Im new, bare with me

[CABINET MAN]

It’s been a long time since I was in to photography. When I met my wife I was an avid armature and she was never with out her point and shoot. Then one day I packed my old Canon AE-1 into its bag, just like I had done so many times before, only this time it would be years before I would unpack it again. It was not that I made a concuss decision to turn my back on something that I loved. It was just that life seamed to get in the way. In time I all but forgot about photography all together.

My wife on the other hand never let go of her passion to snap candid shots of life as we lived it. A few years ago she got her first digital camera. Though still a point and shoot it was leaps and bounds over what she had been using. Now it’s like the camera is just another part of her. This leads me to where we are today.

A few months ago my wife came home telling me that one of her friends wanted her to stand in as a backup photographer at her daughters wedding. Then about two weeks before the wedding the friend asks her if she would take all the photos. This made me real nervous to say the least. I went on to explain that weather or not she was ready to take a wedding by herself that a point and shoot was WAY below standard. She told me that she had already explained to her friend that she was not experienced nor did she have high end equipment, but they still wanted her to do it. My wife then told me that I was going to help. Well the wedding came and went and the pictures we took, though not the most professional, were a hit with the family. We were paid a modest sum for our trouble and that was that. Or so I thought.

About two weeks after the wedding my wife gets a call out of the blue. Another bride to be asking if we will shoot her wedding in a few weeks. She goes through the same spill as the first time telling the lady that we are not professionals but the lady has seen the pictures of the first wedding and loved them. So here we go again. The only stipulation I gave my wife was that I was getting a new camera before this one.

Some where in all this the old me has awaken and almost all I can think about is photography. I am reading everything I can get my hands on about digital cameras and I can’t drive down the road without thinking of how I would like to shoot this barn and that old tree and, and, and, and. I am about to go nuts. I plan to get a 50D and a couple good lenses next week. I hope I can make it that long.

[S.Horton]

Welcome to POTN.

Welcome to the digital age!

Welcome back to seeing everything as if you could shoot it!

[[Hyuni]]

wow great story!
Congrats on our upcoming purchase and I hope your 'photog insticts' come flowing through you quickly!

There's probably going to be a few significant differences between film and digital, but in most cases, it will be a positive move! (Definately easier to use!)

Good luck!

[CABINET MAN]

;8113789']There's probably going to be a few significant differences between film and digital, but in most cases, it will be a positive move! (Definately easier to use!)

Good luck!

I am reading every thing I can get my hands on but I know until I get my hands on my new camera and take it for a test spin I won't be able to grasp it all.

[Wilt]

I shudder whenever I hear of rank amateurs covering weddings for a stranger, even if they have seen photographs you took at someone else's wedding. Time to remind everyone that at weddings the relatives and close friends who come long distances may be in photos that can never be repeated, and that weddings often impose technically very demanding situations upon the photographer. A true pro (not merely a 'hired gun') takes photos where an amateur might not get shots, simply because they possess skills to cope with the demanding out-of-the-ordinary circumstances. I see too many regretful posts by people saying effectively "I should have been more careful about choosing someone to shoot photos of my wedding". The point I am making is to try to talk some sense into this person, or at the minimum make certain they walk in with eyes wide open about the risk of using you (or your wife) to shoot their wedding! They have certain expectations about shots they want you to take, but you do not have the experience to remember to take those shots, and there will be far too much on your mind to even remember to look at a shot list given to you...if you are too busy thinking about the technical aspects of making the shots. A lot of studio pros quit doing weddings because they cannot cope with the pressures and the unreasonable bride's mother or bride on the wedding day!

My advice is "Run!". If you must, think of shooting color slide film when you handle the digital camera! And chimp the LCD to make sure you aren't totally blowing it due to some oversight.

[CABINET MAN]

Wilt
By no means is your point lost on me. In fact it scare's the crap out of me. If they would hire a pro it would be great. We would back out in a heartbeat. My wife went to great paines to tell them that we are not pros. I have no desire to take work away from a real photographer nor do Wish to screw up someones wedding photos. At the same time the level of pro that most people around here get, in my opinion, is a far cry from what a pro should be. I have seen several wedding photos taken in my neck of the woods that fall very short of the bar. I hope I don't sound like a butt for saying this.

