does anyone?

[monter]

Not do actions or lots of PP before you show the B&G the photos? i just see a lot of PP photos on here and wondered if there were any straight shots left. that's not including black and white or sepia. If you all do extensive PP before showing the B&G, do you find that they choose those photos more often or do you find you spent a lot of time for nothing? I'm just trying ot decide what I want to focus on. thanks!

[Photolistic]

I guess it depends on what the B&G wants. If they want real life looking pictures or how "fantasy like" they want them.

[Philco]

I think we like to share our more stylized images here because they tend to stand out and we can't flood the forum with a ton of images beyone that. I believe most photographers choose a minority of images to enhance w/ actions, but for the most part, images are corrected for color, sharpness, etc. and are presented in a straightforward way. Hyper-stylized actions need to be used very sparingly lest they diminish the impact they have or they make images look overworked on the whole.

That being said, I don't know anybody who thinks it's a good idea to show the customer any images before post processing is complete. Showing what's behind curtain opens up a can of worms.

[monter]

I guess I should clarify. I don't mean NO PP. I ALWAYS do color corection, sharpening, etc before showing people. I completely believe in that. I just mean the extensive stuff that makes the pics look like works of art. Sorry about that. I should have been more clear.

[sblais]

My proofs are as simple as possible (with minor corrections). I do propose some B/W and sepia photographs though. Album preview does contain full-PP though.

[Eoseni]

Monter, I was just on joe buissink's website, and oh, a whole lot of the images on his portfolio DO look like works of art, more than normal photos. I'd be looking at the other celeb photog's sites soon to see. Something to look for...good question. Thanks for asking.

I'd like my photos to look like art too. I think we can make a distinction between specialeffects for special effects' sake, or special effects for enhancing the drama/romance/emotion. In the end, it's in the eye of the beholder and comes down to you deciding what your style is...I think.

[monter]

Thanks guys. So when you put together albums, the photos that are in there don't look like the proofs you gave them originally? I'm really curious because I'll be putting together my first album shortly. I showed the clients the proofs with basic PP... cropping, color, blemishes etc. but didn't do much in the way of "artwork". (this was my first solo wedding- as a second I didn't do any PP magic) My next wedding is next month and I'm trying to decide what I want to do. getting ducks in rows ya know. Thanks for any and all input!

PS. the names Monica if that's easier :)

[sblais]

Hi Monica,

For me, the proofs and the pictures in the montages for the album don't necessarily look the same. The pictures become part of a whole in an album and you, as an artist, can now offer a complete product to your client, rather than individual photographs. My clients have the final word in my work, so if they don't like the effects, I can remove them, replace them or come back to the original proof version.

That's my way of seeing it.

[monter]

thanks Sebastien. that makes a lot of sense. Do you (or anyone) find that the clients often like the original un-PS'd image better or do they pretty much like the edits you do?

For example.. I worked on this image tonight. the original was just ok... I think this is more artsy... The bride so far has only seen the original un PS'd photo. do I show her before album selection or wait until she's chosen the photos she likes then edit and show her a proof album to approve? I know I have to find my place. I just really value any and all opinions.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y216/emtterry/Grim234b-sfw.jpg

[Eoseni]

I'm also beginning like you. After my first wedding, I showed the B&G all the proofs with some of my favorites PS-ed, telling them that once they chose their pictures, they can tell me which they like made more artsy. They are still "choosing."

But I think I will change my way. I'd like to present them with beautiful and complete proofs, polished to the hilt with my style.

But doing so before the proof viewing makes economic sense only if it proves effective in enhancing your chances of selling more prints. PS Actions can be bought that will save production time.

Once WE get a larger portfolio, our clients will view our style beforehand and know what to expect. Then, we'll know what to do.

[monter]

thanks tim. I think I'm on that wavelength now. The guy I work with doesn't do much Ps work at all. his albums are basically color or black and white. I was just curious how many others do that same thing. i think I want to compliment him, but have my own style as well. Next wedding, I guess I'll Ps some before upload. thanks again!

