How to answer questions by aspiring photographers

jdhart73 wrote in post #9537253
Well I did find one or two that are snaps basically?

If you are gonna come on here bellyaching about "hacks" and "newbs" muddying up your water then lets see the water brother! I want to see this magic that you are so reluctant to share with the masses?

You call these snaps?

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

Want the truth? ^^^
In my opinion the only one that's great is number 2. The rest are Poorly composed, but thanks for having the guts to post your stuff.

This is getting way too personal, and significantly off-topic. The OP's abilities aren't really in play here.

It is interesting to observe these discussions from a neutral position. I really don't have a dog in this fight. For some reason, it seems to bring out serious passions from people on both sides of the proposition. It's the main reason we no longer have a Wedding Forum here; it simply got too nasty, so the moderators shut it down.

The point is, some of you (like the OP) feel there should be a prescribed course of apprenticeship and/or training before a person is allowed to take on the responsibility of photographing a wedding. Others argue that the best way to learn is by doing, for free if necessary.

Nobody is right, and everybody is right. But getting snotty with each other does not advance the debate, and only exacerbates the same old problem we've had in the past with these sorts of discussions. If you can't make a cogent argument in defense of your position without punctuating it with personal attacks, chances are your argument is not well thought out.

Let's keep these discussions friendly. In the absence of civility, they serve no worthwhile purpose, and accomplish nothing towards promoting your point of view.

Belmondo, why would you allow such a nasty original post in the first place? It's obviously aimed at new photographers which I would bet make up a fair number of this community. I just think it was in poor taste and wanted to see the credentials of the person making such statements. I should have asked him to post in another appropriate critique forum so my apologies for that. I just think it's BS that someone can make these type of posts without being called on the carpet for it.

My .02

jdhart73 wrote in post #9538878
Want the truth? ^^^
In my opinion the only one that's great is number 2. The rest are Poorly composed, but thanks for having the guts to post your stuff.

I have the ability to shoot what a majority of male photographers on forums want to see, namely pretty girls in immodest clothing with sensual posing and dramatic lighting... that stuff is so easy to shoot...
　
What is hard is to make an image that is timeless, family friendly, and a good representative of real people... that is why I don't post my style. Anyone with a brain can tell I know what I am doing... but the rabid lust fest of most forums is really off putting when you get a little older and a little wiser.

Some day your going to want to look back at the pictures you have taken of people and your going to wonder and so is your customers... "what did that room really look like? and what did I really look like?" But it will be too late with all the green and blue cross processing and slanted angles and other over PP'd crap that hides the beauty of simplicity and elegance.

My posing is fine... there is just not a butt in your face or someone jumping up in the air...

jdhart73 wrote in post #9538946
Belmondo, why would you allow such a nasty original post in the first place? It's obviously aimed at new photographers which I would bet make up a fair number of this community. I just think it was in poor taste and wanted to see the credentials of the person making such statements. I should have asked him to post in another appropriate critique forum so my apologies for that. I just think it's BS that someone can make these type of posts without being called on the carpet for it.

My .02

I wasn't really looking for apologies. It just seems pointless to challenge a person's right to complain based on your opinion of their abilities. The OP is raising an argument which is always guaranteed to degenerate into a brawl, and anyone who rises to the bait should have no expectations of scoring points. Closed minds are very difficult things to open.

Ok Pcunite.

PC Unite

You seem to think that your photos you posted are nothing less than perfection and timeless, but honestly... I have to agree with Jacob.

#1-composition is horrible, extremely posed, not confortable, no emotion.
#2-cheezy, posed and the white portion where the sky used to be attracts too much attention and color are very dull
#3-poor composition, distracting background, no creativity, feels staged.
#4-Walmart can do better
#5-ok picture, but is there a message there? try using you long lens to capture the tears and admiration in a grooms eyes while he looks at his wife... its much better
#6-??? are you serious. Anyone with a camera that can handle 800+ ISO and an IS lens can do that. You missed 2 very good candid opportunities while taking that one (ring and flower girl)

michelgauthierdesign wrote in post #9540516
You seem to think that your photos you posted are nothing less than perfection and timeless, but honestly... I have to agree with Jacob.

Allow me to assist you in critiquing images:

Picture 1 (man seated): Shot for an ad. I get constant praise from persons whose opinion is more valuable than yours, this is not meant to be ugly towards you but I can't bankrupt my company over your thoughts. I do appreciate your opinion however.

Picture 2 (woman with children) The sky was gray and overcast. It was cold that day. She ordered five 8x10 pictures to be printed. I also photographed a family member of hers wedding because of this shot. The colors are natural, not flat... I don't slide the saturation bar like some photographers do.

Picture 3 (cheerleader): Shot for a prestigious private school that is accustomed to photography of excellence. The girl is a child, not a woman in a bikini.

Picture 4 (bride groom): They are tired and frowning but they loved the picture. I love it for the lighting which is why I am showing it here.

Picture 5 (black and white hands): A timeless shot of them praying with the pastor during the actual ceremony. Not sure what you find tacky about that.

Picture 6 (back shot of the church): An elegant wedding that shows an interesting moment in time. I forgot nothing... I use more than one shooter for a wedding. Someone else was on the ground doing coverage. I have shown an element... not 120 from this wedding.

pcunite wrote in post #9512162
First the problem:
What makes someone on this forum recommend a 24-70 to a poster who does not understand basic rules of portraiture? Do you get that big of a high announcing to the world that you own the very lens this poor wannabe needs? Is that it? Is that wants in it for you? POTN should be trying to help and protect brides NOT hacks. Shooting weddings is for club members who CARE about people, not who care only about our egos and the brand of gear we use.

Anyone can learn photography... it is not rocket science, but please use a little judgment when answering threads. If this was a small aircraft forum would you help the fellow who wants to know where the altimeter is? "Well jimmy it is to the left... make sure you glance at once an hour" For real

Common questions:
Not knowing the following is unacceptable for photographing weddings:
* What flash to buy
* What lens to buy
* What camera to buy
* What to charge
* What manual settings to use
* insert 20 questions here

The default answer:
These questions are dead giveaways that someone is unprepared! Answering them will not prepare them! The standard answer from POTN ought to be "Go shoot portraits for a year or go to a workshop. Oh and welcome to POTN". If people have been shooting portraits for money or attending a workshop there would be none of these silly questions.
　

Time to take a break from the forum.

cdifoto wrote in post #9540766
Time to take a break from the forum.

Perhaps... or maybe a change for interesting intellectual dialogue instead of another "what camera should I get?"

pcunite wrote in post #9540793
Perhaps... or maybe a change for interesting intellectual dialogue instead of another "what camera should I get?"

Attacking others isn't conducive to "interesting intellectual dialog"

Maybe your approach isn't as you intended but it comes across as a rant that craigslist gunners are out-shooting you.

At the end of the day, it's more about how you make the bride and groom feel and less about the photos themselves.

cdifoto wrote in post #9540987
Attacking others isn't conducive to "interesting intellectual dialog"

Maybe your approach isn't as you intended but it comes across as a rant that craigslist gunners are out-shooting you.

Well it is a rant I suppose... a rant against those who are burning through brides like no tomorrow... even brides who can't afford quality don't deserve garbage in my opinion. Let them hire a portrait photographer so they can have at least a worthy 8x10 out of the whole day.

Oh and I do recommend the 24-70 but only if shooting 1.3x or full frame. It's not really ideal on 1.6x unless you're more of a tight shooter than wide angle.