[Wilt]

Wilt
By no means is your point lost on me. In fact it scare's the crap out of me. If they would hire a pro it would be great. We would back out in a heartbeat. My wife went to great paines to tell them that we are not pros. I have no desire to take work away from a real photographer nor do Wish to screw up someones wedding photos. At the same time the level of pro that most people around here get, in my opinion, is a far cry from what a pro should be. I have seen several wedding photos taken in my neck of the woods that fall very short of the bar. I hope I don't sound like a butt for saying this.

No, particularly in this day where histograms and chimping the photo can hide a lot of technically marginal shooters, it is far too easy to bill one's self as 'pro wedding shooter' when they know almost nothing. I really cringe when I get "I'm shooting weddings...how do you manually focus? or what do you do when using the camera on M?" questions from 'a pro'. I have to fight myself to stay totally silent to such questions rather than give them a verbal throttling. :mad: ain't much different than the amateur abortionist, IMHO

[CABINET MAN]

I undertand.
Thanks for your honest input.

[rumplepigskin]

RUN !!!

[CanonHowitzer]

I am reading every thing I can get my hands on but I know until I get my hands on my new camera and take it for a test spin I won't be able to grasp it all.

There's an excellent book for the 50D. It's about $16 on amazon.
"From Snapshots to Great Shots" by Jeff Revell.

It goes beyond the instruction manual by being more of a short course in digital photography using the 50D's settings.

:)

[CABINET MAN]

There's an excellent book for the 50D. It's about $16 on amazon.
"From Snapshots to Great Shots" by Jeff Revell.

It goes beyond the instruction manual by being more of a short course in digital photography using the 50D's settings.

:)

Thanks!
I think I saw that one at BAM but didn't get it because I was leaning more to the D90 at the time. I will pick it up in a few days and check it out.

[qtfsniper]

Tamrom 10-24mm, 24-70mm 2.8, 70-200mm 2.8 (VR/IS/OS) lenses if possible. 100mm macro. I cant think of any other lenses you could need other than the occasional prime. Off camera flash when you feel like flash is for you. The money needed gets added up extremely fast and you probably won't see it coming.

[tzalman]

Im new, bare with me
I appreciate the invitation, but not on our first date.

[Wilt]

I appreciate the invitation, but not on our first date.

You don't shoot nude on the first date?!

[SAB_Click]

I appreciate the invitation, but not on our first date.

I too was thinking this should be in the nude section! ;)

[CABINET MAN]

Go ahead. Pick on the new guy.

[rdenney]

Go ahead. Pick on the new guy.

You took that well.

Wilt has covered the main apprehension. But I'll offer this: There's a difference between taking pictures for fun at a friend's wedding and being the professional photographer. If you do it, approach it as just a guy taking pictures. Put a decent flash on the camera, set everything to automatic, and try to push the button when people look happy. Pretend that the real pro is standing just in front of you, annoyed that your flash is stealing everyone's attention.

Even though I used to do it professionally (and in the days when none of Wilt's complaints were even a possibility--there was nothing automatic about my Mamiya C-3), when I shot weddings for friends in later years I always made them sign an agreement that said:

1. I am not a professional photographer. I'll take pictures, but you get what you get.

2. I will not accept money. The pictures you get (whatever those might be) are my gift to you.

3. Even if none of the pictures turn out at all, you agree herewith to continue to be my friend.

In all these cases, I did the pictures because I didn't want them to go through with their plan not to have pictures done at all. Clearly, the pictures aren't important to them. But they will be eventually, if they have them.

Most disputes are the result of a violation of expectations. Just make sure the expectations are properly set.

A 50D with a 580EX flash (set to ETTL-2), set to M, with the aperture at f/5.6 and the shutter speed at 1/125 (unless there is daylight, in which case put it on P and turn off the flash), will cover 98% of the situations you'll face. ISO400 sounds about right. Get a 17-55 and the flash instead of a second lens. Keep the camera level, check to make sure poles aren't right behind people's heads, don't cut off their heads, include their feet in large group shots, get a big memory card, set the camera to JPG-Large, and don't stop pushing the button.

Since these are strangers, leave out the second clause above. Instead, charge them by the picture. $10 for each picture they keep sounds about right. Then, give them the digital files of the ones they buy and make them responsible for getting prints made. That way, if none of your pictures turn out, they won't buy any and you are assuming the risk of being incompetent (don't take that wrong--but if none of the pictures are keepers then it will be true), which is as it should be.

ONLY do this for people who would not otherwise hire a professional.

Rick "everyone has to start somewhere" Denney

[Wilt]

when I shot weddings for friends in later years I always made them sign an agreement that said:

1. I am not a professional photographer. I'll take pictures, but you get what you get.

2. I will not accept money. The pictures you get (whatever those might be) are my gift to you.

3. Even if none of the pictures turn out at all, you agree herewith to continue to be my friend.


...Most disputes are the result of a violation of expectations. Just make sure the expectations are properly set.




Superb!

But $10 a picture rapidly approaches surpassing a real pro in total cost! With digital 300 shots is child's play compared to the 1000-3000 shots fired when the trigger finger of the average dSLR shooter is twitchy!

Oh, I just read once again slowly...$10 for 'the keepers' sounds reasonable until you consider how many keepers people used to order in the film wedding days, for the albums!

[obnoxiousmom]

Welcome back and best of luck!

[rdenney]

Oh, I just read once again slowly...$10 for 'the keepers' sounds reasonable until you consider how many keepers people used to order in the film wedding days, for the albums!

In the old days, I showed up with two pro-packs of 120 film. That's 120 pictures, total. I'd usually have a roll left over (unless I also did bridal portraits). Of those 120 pictures, oh, about 120 of them would come out fine.

When my wife and I were married (nine years ago--we both married late in life--and decades after the weddings where I showed up with 10 rolls of film), we hired a local top pro, and she delivered 210 pictures shot using a Bronica SQ, again without a miss, but with a few repeats. We paid $2500 and got a proof book and the negatives. (One of these days, I'll get them scanned in so I can make the real album, heh, heh.) In my more recent wedding gigs (for friends), I used two pro-packs of 220 film, which is 330 images in my Pentax 645. But I would take safety shots far more than in the old days, and still deliver no more than about 200 pictures.

So, if there really are 200 keepers, then $2000 seems a reasonable price to me. My bet is that there won't be more than 200 keepers even if there are 4000 exposures made at the event.

Rick "who got $1 a picture to deliver a proof book in the old days" Denney

[Wilt]

So, if there really are 200 keepers, then $2000 seems a reasonable price to me. My bet is that there won't be more than 200 keepers even if there are 4000 exposures made at the event.

Rick "who got $1 a picture to deliver a proof book in the old days" Denney

But as an experienced wedding pro, $2000 is reasonable, but I think it is too high when one is not very experienced, as is the case of the OP!

[rdenney]

But as an experienced wedding pro, $2000 is reasonable, but I think it is too high when one is not very experienced, as is the case of the OP!

The point is that the price will be keyed to the quality, as perceived by the customer, not to the experience or credentials of the photographer. If the buyer is happy enough with 200 pictures to pay for them, then at the end of the day the photographer was good enough to be worth $2000, no matter what is or is not on his resume. If the photographer's inexperience shows, then there won't be 200 keepers, and the photographer will get less. It's self-correcting. The key, from the budding photographer's point of view, is to expect nothing.

In fact, this isn't much different than the typical price model used in the past. In the old days, I priced weddings as a show-up fee that provided an opportunity to view a proof-book, and then charged for prints ordered from the proofs. The better I did, the more I made. The show-up fee should grow with the photographer's experience and reputation, and in my view can be zero for one with no experience or reputation. The photographer we hired had a "show-up fee" of the full amount.

The business model is that the customer pays for successful images, not services. That changes the burden of responsibility and expectation. If no successful images are delivered, there is no pay. It changes the risk model.