[_Jo_]

I do a few "artsy" (eg; colourization if wanted) ones but for the most try to keep the images as close to the real thing as possible. That is just my style...

[motogeno]

Guys, I know that I am no authority on this, but I do all of my pp including any effects before the client ever sees them. Many I do minimal pp on, but I am an artist first and foremost, or at least that's how I would like to be considered, and they are paying me to make the decisions on their images. I will certainly make changes if they don't like a certain effect on a photo, but I really want to make a name for myself as an artist and if I leave all the decisions up to the clients on what effects and pp they want then I feel like I am short changing myself and them, IMHO

[Silverwool]

I find that often the Bride and Groom don't know what effects they want. Therefore its up to us to help them make that decision. I do just basic work on most of my images, colour correction, sharpening, very subtle vignette etc. But I do more substantial work on about 5% - to 10% to show the possibilities. While I say 'x effect can be applied to any other image' the majority just ask for the one's they can see. Perhaps I should do more! Seems a lot of extra work for no extra reward.

I do a bit of hip, stomach, and arm slimming using the liquify tool if necessary. I never mention this but they are often the shots they pick. This has to be very subtle as you can't turn a robust bride into an anorexic model!

[tim]

My proofs (300 on average) look like well exposed photos, little PP though, except fixing faces or eyes on important photos. If they wanted 50 proofs i'd do the lot, but it's not practical or economic with 300.

[Wedding Shooter]

Proofs are just that - proofs. Basic white balance, exposure and a little contrast enhancement via batching in the RAW converter. Maybe select a few in black and white to give an idea.

When you are shooting a wedding every weekend and putting together around 500 proofs you have to keep it simple.

Fancy PP goes in the album and/or in larger prints.

[monter]

So for those of you that do just proofs, do you do the artsy stuff after they've picked the photos or not at all? Do you find that clients like it when you deliver a final photo that didnt' look exactly like the proof?

And Tim, I know you are a fan of vingnetting... do you do that after they've chosen the photos based on the proof?

I know they've hired us to deliver a complete product, but I don't want to get into a situation where the photo they choose looks nothing like the one that I deliver because I've made it more artsy. Perhaps they liked the plain ole color photo. does that make sense?

Thanks again for all the input.

Monica

[sapearl]

The only thing I'm doing at this point is preparing their proofs by adjusting WB, exposure tweaks, contrast, highlight, shadow, straightening on the RAW files. The final album picks and loose enlargements get the enhancements - special actions, eyeglass reflection removal, etc. - Stu

[sapearl]

Thanks guys. So when you put together albums, the photos that are in there don't look like the proofs you gave them originally? ......

Hi Monica - they'll be "similar" in appearance to the proofs, but major blemishes will be removed, along with bags under the eyes, distracting wall sockets that I may not have noticed while doing the group shots, things like that.

I don't do a LOT in the way of art for the final album right now. Some people get a little "funny" about how they look after being run through a few artistic filters. I may feel that I've added a gorgeous warm glow to a portrait, and the client may look at it and say: "Why is it all fuzzy with the color all yellow like that?":rolleyes: .

There's nothing wrong with well exposed, nicely focused and composed competent work in an album that shows you know your way around a wedding, how to interact with people, and that you can cover a whole day from start to finish. At the same time, there's nothing wrong with keeping some matted or framed "artistic" samples in your display area to show them your capabilities.

[sapearl]

My proofs (300 on average) look like well exposed photos, little PP though, except fixing faces or eyes on important photos. If they wanted 50 proofs i'd do the lot, but it's not practical or economic with 300.

Tim says it very well, which pretty much describes my flow.

If you're only shooting a couple of weddings and events per your then you can do a lot of PP on your proofs. But if you're delivering 400-500 proofs per wedding X 15-20 weddings a year, you won't have time for much else and will end up paying yourself very little.

