Went to friend's wedding recently and was asked to take my camera along as the photog they hired couldn't do the reception / evening festivities. He also had no probs with me taking a few at the ceremony so fair play to him.
Posted a few of these in the wedding forum but got all of about 2 replies and was told they were snapshots and that they were sure the B&G would appreciate the extra snaps.
Why is it, if you go to the macro, landscape or wildlife forums everyone is super friendly and helpful even to beginners, some of whose work is frankly crap but go into the people or wedding forums and people are so less helpful ? something to do with money to be made I suspect ?
Don't get me wrong, there are people who are really helpful in there but not so much.
Anyway, here are the some of the pics. You can go to my zenfolio for more, all taken with 17-55 and D300.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
Not that bad are they ? not like I was paid for them or anything
I like 19, 20 and 24...... what mode did you shoot these in?
Also when you put up pics for critizium one should prepare themselves for good comments and comments not so favorable....thats the price of admission... Keep shootin!
Check out the 1st reply ! I'm sorry but, what a wanker.
Andy
have to say I tend to agree with your sentiment
Have done a few weddings over the years as a favour and truly, all they want really want is a very nice record of their evening/reception and their friends.
If you happen to ace it with a few special shots, that is a bonus.
the only crit I would come up with out of all of them is 1 could have done with some fill flash, but I suspect you know that
If the B&G were happy then you done good, eh??
Cheers
tim
How were you using your flash? Did you use the pop-up flash or an SB? You did get some nice shots in the bunch but some of the others are just nice memories of the event.s If you look at the wedding forum and look at the pictures they post, they are not the usual group shots or couple shots, they are planned setup shots with B&G or any other couple. They want to showcase their fancy stuff and leave the personal snaps for the B&G to see. I feel you added in both so when most people see the shots that were the usuals, they probably just passed it along.
I quite like the one with the kids face lit-up from the screen on the small camera. I think these are very nice photographs.
Event photographers tend to discourage anyone trying to do events, lest people find out that event photography is, well about the event and the people, and stop paying them. Having said that one can always pick some useful advice and forget about the arsiness of the comments.
I like your snaps, that you snapped, there SUPER SNAPPY.....kidding (I did go look at the post in the wedding forum)
I like the shots, I would expect it to be what the B&G would be looking for!
I'm NOT into wedding photog, but it seems to me that the ones who do it for pay get these exact sort of photos and they go into the book for the B&G. They do not tend to put them in the wedding forum here (I would guess for the same reason's you experienced) the wedding/event at nikonians.org seems friendly from what I've gathered, maybe post there and see what you get for a proper (read helpfull) critique.
Just me thinking out loud!
I like to visit the wedding forum anytime I think I'm taking OK pictures, it keeps me humble. There is a level of talent on that board that is just amazing that reminds me to keep shooting, keeping looking at the contrast on the scene and then look at all the details. So far, I'm still just excited to take pictures and see how I did.
My comments here are worth every penny you will pay for them, but I hope they help.
For the most part, I like a lot of the B&Ws shots; they should be a good reminder to the B&G. Now, for a few questions:
1) Are these photos completed in you workflow?
2) Have they all been processed?
3) Do they represent the best of the day that you have?
The reason I ask, is because the outdoor shots taken in the shade are very flat. There is very little contrast to the scene as well as the blue tint due to the shade. I took the liberty to spend a couple of minutes on pictures #6 and #7. Please let me know if you have a problem with this and I will remove them ASAP.
Here's what I came up with based on the small JPGs posted,. These are basically contrast modifications and white point settings. I added a fake sky on the second to try to make the big white blowout, but I'm not sure if I like it.
Yes, it is about the money. The wedding business is rough nowadays as more and more people believe it's easy to take photos. So people in the wedding business tend to get protective of their livelihood.
Of course when you post photos in there, you need to be prepared for criticism. But I don't know what you expected. Did you post in there to get some ooohs and ahhhhs? Quite frankly, they see casual shots like these all day. If you want to get friendly criticism, maybe try the people forum.
I know it seems offensive to have your photos called snapshots, but I wouldn't worry about it. I shoot weddings for friends and family all the time, and the majority of shots are snapshot-like too. I know I'm not trying for anything super artistic.
