While I can see the the point that Jazzy is trying to make in his defense, I can also agree with both curtis and evan.
I'm not going to attempt to tell anyone that they can't be a wedding photographer.. but I do agree that if you are going to jump into the pool, you better know how to at least doggie paddle... or invest in some swimmies. There is definitely a ton of helpful advice here... much of it posted by Curtis.
I did find it humorous when the op said "I wasn't about to ask the bride and groom to wait until I saved money to buy better lenses to get married. =) " but it never occurred to her that maybe she should just decline from doing the job if she wasn't prepared.
JazzyMac wrote:
Not picking a fight. As far as the warzone, I'll choose to not comment. But if you don't know, please, don't even talk.
Disagreements = trolling. I'm done with this thread.
Thanks to all those who actually posted assistance.
Don't let the door...
And trolling can be chronically disagreeing, pointlessly arguing, and contributing absolutely nothing to a thread other than just derailing it, which is what you did here. Congrats!
RichardLavigne wrote:
I did find it humorous when the op said "I wasn't about to ask the bride and groom to wait until I saved money to buy better lenses to get married. =) " but it never occurred to her that maybe she should just decline from doing the job if she wasn't prepared.
Or leave the gear at home and enjoy the day. That seems like the best solution. Weddings are for having fun, not trying to build your port.
I'm guessing that you are using the original 75-300 that doesn't have IS. Yeah that's just going to be rough indoors (especially when zoomed in) to get a sharp shot.
Definitely pick up the 50mm 1.8 lens. For around $100 it's really great for the money. You'll get sharp pictures indoors but you are going to have to practice with it. With at 1.8 you'll get a lot of light into the camera but your picture will only get a small small area of the shot in focus.
Look for a used Tamron 17-50mm 2.8. It's a decent lens and and you can probably get it used for under $300.
Thank God the troll is gone. Let's get back to helping the OP.
Out of the 3 shots, the first 2 didn't have fast enough shutter speed. The third one works fine. The simple rule of thumb is you need 1/focal length for your shutter speed to ensure a stabled image, unless you got really steady hand & good shooting practice, this should be used most of the times with the exception of lenses with stabilizer / vibration reducer.
One other simple piece of advice I can also give is this, get the hell away from all those pretty little icons on the dial, as well as the "P"rofessional mode. Learn the basic and experiment with Manual, Aperture priority or Shutter priority, see which works best for you.
JazzyMac wrote:
Wow, again? This begs the question...and possibly a lesson to learn:
Has no one *ever* used a tripod to shoot a wedding? Ever?? Like not one time *ever* did the tripod come out during a portion of the wedding event??
Ever??
O-kay.
I asked an honest question because I personally have never shot a moving subject with a tripod. Now, have you tried it? I'm wondering because somehow I doubt this would have helped the OP, but I don't have enough info to go on.
FYI, never did I state that a tripod has never been used to shoot a wedding.
Learn photography. learn not to set yourself up for a harder time raising prices, learn to not alienate professionals in your field. There is no insult to a post when you ask for help and someone gives it. The best advice, if valid, remains valid regardless of how you receive it or read the wording, feeling, etc. I would give you much harsher words and hope you learn more quickly from a stern voice than a supportive soft one.
Ugh poor OP. The rediculous cocky attitudes of the "pros" on this board are sickening.
If the OP didn't charge, big deal who on earth is ANYONE on this board to judge? Thats like someone in Geeksquad crying because I fixed a computer for free and I don't work in the home computer repair industry.
To the OP:
Don't get discouraged by the hate on this board and the people telling you you shouldn't have posted wedding shot questions in the wedding shot forum. No one here runs anything and you can post where you please as long as it abides by forum rules. Unfortunately there are a lot of nasty people on here who forget that they were once beginners too. They also don't seem to realize that second shooting for a pro is rarely an option (seriously, good luck finding a pro to take a beginner on as an assistant).
What I could suggest is practice a lot on portraiture and posing and then move to low light. Have a friend or two do something and you try and get some low light shots of it. Practice, and lots of it is what you will need. Don't get discouraged because this type of thing takes a long time to perfect.
Chrono1081 wrote:
They also don't seem to realize that second shooting for a pro is rarely an option (seriously, good luck finding a pro to take a beginner on as an assistant).
Chrono1081 wrote:
Ugh poor OP. The rediculous cocky attitudes of the "pros" on this board are sickening.
Why is 'pros' in quotes? Plenty of the posters here do this professionally.
Based on your comments, I guarantee you are not a professional wedding photographer. At best, you've shot a few freebies or cheapies yourself.
