A recent wedding and A SERIOUS QUESTION!!

N2bnfunn wrote in post #18920649
Remember this in shooting wedding the keys are as following.

1. lighting best lighting you can get
2. The Best camera you can get even if you have to get a rental
3. Photoshop is your best friend when doing wedding

I agree with #1 but kind of disagree with #2 and #3.

My feeling is that getting the best lenses is more important than the best camera.

Photoshop may be your friend when shooting weddings but I rarely ever use PS for my editing. Lightroom is my best friend. I only use PS for retouching images that make it into an album or print. The only image in the ones I posted above that had any PS work done to it is the bride in the doorway as this is the one she chose to have printed. The rest of my work is strickly Lightroom editing.

I def agree with "lighting"
I too think that "glass" is probably the most important
Having used PS since the early '90s for varying degrees of work, from photos to graphic design, never used Lightroom but I understand it is an awesome tool for photogs.

Damn dude.. lol... those are amazing. Makes me want to practice non stop.

Rowdy, you asked how its done and I explained it. To clarify, we have taken all sizes of brides and they all came out great according to them. You state every wedding was a pain in the ass and how do you get great shots and I explained how to do this. Planning with the couple and asking a few questions with the right answers. But, and I love JColeman's work, amazing photographer, I found that most hire us after looking at our PORTFOLIO and they see what types of photos we take and they want that for their wedding. So the questions although there are a few from them, we don't really get a lot because they basically state looking at our book, that's what we want. In our contract we cover our butts fifty ways to Sunday in the time frames needed and explain to get certain shots some time is needed.

And here is where I really upset some people but we will not do a wedding without two photographers. And I have heard all the great ones state the big line, "What do you want Quality or Quantity" and even some brides will say this to us when they have interviewed another photographer pitching that line. Our response is "well we do want some quantity because you want a lot of great photos but we also want quality and we just can't give you this when you are getting dressed at the church or where ever and your guys are across town". or "you coming down the aisle is so important to us but the look your husband makes seeing you the first time in your dress is priceless so Standing in the front to capture you coming down, do I do the twirl and get him hoping I get him at the right time with his expression and then swing to get you but geez I missed you the bride touching your great grandmother with her crying tears of joy because I had to spin around etc". We even joke about it and then say I am spinning so much I faint and they have to stop the wedding and everyone laughs but they get the point. It is just to difficult to get it all and we are in great shape. So while she is coming up the aisle, the other photographer is getting her from the back and then holding his 70-200 to capture the grooms face. And we usually nail it because we calibrate all of our equipment often so focus is spot on which a lot of photographers do not do.

But please don't take the wrong way about the critique I gave of your photos. Was not meant to insult. It took us many years of photoshop practice to get it right. I really like that you do motor sports and that is something my son wants to do eventually. We are getting into the the high end car market and loving it.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Just my opinion but I think 2 shooters at a wedding is essential.

Amadauss, it's all good, I'm a big boy and can usually take the "hits", lol. If I fired back, chances are it wasn't a good night on the lanes and there was some alcohol involved,, lol. I understand that it takes a ton of time to get to that "point", I'm just astounded by many of the photos I see posted, and even as an Old Fart, I'm always interested in improving.
As for two photographers, I've learned that lesson already. I'll always have a second shooter on hand.

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #18930318
Just my opinion but I think 2 shooters at a wedding is essential.

While I love having an associate photographer at my weddings I disagree. I concur that two photographers makes the job easier, but shooting by yourself and creating some great photos can be done as a single photographer.

Of course it can... but I still prefer two. It's a little less stressful for me as well.

i too wish i knew how to do amazing wedding (not really my favorite genre) but my nephew and his wife somehow just got the knack. shes the chief shooter, he the assistant and 2nd shooter...

theyre 30 and 29 (28?) and have been doing weddings for about 3 years i think. they do destination weddings and clear several thousand per gig. theyve been in a multitude of wedding/bride magazines and neither have had any sort of formal training. their work is very good. not my style (to ephemeral/whispy, almost washed out) but their clients love their work because theyre busy all year long...

Won't disagree. And your work makes up for not having two I would say, but if you have two separate prep areas going on at the same time, how do you cover it if wanted by the couple? Maybe I am missing something. thanks.

Can you post a link to their web site?

Amadauss wrote in post #18948246
Won't disagree. And your work makes up for not having two I would say, but if you have two separate prep areas going on at the same time, how do you cover it if wanted by the couple? Maybe I am missing something. thanks.

I don't know if your question is directed at me but I'll answer it anyway. If the couple wants two photographers, then I'm more than happy to provide two. If, however they want to save some money, then I tell them that something has to give. I can't be in two places at the same time. Assuming that the couple is getting ready at the same venue, I can go back and forth, but I prefer not to.

But most of the weddings I shoot by myself are smaller, more intimate affairs and not the "big blown out" weddings with 9 bridesmaids and 9 groomsmen like the wedding I shot last Saturday. For that one, I did bring an associate photographer to cover the guys.

jcolman wrote in post #18948395
I don't know if your question is directed at me but I'll answer it anyway. If the couple wants two photographers, then I'm more than happy to provide two. If, however they want to save some money, then I tell them that something has to give. I can't be in two places at the same time. Assuming that the couple is getting ready at the same venue, I can go back and forth, but I prefer not to.

But most of the weddings I shoot by myself are smaller, more intimate affairs and not the "big blown out" weddings with 9 bridesmaids and 9 groomsmen like the wedding I shot last Saturday. For that one, I did bring an associate photographer to cover the guys.

i work with a wedding/portrait guy and he offers a 2nd shooter as an option, if the couple wants it. if they prefer a lower priced package, #2 or some part of the events, get the axe...

Well for me I start with a questionnaire I share with the couple. It gives them a list of photos to chose from. For example do you want you with each all attendants, you with each attendant, your partner with all attendants, your partner with each attendant, and so on. All of our forms are gender neutral. The form has 72 standard choices. Plus it gives them the ability to list their own photos that they really want and I have not thought off.

From there the website tells them you need X time to give these photos (calculated by size of the wedding and how many pictures they asked for). So they know, 10 weeks before their wedding, they have to accommodate a certain block of time to get everything they want.

I also go see any location I have not shot in the last 2 years. So I don't have to be imagine what can happen on the day of, I already know what's going to work, how the natural light falls etc. For example if they know they want a sunset picture I can tell them sunset is at 6:18 so I need 6:15 to 6:35 to be sure of that picture.

We have a meeting the week before. So me and the second and the assistant know what we need to make sure we get and what we need to focus on. I also meet with the coordinator if they have one so the schedule accommodates the couples photo needs.

And I take a crap load of equipment. 8 lights, various grids, gels, soft boxes. It basically fills the van but I have at my disposal any tool I need.

The day of the assistant has a list of what photos we need to get, that list is mapped into the schedule so it knows we should try to get the bride/groom(s) with the attendants while they dress. If there is a first look we try to do the bulk of formals you can do then. If someone wants to cut planned photo time because they are late (and this always happens) then that person needs to sign the schedule saying they changed it. Only the couple or the coordinator can do this. Its useful because you've got proof if you miss a picture. However I've never missed a picture unless that party missed their time.

But the real bottom line is I've done hundreds of weddings. And I know my equipment backward and forward so I can figure out a picture pretty quickly. I pride myself in feeling secure in my ability to dial in most pictures pretty quickly.

jcolman wrote in post #18930393
While I love having an associate photographer at my weddings I disagree. I concur that two photographers makes the job easier, but shooting by yourself and creating some great photos can be done as a single photographer.

Agreed. Half my weddings I shoot with just me.