that they're in charge that I am in charge of the pacing. The only aspect I don't control is the actual ceremony, but after the bride is kissed, it's my show. You shared your experience about the garter toss. Well, if you control that situation, you wouldn't have had the wrong lens choice. I also tell them that i know family members like to take pictures themselves and I agree to let that happen but my lighting comes first. If there's excess flash it will affect my photos, and that's not acceptable. I let the different aspects (garter toss, cake cutting, etc.) happen naturally, but before it happens, I'm in position because I'm in control.

Also, a good planner is your friend. Or if there's no planner, my assistant will handle that and I usually designate a family member that's not part of the immediate bridal party to be in charge of rounding people up, and letting the party know what's happening. Be assertive. another good thing is reminding them that they booked you for some reason and if there's 20 people besides you getting in the way or throwing light everywhere it will affect your chots and they won't get what they're paying for. Hang in there, we all go through it.

Jan 31 13 06:28 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Michael McGowan
Posts: 3,547
Tucson, Arizona, US


I was best man at a wedding long, long ago. Every male in the wedding party was a photographer. Somehow, the guy with the Rollei survived. And all the Nikons, Leicas and Pentaxes stayed in our cars. (Yeah, Canon didn't make a decent 35mm back then.)
Feb 02 13 09:55 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MC Photo
Posts: 4,144
New York, New York, US


Stephen J Moss wrote:
I'm a student at the New York Institute of Photography. They have a saying at NYIP... "It's not the violin, it's the violinist." Point is: If you know composition, and take good photos, your work will outshine other peoples gear.

Even composition doesn't matter. All that matters is knowing what to shoot.

Deciding how it's shot is fun and interesting to see different styles, but it's the choice of what to shoot that determines what makes a good photo.


Antonin Kratochvil is an excellent example of that - http://www.antoninkratochvil.com

Feb 02 13 03:45 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MC Photo
Posts: 4,144
New York, New York, US


Randy Henderson Images wrote:
I don't shoot many weddings any more, but I used to consult with the couple a few weeks in advance, and advised them that the quality of the pictures was in direct proportion to the courtesy of the guests.  I recommended that this accompany the invitations.

"We are thrilled for you to share our special day with us.  We have hired a professional photographer to record every aspect of what we think will be a magical experience.  With that in mind, we ask our guests to be courteous with their use of personal cameras and recording devices.  Bear in mind that raising a cell phone camera over your head during the ceremony, or positioning yourself behind us during a special moment may interfere with the contracted photographer.  We ask that our friends keep their personal photos discreet."

That seems reasonable. How often do people do that?

I'd go about it slightly differently. The subtext of that message is don't shoot. I think saying that the photographer will announce times when it it's appropriate for guests to take their own photos. Maybe not that exact wording, but I think the idea is more inclusive.

I also think that there's a way to use guests as second shooters. If you have an assistant or a photo station with one of those hyperdrive that automatically downloads the photos, you could allow guests to contribute their photos to the official wedding album. Just take all of those photos and do exactly what you'd do if they came from a second shooter. There are a couple of issues to deal with - download time, and copyright, but they are addressable.

It's the digital equivalent of putting a disposable camera at each table.

There's probably a way to make a private Instagram account where people can upload shots and then the photographer can make selections from there, or even instructions on how to email or FTP photos later.


We're not too far from cameras with an ISO of one million. After that will be two million and at some point the dynamic range will expand to the point where you only need to be within three stops of the correct exposure to have no loss of quality when you fix it in post. Plus, metering will continue to get better.

At that point, with the exception of the ceremony and formals, a wedding photographer will be unnecessary. All that will be needed is a wedding photo editor.

You could even become a wedding photography service where the couple rents cameras from you and sends them back after for you to download the photos and edit. You could "shoot" multiple weddings simultaneously.

Feb 02 13 04:05 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MC Photo
Posts: 4,144
New York, New York, US


Phil Drinkwater wrote:

I think that has always been the case, although I also think pros have been able to differentiate themselves with technology. It's only now that guests are starting to be able to shoot in very low light.