It may be personally gratifying to do a lot artist PP, and even part of some educational self-tutorials. But at some point it will translate in business profits or losses. You need to determine where to draw the line. Remember the other thread about the ratio of shooting time to PP time? ;)

[monter]

Thanks so much sapearl!!! this has helped me immensly. I guess I just felt out of the loop with only doing the standard non-artsy shows. I'm glad to know there are some others out there that do only the standard things and that clients still like and expect that. Thanks so much again!

[sapearl]

Thanks so much sapearl!!! this has helped me immensly. I guess I just felt out of the loop with only doing the standard non-artsy shows. I'm glad to know there are some others out there that do only the standard things and that clients still like and expect that. Thanks so much again!

You're welcome Monica. Some clients are quite savvy and observant people and will know when "artsy affects" are just covering up mediocre or careless photography.

By careless I mean sloppy focus and exposure, poor composition, lack of attention to the days activities, WB not quite right... seriously, there are some really sharp clients out there. They may not know exactly what package they are looking for, but they will understand the basics of solid competent photography and know when it is missing. Don't get me wrong - I'm not against artistic and creative effects.... they just need to be used wisely and sparingly.

Reminds me of an old story about going to auto and product shows. The quality and reliability of a product is often inversely proportional to the number of bikini clad young ladies prancing around the stage.:lol: There's a "reason" why they're trying to distract you.

[Eoseni]

Stu, bikini ladies at Canon shows would be something!

[blueaerodynamique]

Can I share a recent experience that is making me think about how careful we have to be about what is offered to the B&G.

I went to a family wedding as a guest. It was the usual church white wedding with all the trimmings and the hired photographer seemed to know what he was doing. He shot digitally and I understand the couple paid just short of a £1000 for his services.

Out of curiousity I asked to see the album when it was ready and this weekend it was left for me to look at. I had been warned by other family members that it was bad. I was surprised to be handed a small flip album of 120 5x4" prints slid into plastic sleeves. My first thought was that it was the proof album but I was assured not. Though the photos had generally been well composed, they appeared to be straight out of the camera. Many were dark and all were very "flat". Many wouldn't need too much PP to turn them into reasonable images though some would need a lot. There wasn't anything "artsy" that the couple wanted. They had hired him because of his website which did have artsy photos.
The couple were very disappointed.

I went onto the photographers website and gathered that they had paid for the "Gold" package that included a main album and a smaller one of 120 images (the one I have seen). I haven't yet been able to speak to the couple to find out if the main album photos have been PP'd further, but what is happening is that the small album is the one being passed round for everyone to see to save wear and tear on the main one. Fair enough, but the assumption by all who see it is that it is the main album. That is the album that is being passed around by the couple and is the one representing that photographers work. The comments I am hearing are very negative and that album wouldn't get that photographer any further bookings if he worked in our area. I'm very keen to speak to the couple and find out if their main album was the same or had the shots enhanced.

This made me realise that everything we give the couple is a representation of our work and could influence further bookings. I've always given couples the finished images and have often wondered if I could make life easier for myself by just giving basic shots for proofing. This experience made me decide to carry on as I am.

[tim]

I clearly mark proofs as proofs.

[sapearl]

This is all the more reason why my proofs are pretty much 90% finished photographs, less "art effects."

That proof book of mine that gets passed around is my calling card. Bad shots, poorly exposed images, etc. are never put in my proof books. Either they were deleted in camera during the day, or didn't make the second culling when I was PP later at home.

[monter]

thanks for the input. I never EVER show a client photos that I wouldn't expect them to buy and hang on the wall as is. I just dont usually do too many special effects on them before they see them. I guess the only thing that does is to keep them from knowing that they could have those effects. although, I don't really have many special effects on my website so they probably wouldn't expect that from me anyway. Myabe I should change that up a bit......

[CyberPet]

General tweaks like white balance, contrast and adjusting exposure if I had to shoot in tricky situations. Then I often do some b/w images and some more artsy, to give them an example of what can be down with the images if they choose. But mayb 10% are "fixed" more than the general tweaks.