Where was this wedding anyway? The locale looks beautiful.
Actually, for posting in the wedding forum here, you got some decent responses. I usually get snide remarks about anything and everything when i post on there. Some leave some good ideas and critique, but it's tough love over there.
I like the candid shots the most. The posed ones are fine, but it's hard to make a posed photo really stand out. The b&w conversions are well done. I think the B&G will be happy with these.
To my amateur eye, the ones that really stand out are 5, 11, 20, 22, 24. I did one wedding, long ago, for friends that could not afford to hire anyone, so snaps with my N50 and 35-80 are all they have. I'm sure your friends will appreciate your photographs as well.
Check out the 1st reply ! I'm sorry but, what a wanker.
Andy
I can't see the problem with the quote considering that something a bit more than just a well performed recording is required, I reckon. This isn't dpreview, after all.
Wedding photography has a stronger tendency to require a higher standard and so its natural that the forum wouldn't have much truck with such lowely fare.
Being a non-essential photographer would also have given you the chance of low-light, non-flash atmosphere pics with small dof (ie. 50/1.4 or 30/1.4). High ISO noise is nothing to worry about in your position, and B&W conversion of noise to grain is fine if the noise is to much. A pro can't take that many of such photos, but they are the ones people tend to admire the most. Rather than the black-background flash photos, and atmosphere removal of fill-flash.
As others have said people can be snippy on the wedding forum because it's their lively hood and the infusion of people that can take photos with their DSLR and only charge $400 or do it for free has made the situation tougher for the pros making between $1-3K a wedding. Uncle Joe with his DSLR is just as much the bane of the wedding photographer as Bridezilla.
Most of the time it's nothing personal, it's just that having someone else there shooting with a 70-200 zoom on a pro body (or even a D60) can seriously compromise some situations if it's not handle properly. You get people looking at the wrong camera during shoots, people confused as to who the 'photographer' is, you loose print sales if that person is giving their photos away for free, and there's always the chance you're missing a special moment because someone grabbed uncle Joe to take a photo instead of you.
You're work could get you paid around these parts if you had a flashy website and marketed yourself correctly, so keep that in mind.
Edit: I'm an idiot and mis-read Matthew's comment doh.
There's a thin line between working like a dog lining up kids like cattle and shooting them for a school yearbook and shooting high end weddings and events for bigger money. Sometimes a talented amateur can show up a pro and push him back to airbrushing tens of thousands of zits on thousands of teenagers instead of wearing a suit with a carnation in the lapel and shooting pretty bridesmaids. Rather than proving their worth with photos, some photographers defend their turf with sharp words. Don't let it bother you. Those guys deserve to be shooting yearbook photos. A real photographer won't feel threatened.
To be honest, the first dozen or so really are just snapshots - not that there's anything wrong with that. 18-21 show some good technique combined with nice composition and so are a cut above (I like 16 too), but after that the remaining pics are somewhere between those two groups. And no, it''s not just about the money, a real pro in any field knows that 90% of what you do is pretty easy, but that last 10% is what makes your work special. So, getting the right angle at the right time with the right focus and DOF is more than just shooting a bunch of frames. Take #9, for example. The background car windshield overpowers the man in the image and also messed up the exposure. Is it a nice snap? Of course, and he looks like he was an integral part of the wedding party and so it serves as a nice memento - but is it a "Wedding Pic"? No. A pro would have known to move to their right and get something else in the background. Still, nice pictures and I'm sure the couple will love them.
I'll only comment on the People and Wedding forum comments. I think those two forums are tough to figure out. I posted twice to the People forum and the first was great, but the second wasn't so great. The first I was sharing some photos of a senior I shot and she was gorgeous and made my photos look great, and the folks over there loved them! The second time around I shared another senior session and I got! "Snapshot" was one of the many criticisms thrown my way--of course those who criticized the most had nothing I could find of theirs to compare to. I have to say that the parents and the senior loved the photos and bought lots of them--go figure.