Rick "if you like it, you pay for it" Denney

[Wilt]

The point is that the price will be keyed to the quality, as perceived by the customer, not to the experience or credentials of the photographer. If the buyer is happy enough with 200 pictures to pay for them, then at the end of the day the photographer was good enough to be worth $2000, no matter what is or is not on his resume. If the photographer's inexperience shows, then there won't be 200 keepers, and the photographer will get less. It's self-correcting. The key, from the budding photographer's point of view, is to expect nothing.

In fact, this isn't much different than the typical price model used in the past. In the old days, I priced weddings as a show-up fee that provided an opportunity to view a proof-book, and then charged for prints ordered from the proofs. The better I did, the more I made. The show-up fee should grow with the photographer's experience and reputation, and in my view can be zero for one with no experience or reputation. The photographer we hired had a "show-up fee" of the full amount.

The business model is that the customer pays for successful images, not services. That changes the burden of responsibility and expectation. If no successful images are delivered, there is no pay. It changes the risk model.

Rick "if you like it, you pay for it" Denney

Good points! "Look, I'm an amateur who is probably over my head. If I get a few good shots, you pay me a little. If I get a lot of good shots, you pay me accordingly. Your only risk is whether you get any keepers at all! :) " The risk for the photographer is that she loves a lot of photos, but fakes dissatisfaction in order to get a lowball price, and the photographer is none the wiser! So the prudent approch might be to provide very low res previews and then deliver a CD with the high res versions of chosen images.

[CustomMinds]

Bare with me...

"Bear with me". The saying comes from what I believe was an old english term that eventually became bearer, as in paulbearer. It was a term that was meant to mean "Hang in with me". It meant to basically "work through the situation even though it stinks."

bare with me is to be nude together

[WaltA]

Bare with me...

"Bear with me". The saying comes from what I believe was an old english term that eventually became bearer, as in paulbearer. It was a term that was meant to mean "Hang in with me". It meant to basically "work through the situation even though it stinks."

bare with me is to be nude together

Did you mean to say "pallbearer" - seeing as paulbearer is a person that carries someone named Paul??

Edit - Added question mark or 2 just in case.

[Mike-DT6]

Did you mean to put a question mark at the end of your question? ;-)

[SAB_Click]

Did you mean to say "pallbearer" - seeing as paulbearer is a person that carries someone named Paul.

Like his mother perhaps? :rolleyes:

[rdenney]

The risk for the photographer is that she loves a lot of photos, but fakes dissatisfaction in order to get a lowball price, and the photographer is none the wiser! So the prudent approch might be to provide very low res previews and then deliver a CD with the high res versions of chosen images.

We need a CD that self-destructs in, say, two weeks, and that can't be copied.

Surely that's not too much to ask.

But, yes, I would provide images about 300 pixels wide for previewing, and probably also with text on the bottom of the photo that says "Preview Only. Copyright Rick Denney 2009. Do Not Print." That will likely give them some trouble at photofinishers.

The proofs I used to get from labs were not archival, and I passed that tidbit along to my customers, lest they think they can keep the proof book as their album. That isn't available any more, so we have to be creative.

Rick "who still has some of those proofs, and some faded with time and others didn't" Denney

[rdenney]

"Bear with me". The saying comes from what I believe was an old english term that eventually became bearer, as in paulbearer.

Rick's Internet Aphorism Number 1: When noting the grammatical or spelling error of an an Internet post, one will make an even more egregious error in grammar or spelling.

Rick "been there; done that" Denney

[CustomMinds]

Did you mean to say "pallbearer" - seeing as paulbearer is a person that carries someone named Paul??

Edit - Added question mark or 2 just in case.


heh.. i didn't even read it. cut and pasted it from google. ;-)

nice catch.

[WaltA]

heh.. i didn't even read it. cut and pasted it from google. ;-)

nice catch.

I saw it too. Thats how Intenet Urban Legends get perpetuated. :cool:

[20droger]

"Bare with me" is the very least of the OP's grammatical faux pas.