Chrono1081 wrote:
If the OP didn't charge, big deal who on earth is ANYONE on this board to judge? Thats like someone in Geeksquad crying because I fixed a computer for free and I don't work in the home computer repair industry.
.
OP is the reason why some brides are under the impression that photography is not something they need to invest money in, and is also a perfect example why they must. I'm not upset they didn't charge, I'm upset because it's a perfect example of the horror stories I hear from prospective brides who 'knew somebody' that opted to have a friend shoot their wedding, with disastrous results. It makes us even easier to sell, sure, but it's all too common to hear of, sad, and makes wedding photographers in general look like a shabby lot. If you're going to bring 1 body and some trash gear without knowledge of the basics on how to use it (not to mention WTF to do if it fails), then you have no respect for what professionals actually do nor respect for the importance of what you're photographing. OP's questions and images show a lack of even the beginnings to understanding photography, and the advice of buying a beginner's book on photography is sound.
JazzyMac is obviously a troll, and most likely an alt. Stop feeding him and his obvious bait attempts.
I apologize if I hit a nerve of all the paid wedding photographers on this forum. I really did not mean to.
Yes, I am an amateur photographer and that is why I came here to ask questions. A lot of you seem like you know what you are doing and could offer helpful advice that I would very much appreciate.
I'm not out to steal your business; it will be a while before I will charge any one for photos, if I even get to that point.
That is actually the problem Jen.
If every amateur were able to come in and get training from the pros and not charge money for what they do then why would anyone bother to hire a pro?
You would get far more support if you actually had intent to charge and grow a business. To just advance your skills while shooting for free is not in the interest of those aiming to make money from it. It just devalues the craft.
Chris Fawkes wrote:
That is actually the problem Jen.
If every amateur were able to come in and get training from the pros and not charge money for what they do then why would anyone bother to hire a pro?
You would get far more support if you actually had intent to charge and grow a business. To just advance your skills while shooting for free is not in the interest of those aiming to make money from it. It just devalues the craft.
Best post, yet.... read this, bitter people, and try to understand the words and concepts brought forth.
Just to let you know, they paid another photographer. So I didn't cheat any one out of their business.
And who are you to judge a bride's motives in getting freebies? Seriously. Not everyone has a couple grand to give to a photographer, and not everyone sees the necessity of having every single move they made on their wedding day captured. Perhaps this bride was even o.k with someone with a point and shoot doing things for them. That is still no concern to you. That is her personal decision, and you can just let it live.
I wanted to get some experience, practice and to see if I can handle doing wedding shoots. The bride and groom knew this. Everything was covered and discussed. They still had a fun and beautiful wedding. I didn't steal any shots from the professional who was there; we were never even on the same sides of the church. Outside, we were doing our own things.
I think many of you have made this far more scandalous than it is. All the possible gawking and complaining has been done.
bride's motives in getting freebies
The problem is not someone wanting freebies -- it's providing the freebies that causes harm... and expecting freebies handed out so that you can provide more freebies.
Not everyone has a couple grand to give to a photographer
The money is not "given" it is earned. You have no clue about the time and expense required to provide photographic coverage of a wedding.
It's time to let this post die.
Yes, it was.... you should have let it.
I didn't have a problem with you until you posted this drivel.
Don't get discouraged by the hate on this board and the people telling you you shouldn't have posted wedding shot questions in the wedding shot forum. No one here runs anything and you can post where you please as long as it abides by forum rules. Unfortunately there are a lot of nasty people on here who forget that they were once beginners too.
Chrono,
you are correct. The Op's question violated no rules and was therefore at least technically acceptable.
That being said...
I used to have some "fellow classmates" in Calculus Class who would interrupt class to ask what was OBVIOUSLY algebra questions. Yes, granted, you need Algebra to do Calculus... so it's not like they were interrupting to ask MUSIC questions... but the reality is that their deficiencies in Algebra were NOT something that should have been addressed during our Calculus Class.
Algebra is a PREREQUISITE for Calculus... much like EXPOSURE is a prerequisite for Wedding Photography.
Those students had tons of options:
1. Get a book on Algebra and study on their own
2. Take advantage of the school's free tutor program
3. Hired a personal Algebra tutor
4. Went to the Math department and asked for assistance
5. Approached the teacher after class and asked for advice.
Instead... what they chose to do was rudely assume that since their questions were about the general topic of mathematics, it was ok for them to have 28 other students sit idly listening to their PRE-REQUISITE questions and the subsequent answer.
Oh and those students were NOT devaluing an industry by providing what SHOULD BE a valuable service for free.
