I have a friend who is looking for a photographer for her wedding on with 20th of April 2013. She loves B&W, and is keen on a photographer with a strong reportage element. I think her budget is around £1000-£1600. Not sure on product. She is just struggling to find someone who's work she really enjoys, (and is available, or will respond to inquiries).
So any recommendations welcome, as my suggestions haven't been as productive as I'd hoped.
I think you both might be out of her budget, but will pass on the details regardless, thank you both. If anyone else is available, or just knows someone who fits this description please feel free to drop there website.
Chris Beaumont wrote:
You could pass another one to me
You would be running up quite a tab if I did ;-)
I see the focus of your work as the B&G portraits, which I believe she is somewhat less interested in. This is the impression I get from your website at least (as I imagine she would as well), but I have not seen your albums so perhaps there is a heavy reportage element to it.
I'm 80+ % reportage, and I say this without meaning to denigrate anyone who advertises specialising in the area, because everyone on this site KNOW how hard it is and how incredibly talented someone like Chuck A is....but I've always slightly felt that:
a) reportage is a label that a lot of technically incompetent Uncle Bobs hide behind because they don't have the skills necessary to do posing and lighting.
I hope it goes without saying that what they're doing is "point and shoot" and not reportage, I hope I'm preaching to the converted, but I want to make it crystal clear before anyone gets offended.
b) a lot of the best reportage stuff lacks context to outsiders who weren't there on the day.
Not trying to start a war, just an explanation of why I don't show a huge amount of it on my site, I tend to explain the 80% thing in meetings and bring along an ipad with whole weddings on to show it.
That's almost exactly what I imagined you'd say. And if that sounds arsey it isn't intended to, as I do agree with what you're saying. The impression I've had is that in this case she simply isn't connecting with such images as she does with some of the more spontaneous ones. Without meaning to go off topic, but if you showed some of these alongside your portraits she (as an example of just ONE person) might take a greater interest. Obviously, there is the other side to that as you mention.
Yup, I'm still trying to work out how to show both on a website without going into the "quantity over quality" thing.
My logic is that I show 10-15 or so images with big skies, big lighting, the kind that "my friend who has a nice camera" couldn't possibly convince his friends "I could have done if I was there" and hopefully mix in enough nice natural moments to show people it's not all I do...without bogging down the portfolio.
Indeed. I find if very difficult to put a portfolio together because of the balancing act, but mostly the context element that you mentioned. You used to have a blog, didn't you, which showed a series ? I speak about quantity/quality at a meeting obviously, but you probably wouldn't get that impression from my excessive blogging
Yeah, I took my blog offline to make it not look like I spend an average of about 4 months between weddings! I've been rubbish at putting posts together and seoing properly, is one of about 4989 jobs this winter
I would be interested, too. I think my strong site is unposed, authentic stuff. And I am not point and shoot.
Check out here for a (nearly) full wedding:
