Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 74,124   Posts: 1,636,916   Online: 878
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Overhead

  1. #11
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,945
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    I actually send mine 900 miles away to Richard Photo Lab in So. Cal. I have built priority mail cost into the $50/roll processing.

    The clients are told from the start that it's going to take several weeks. I'm getting no push back at all.

    I'm also finding that it's not hard to sell the clients on staying under 250 shots vs 2500 shots. I help them understand how many shots they will really use and how many their freinds will actually be willing to sit through. I also suggest that if they want 1000's that video is probably a better choice than still photos.

    Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
    that is all great, if you have a lab near you that can process your work
    i am up here in rhodeisland where there used to be 3 or 4 pro labs for the whole state,
    and now maybe there is one prolab left that still processes film ...

    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  2. #12
    JohnRichard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    262
    Images
    15
    Yes, Yes, Yes!

    A friend and I have been arguing this point over and over. He states that most people already HAVE a computer and printer and stuff, and I said that most people that don't know the first thing about editing or printing have an e-machine from the Wal-mart and a portable Canon printer. He just couldn't get it through his head that if someone went into business, they would think they NEED a new computer (which they probably do), and a new printer (which they do).

    I DO NOT want to sit in front of a computer for 60 hours touching up this and making that pretty. The only thing I do with my computer is increase the contrast on some prints/neg scans if they are not where I want them to be. I can find someone to do all that for me, and bill the customer for it. Then, I have much more time to go SHOOT! That's what I really want to do.
    I have no problem sending stuff to Richards Photo Lab, and the downloading the digital scans. The youngers can facebook the crap out of it, and I'll still have pretty negs I can print.
    - J. Richard
    4x5 Speed Graphic, Looking for another 8x10.

  3. #13
    Paul Sorensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Saint Paul, MN
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,896
    Images
    26
    Same here John, I am looking forward to hearing more. And Mark, that is great to hear, I am very impressed that you are succeeding by doing something different than the masses.

  4. #14
    JohnRichard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    262
    Images
    15
    Thanks for your words of wisdom. I am still planning my gear setup. I have decided I don't like rangefinders. There is just something about them that is weird. That thought is weird, because I like my Yashika-Mat... and it has a leaf shutter. But even it has a more positive feel than the rangefinder when I mash the button. So, I am thinking that I will shoot with just that, or, if I decide to get the Bronica, that. And, I think I will shoot the 135 stuff with my trusty K-1000, why not. After all, I don't need all that fancy stuff, I like simple. It has a PC socket, and hot shoe. The standard 50mm lens is fine for reception work, and I'm use to it. I am going to crash some weddings, because I can, to see what the competition is using. I'm sure they shoot digital, but it will be neat to see if they think about the lighting or if they just bought a Nikon sunpak (whatever) just because it was expensive.

    I am also having a hard time deciding weather to use a single light weight strobe on a stand, or not. I posted about strobes in the lighting section if any of you want to chime in.
    - J. Richard
    4x5 Speed Graphic, Looking for another 8x10.

  5. #15
    Marco B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,982
    Images
    169
    I once was out shooting a castle ruin with my Tachihara camera. A girl came up to me, and was interested what I was doing. I showed her the camera and explained a bit. After a look through the camera, she said: I would hire you for my wedding if I had one...

    I have never pursued this option yet, but I seriously think you could make real money shooting just 10-20 LF formal photos on a wedding, taking into account all other positive responses I have had to using that camera out in the field.

    And even if you would shoot anything else (non-formal on rolls of 35mm or 100's of digital shots), these photos would get lost in the barrage of all other digital photos taken by family, friends etc... By the time you have your photos ready, the wedding couple will be numbed (and that's from some experience I heard from a female photographer doing that kind of work).

    In the end, tell me, who is really interested in seeing the 100th photo of a distant cousin eating a steak at your wedding party???

    Marco
    Last edited by Marco B; 09-16-2009 at 04:19 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    My website

    "The nineteenth century began by believing that what was reasonable was true, and it wound up by believing that what it saw a photograph of, was true." - William M. Ivins Jr.

    "I don't know, maybe we should disinvent color, and we could just shoot Black & White." - David Burnett in 1978

    "Analog is chemistry + physics, digital is physics + math, which ones did you like most?"

  6. #16
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,945
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnRichard View Post
    I DO NOT want to sit in front of a computer for 60 hours touching up this and making that pretty. The only thing I do with my computer is increase the contrast on some prints/neg scans if they are not where I want them to be. I can find someone to do all that for me, and bill the customer for it. Then, I have much more time to go SHOOT! That's what I really want to do.
    I have no problem sending stuff to Richards Photo Lab, and the downloading the digital scans. The youngers can facebook the crap out of it, and I'll still have pretty negs I can print.
    The people at Richard Photo Lab are great and they really can do the whole thing for you. Try your proofs printed on 5x5 paper with 1/4 or 1/2 inch minimum borders.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  7. #17
    polyglot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,442
    Images
    12
    I shoot weddings (using the D word) and I use film. As you've found, you cannot compete on quantity against spray-and-pray using film, but nor should you want to. However, there are benefits to having digital around for the purpose of getting candids because it seems that what people mostly want now is candid coverage of their wedding and not so much the formal shots. People standing stiffly in groups are not cool, but people engaged and lively and probably unaware that they're being shot - they're the shots that I find that people respond best to. And they want a good photo of EVERY guest.

    If you're doing digital properly, there is definitely more time involved than there is if you're just posting some films off to the lab. However, it doesn't have to be the massive time-sink that people here are saying that it is. I typically shoot about 1000 shots at a wedding (over the course of 10 hours: ceremony, reception, everything) and it takes me maybe 4 hours to do all the postprocessing on them. I don't process heavily (no blemish repairs, face swaps, etc) but just deal with colour issues, adjust contrast, etc. While that extra 4 hours is annoying, it's way way way less time than I'd spend in front of an enlarger just to get a handful of good prints!

    While you need (to pay for) proofs or at least scans of all your analogue shots, you don't need to pay for prints on ANY digital shots except for the ones that you really want. While I might shoot about 1000 shots, I'll cull that straight to about 300 that the customer sees and then you might be looking at picking 150 for an album and another 10 for larger prints.

    If I were you (well actually, I'm me, and this is what I do... it may not be right for you at all), I would use each technology where it is best suited. Use a DSLR for all the candids and chasing kids around and experimental grab-shots that might come off and high-ISO church shots (ISO1600-3200 in colour is quite viable these days, which gets you shots in very dark locations, particularly if you have stabilisation). Where you have time for high quality formal setups and/or know you might want to print large, use medium format.

    If you want to make archival FB prints and sell them as your top-of-the-range product, then do so! Obviously with such an approach you're not aiming at the budget-wedding people (because they'll go with a $500 spray-and-pray, burn-to-cd incompetent), but that's no reason to forgo the best tool for each job on the basis of some ideology.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin