I wouldn't be so sure. To the newest generation, doing something virtually is better than doing it for real. Virtual photographs are better than those undesirable real ones, that cost money, have mass, take up space, and can be smelled. Playing virtual bowling on the virtual bowling machine is as good as going to the real bowling alley with real sticky seats and drinking real beer. Reading virtual books on a virtual book reader is as good as a bookshelf full of books...even better...more virtual. A harddrive is as good as a record collection...even better. A virtual-photograph-virtual-wedding is as good as the real thing....probably better even...it has more of that desirable virtuality.
Maybe I'm too much of an old romantic, but I'd have thought the bride would have had more interesting plans for the honeymoon nights than looking at digisnaps of cousin Henry in his ill-fitting suit on the laptop...
I went on vacation this summer. I realized people spend more time looking at the backs of their digital cameras, than they do looking at the sights.
Although I do take photographs when I am on vacation, and go on vacation to take photographs, I refuse to ever stumble onto the next level where the experience that is sought is not the experience itself but the experience of having had (and documented with forensic precision) the experience.
The book In the Beginning, there was the Command-Line has several insightful looks at this endemic virtuality.
Last edited by BetterSense; 10-13-2009 at 03:17 PM. Click to view previous post history.
f/22 and be there.
It's easy enough to understand how he got the job–instant portfolio via flickr! (O.K., I'm not saying I have proof, but it's certainly trivial to build a web portfolio this way, and I have trouble imagining any other path to someone spending this much money on someone this incompetent in a very competitive market.)
Haven't shot enough weddings to have one truly come unglued yet, but I came very close to disaster on a Quinceañera once (a long time ago). As I packed to go to the event I noticed that somehow the frameline selector had fallen off my Mamiya Universal, so I subbed a Super 23 as my main body.
The problem with that is that the Super 23 has a Linhof-style tilting back, and vaguely crummy locks. Sure enough, at some point I must've picked it up by the back, and added 1/4" or so of stealth back tilt to all the formals. But by some miracle I'd been doubling all the formals with my HiMatic 7s, mostly as a test of what the new-to-me little body could do. They were sharp, on Reala, and even exposed better–its GN-only-mechanical-autoflash system did better than the thyristor flash I had on the Mamiya, especially in bright daylight.
A few years ago when my wife and I got married in Vegas, the, uh, photographer was still shooting film. They shot one roll and gave us the film on the way out. Along with the videotape. But we were only paying, as I recall, about $50 for the service. Were the pictures great? No. Were they better than what those folks in the UK got? Yes.
Originally Posted by eddym
When you're getting married by a big, fat, sweaty Elvis, you may be better off with not so many photos.
"People get bumped off." -- Weegee
What I don't understand is why this story is being reported all over the world thousands of "photographers" are f***ing up weddings and being sued all over the world all the time.
I photographed my cousin's wedding this year using a film SLR. Fun day and some nice photos. A friend does this on the side using his DSLR and he said I was 'crazy' to do this using film as it's too 'risky' (there's no preview screen). I told him when my parents married in the late 1960s the photographer gave the films to his assistant after the wedding, he drove back to the lab and they had proof prints on a board as the guests arrived for their evening meal. Nowadays my friend spends days whittling down his 500+ photos before burning them onto a CD. Progress!
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
If that's factual then I strongly suspect it has something to do with ever decreasing skill levels in most, if not all, professions. However, the profession is still well respected notwithstanding "wedding photographers" attempts at making a buck despite a lack of skills and experience.
Originally Posted by benjiboy
Last edited by Mike1234; 10-14-2009 at 10:00 AM. Click to view previous post history.
I agree, the technology that the manufacturers has provided so their keep selling cameras has made increasingly smarter cameras, but dumber photographers who rely on the electronics to do their thinking for them.
Originally Posted by Mike1234
Glad I started this thread - it's been educational and fun! Now to relate a little story of the first wedding I ever photographed.
I used my Retina Reflex with Tri-X and bulb flash. I was very nervous as the bride was an old family friend. When I got home that night and was putting my equipment away, I realized the flash setting was on 'X', not 'M', in other words, it was set for electronic flash, not bulbs. I couldn't sleep that night.
The next day I took one of the last rolls, which was just some general shots as the reception was winding down, and really souped it! Amazingly, I had usable negatives - not great, but usable. Guess the duration of the bulbs helped. I souped the rest of the film, made some acceptable prints, and presented the couple with the albums when they returned from their honeymoon. They were very happy with the results.
Fast forward 40 years. Spouses have passed away, and I marry the old family friend. She has become a good photographer herself. I tell her what happened with her wedding photos of so long ago. We have a great laugh over that from time to time! Isn't life interesting?
^^^ Hah... that's funny. Thanks for sharing.
"For that kind of money I might just whore myself out as a wedding photographer!"
If you can shoot when you have no opportunity to do remakes or reshoots and have to get it right the first time or fail... maybe you should.
Many can't shoot weddings or quick events because they are not talented enough. Some don't shoot it because they don't want to. Those who do this work are not whoring. Not at all.
It looks so easy but figure out fill flash on the shadow side of a brides face while not overexposing the white dress or wiping out detail in the black Tux the groom is wearing and do the shot with 200 guests looking on urging you to hurry so they can get to the refreshments and on with the cake cutting.
It takes talent and skill to shoot this way. Just ask those who have tried and discovered shooting 'one time and it has to be right' is too much work.
Just as with so many things, it isn't as easy as it looks.