In terms of tech though I still have the lenses - 50L, 135L, 15mm fisheye in particular - that give my shots a very different look, in good or low light. Off camera flash is one other differentiation.

But still it's about the photographer and what and how they shoot. Social photography will always be about this.. getting the most from people.

I don't even think how matters, just what to shoot. And it's what you get from people rather than "the most". I can see the point that that's what "the most" means,  but I don't think you necessarily have to influence people, just know what the album should like and then shoot the photos as you recognize them.

That's pretty much what Jeff Ascough does. Somewhere he's got a blog post that says he uses a 1D3 in P, with exposure compensation and bracketing. That's beyond spray and pray.

What makes him successful is his perception of what should be captured.

Feb 02 13 04:17 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jon Macapodi
Posts: 287
New York, New York, US


Randy Henderson Images wrote:
We're not too far from cameras with an ISO of one million. After that will be two million and at some point the dynamic range will expand to the point where you only need to be within three stops of the correct exposure to have no loss of quality when you fix it in post. Plus, metering will continue to get better.

At that point, with the exception of the ceremony and formals, a wedding photographer will be unnecessary. All that will be needed is a wedding photo editor.

All you'll get are well edited facebook snapshots. I guess thats better than the poorly-edited facebook snapshots I see lots of wedding photographers putting out these days.

Feb 02 13 04:20 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Leighthenubian
Posts: 2,749
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


Kenny Dion wrote:

It sounds to me like you just need some more experience shooting weddings. When I shoot a wedding, I let the planner, parents, bride & groom, or whoever else thinks that they're in charge that I am in charge of the pacing. The only aspect I don't control is the actual ceremony, but after the bride is kissed, it's my show. You shared your experience about the garter toss. Well, if you control that situation, you wouldn't have had the wrong lens choice. I also tell them that i know family members like to take pictures themselves and I agree to let that happen but my lighting comes first. If there's excess flash it will affect my photos, and that's not acceptable. I let the different aspects (garter toss, cake cutting, etc.) happen naturally, but before it happens, I'm in position because I'm in control.

Also, a good planner is your friend. Or if there's no planner, my assistant will handle that and I usually designate a family member that's not part of the immediate bridal party to be in charge of rounding people up, and letting the party know what's happening. Be assertive. another good thing is reminding them that they booked you for some reason and if there's 20 people besides you getting in the way or throwing light everywhere it will affect your chots and they won't get what they're paying for. Hang in there, we all go through it.

You may be right about the OP needing more experience...but most of the other stuff is pure fantasy...

The photographer isn't being paid to control the flow of the wedding. It's your job as a professional to be ready and capable of catching as many memorable moments as possible. If there is a planner present, she or he is just gravy but I've never heard of any pro depending on one. They are working too and don't have time to spoon feed you. Have your own shoot list with the general flow of the day. That's how you know where to be and when. The schedule may go off side here and there but that's why you are a pro, and have a second shooter if it's a larger wedding than you can handle solo.

As for not having the right lens on...well that's pure bad planning. always carry two bodies with enough FL between them to cover the general situations.

You think that you are gonna tell 20 people not to take pictures on their compact cameras and cell phones with full on flash so you can control your lighting?? dream on...

Feb 02 13 04:29 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jay Farrell
Posts: 12,999
Nashville, Tennessee, US


MC Photo wrote:

That seems reasonable. How often do people do that?

I'd go about it slightly differently. The subtext of that message is don't shoot. I think saying that the photographer will announce times when it it's appropriate for guests to take their own photos. Maybe not that exact wording, but I think the idea is more inclusive.

I also think that there's a way to use guests as second shooters. If you have an assistant or a photo station with one of those hyperdrive that automatically downloads the photos, you could allow guests to contribute their photos to the official wedding album. Just take all of those photos and do exactly what you'd do if they came from a second shooter. There are a couple of issues to deal with - download time, and copyright, but they are addressable.

It's the digital equivalent of putting a disposable camera at each table.

There's probably a way to make a private Instagram account where people can upload shots and then the photographer can make selections from there, or even instructions on how to email or FTP photos later.


We're not too far from cameras with an ISO of one million. After that will be two million and at some point the dynamic range will expand to the point where you only need to be within three stops of the correct exposure to have no loss of quality when you fix it in post. Plus, metering will continue to get better.