I would keep shooting and maybe ask us over here what we think. There are all types of photographers here and I do think this forum is much more friendly and helpful in it's C+C--a few give C+C when not asked and they know who they are
I think if you haven't shot a lot of weddings you have done a great job.
I have a few somewhat generic points since I can't possibly comment on every shot/scenario:
- you have a good eye for the action and you recognize that there is a story going on
- perhaps the 17-55 lens isn't the best choice for some of the shots.. but it is what you had so who cares.
- keep post processing consistent, your color temp and contrast seems to vary a little too much. However, still treat each image like its own and give it the proper treatment
- Don't be afraid to dodge and burn, a lot of these images need it
- whenever possible move into the shade. When subjects are in the shade the light around them comes in to that area like a nice soft box.
- I hate to say it but if you insist on using flash indoors in low light (which isn't always a bad thing).... try using manual flash. Set your camera to say 1/60th @ say 800 or 1600 iso and your flash to perhaps 1/4 power. Bounce the flash behind you off the ceiling and control the flash exposure by adjusting your aperture only. This way you can get a nicer balance and avoid an overly snapshotty look. Yes it sounds like going back in time but once you get it dialed in and get familiar with your shooting distances and what aperture is required it is much more consistent IMO. However, be aware of ceiling heights etc....
Most of the regulars on the Wedding forum are professionals and tire of amateurs with cameras thinking they can shoot a wedding. Their profession is tough enough without having to contend with cousin Joe and his camera. I've seen so many threads from people who have 2 weeks to prepare to shoot a wedding and would like to know what equipment they need. This is a different attitude than you would find on other forums. It may not be what you would like to find, but, it is what it is.
As was said before, if the B&G like you pics then you did good. If you ask a professional wedding photographer, they will tell you the truth--the shots are basically snapshots that lack proper post processing. Don't shoot the messenger. Take their comments and learn from them.
BTW, I'm not a wedding photog, but have done second shooter work for a friend. It is a difficult way to make a living and filled with location issues, personality problems, and MOB complaints and demands. So, give them a break.
The previous post has a few good points about the wedding photographer/profession.
Nothing wrong with a great snapshot but what makes it so great? Do you love it, speaking from experience?
If they are posed, do you have it "right"? How do you know? Did you study portraiture, lighting? Do you practice on people outdoors and use fill light as necessary?
The bride and groom might love all of the pics but if the pics don't please you or other wedding artists, then how do you feel?
A whole lot of different aspects go into good wedding photography.
It amazes me that someone buys a zoom lens and covers a wedding with it.
Wedding photography is more complicated than that and yet, the more simple you can make it...
Try it. Not easy to do.
I will add that the tiny details add and subtract to my personal enjoyment.
In your pics here, the purses distract me from the dresses. My preference!
19 is getting good. But compared to the quality of the photography that regularly appears in the wedding forum the rest are frankly crap (to use your words). That's why they're called snapshots. If you really can't understand why they're being called snapshots, then get yourself a book on photography and do some learning rather than whining and calling people wankers.
I have just taken a pretty thorough look through the wedding photographer section and quite frankly IMO the simple concepts and straight forward photography overall were by far the most appealing.
In fact I will go as far to say that for me, some of the more contrived efforts of photograhy and PP were embarrassing.
Weddings are bloody hard work and I have only fronted when the B&G have been financially challenged, but even then the reponsibility is enormous as there is no opp for a reshoot. The last one I did was still in my film days and after 24 rolls of film, from the bride getting prepared to the end of the reception, combined with the responsibility, you know you have put in a serious days work, esp when you are doing it for the cost of materials and processing.
Alternatively when I hear of wedding photographers charging $15,000-00 for two photographers for an eight hour shoot, I dont care how big the album is or how much time they spend in post, they are giving anyone who holds a camera and has pride in their work a truly bad name.
I heard of that first hand and saw the results and it was truly all I could do not to say, "why didnt you ask a friend". Technically they were fine. Were they special? nope.
Could have done it with my D70s, 35-70 + my old SB28 and done it as well, despite being told they had over $30,000-00 worth of cameras and lenses on hand
I guess what I am trying to say there seems to be a lot of emotional blackmail involved.
