gdanmitchell wrote:
There are many who believe that when there could be a risk to the front element, such as from hazardous or dangerous materials flying about, that it is a fine idea to a protective UV filter. Consider this.
Given that the time between your first shot and the point when the subject acquires his/her target may be rather limited, it could be advantageous to have a camera with a very high burst mode rate and deep buffer to ensure that you are able to capture sufficient frames
I remember reading somewhere that the 1Dx has a habit of locking up and the battery would have to be removed and then reinstalled to be able to continue shooting….hard to execute that maneuver smoothly while running and dodging foreign objects…also, wouldn’t a protective UV filter adversely affect IQ?
This is a joke right? who is paying for the photos? wife or husband? Most of the time the wedding album and all photos go to the fireplace so why more photos. There's no market for photographers in a divorce, gun dealers and hitman already corner that market.
carlsbadbum wrote:
This is a joke right? who is paying for the photos? wife or husband? Most of the time the wedding album and all photos go to the fireplace so why more photos. There's no market for photographers in a divorce
That’s why I print on stainless steel with high temperature infused inks…even the ex-husbands friends don’t have those…
As far away as you can get! Prayer would help too. This would do both as it's the Pope Scope on Mt. Graham in Arizona. I'm sure some one makes an adapter.
carlsbadbum wrote:
This is a joke right? who is paying for the photos? wife or husband? Most of the time the wedding album and all photos go to the fireplace so why more photos. There's no market for photographers in a divorce, gun dealers and hitman already corner that market.
no, no joke
never a more serious photo topic ever
who pays for the shots in the end? well that is to be determined at the proceedings (and ironically, arguments about who will pay for the divorce proceeding photos is actually what leads to most divorces in the first place*)
* pg 666, May, 2008 - "The Journal of Divorce Proceedings"
Great marketing idea for a wedding photographer - tell them that if they hire you to shoot the wedding you'll give them a 50% discount on the divorce photos.
abqnmusa wrote:
are you photographing the after divorce celebration?
Divorce may be expensive; but worth the cost.
“After Divorce” photography is a whole different animal, usually with a different set of people that have a much better attitude toward the photographer…and a whole lot more fun
I have over the years, learned to look at women I meet as potential ex-wives from the get-go, and get a general feel for later malice and how it would be expressed, mostly towards me, at a later date…helps keep thoughts of marriage away…
Remember…Divorce is the F#%*ing you get for the F#%*ing you got…Truly words to live by…
Oooooh... I was just reading on the wedding forum about "morning after" photos. I can imagine there'd be a huge market for those in the divorce genre. You could probably sell large prints to be used as gifts from one half of the happy ex-couple to the other! I'm thinking complete coverage would usually require a second shooter, though.