At that point, with the exception of the ceremony and formals, a wedding photographer will be unnecessary. All that will be needed is a wedding photo editor.

You could even become a wedding photography service where the couple rents cameras from you and sends them back after for you to download the photos and edit. You could "shoot" multiple weddings simultaneously.

Why do guests need to shoot photos? Isn't that why they hired a pro? I think the couple requesting an unplugged wedding is a wise idea.

Feb 02 13 04:31 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Richard Klein Photo
Posts: 174
Buffalo Grove, Illinois, US


@Illuminate: Here in the Chicago area, many larger weddings feature the services of a wedding consultant.  These folks have been hired for many thousands of dollars to secure the services of a band, florist, caterers, photographers, invitations, venue,  etc.  They also run the wedding, by laying out a schedule of all events in sequence.  From the photographer standpoint, we shoot following their guidelines.  Of course, we have input as to starting times for different events such as preliminary shots of the bride, her entourage and families, same with the groom, formal and photojournalistic portraits and groups, ceremony, and reception events.  We shoot posed and candids during the event.  But the key is that these highly paid consultants are getting their fees so that the wedding flows exactly the way the bride and groom, plus their families, want the day to go.  I have worked with enough of them many times.  I do discuss the flow of the wedding with them prior to the job and have input as to the photo end of the events. As a photographer, many times we have to "kiss ass" with these people for 2 main reasons: 1-they can make or break your reputation with the current client and future ones, and 2-you will get referrals that practically guarantee you have the job.  Over the years, one thing I learned when doing these kinds of weddings was that you nurture your relationship with these consultants.  Probably almost a third of the nearly 2000 weddings I have shot since 1971 have come from consultants.  This does not mean I like what they have planned for the day or even like them personally.  But I do know that their employers like them enough to pay some of them upwards of $10,000 for the day.  So I smile and do whatever is necessary to make them and the bride and groom, plus the families very happy.
Feb 02 13 11:41 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
1k-words-photograpy
Posts: 323
Leesburg, Virginia, US


Randy Henderson Images wrote:
I don't shoot many weddings any more, but I used to consult with the couple a few weeks in advance, and advised them that the quality of the pictures was in direct proportion to the courtesy of the guests.  I recommended that this accompany the invitations.

"We are thrilled for you to share our special day with us.  We have hired a professional photographer to record every aspect of what we think will be a magical experience.  With that in mind, we ask our guests to be courteous with their use of personal cameras and recording devices.  Bear in mind that raising a cell phone camera over your head during the ceremony, or positioning yourself behind us during a special moment may interfere with the contracted photographer.  We ask that our friends keep their personal photos discreet."

I do this as well when I shoot weddings, but mine is like this:

"Thank you so much for considering sharing our special day! To commemorate the occasion we have hired a professional photographer. To not interfere with the capturing of this once in a lifetime experience we ask that you not stand or hold cameras or phones over your head during the ceremony. We also ask that you do not use flash photography at any time during the event"

Feb 03 13 08:26 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Sandlapper Studios
Posts: 22
Florence, South Carolina, US


twoharts wrote:
shot a wedding last night and one of the guests noticed the wife's x-pro1 and showed off his new fuji x-e1 and then said his normal camera was a D-800 but he didn't feel like bringing that along. i asked him if he shot professionally and he said he did it just for fun. he didn't interfere or anything but it's hard to outgun the guests these days unless you have like  a D4. during the cake cutting there must have been 20 guests shooting although they did let me get my shots.

we did some shots with a Bel Air in the dark and the x-pro1 again outperformed my canon 5D MK II at ISO6400. and it's not even full-frame. fuji did something special in making that sensor.

just seems like within a few years if everyone is running around with X-E1 class cameras then they can get good shots in the dark, too. so a "pro" will have to distinguish themselves through other means than camera technology. but maybe that has always been the case.

Simple to remedy...just go get a Hasselblad or Mamiya with digital backs and dare the wannabees to shell out the cash to keep up.

Feb 06 13 10:45 pm  Link  Quote 
first23456last   Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers