Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,665   Posts: 1,481,689   Online: 733
      
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 77
  1. #31
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Quote Originally Posted by blansky View Post
    As I said before, in what other profession are amateurs allowed to be present, and offering their services while the pro is working.
    Sex.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,810
    Develop, stop, fix.... wait.... where's my film?

  3. #33
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Blansky, I see your point but I think you aim at the wrong target.

    A professional photographer doesn't just make money out of the initial sum, but he (used to) expects to make other money from additional prints for relatives and friends. I understand this.

    I also understand that the work of the hired photographer can be disrupted by other people photographing the scene: flashes, the couple looking in the "wrong" direction, the additional stress placed on the photographer.

    My point is that in this day and age it is exactly the professional responsibility of the photographer to talk to the wedding couple about these issues and to make sure they iron those things out or revise certain of their expectations.

    It's the wedding couple who must tell the guests not to use the flash, not to attract the attention of the couple, not to encumber the view of the official photographer, or more simply not to take pictures at all. As you say, the photographer is not in a position to do it.

    If the couple doesn't feel like doing that kind of "breefing" to the invitees, for whatever reason, the photographer will price his professional performance taking into account all the diminished revenue and the additional stress. And he will warn the couple that if they look in the wrong direction this will show in the pictures. And he will insist on being paid in advance. Or he will give up the job.

    If the couple asks Thomas to give a photographic contribution, then it is the couple responsibility to inform the official photographer, plain and simple. Thomas is doing a favour which his friends requested to him.
    Even if Thomas had applied this kind of self-restrain of his own initiative, that wouldn't have changed much: somebody else would have being asked by the couple in Thomas stead, and nothing would have changed (besides that Thomas would have deprived himself of the possibility of making a nice favour to the couple). Or somebody would have come in any case with a prominent camera and everybody would have begun taking out their smartphones.

    That's supposing that people really wait to be "enabled" by somebody else before taking their smartphones out.

    The problem is the couple. The couple must be educated about this aspect of the business. Some people spend entire days trying on dresses, looking for shoes, rehearsing the entrance etc. and I don't think it would be asking too much to ask them to pay attention also to the photographic aspect of their marriage if they care about it.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,786
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson View Post
    I disagree with you. But I don't want to argue with you, so I'm going to stop. It's pointless and waste of energy I should be spending elsewhere.
    After 16.8 years of marriage we still have four (4) wedding photos on the wall or shelf (the album is under the coffee table in the parlor). Of those four on public display are three from the pro an done from a friend... who with a P-O-S POS took an "iconic" photo of us while the pro was doing something else. I really appreciate that the guests at our wedding/reception let the pro work without distraction/interference, but also took some of their own pics that were shared. Maybe things are different now but I don't think so... we had a fair number of guests who came with cameras of hteir own. Maybe they were just more polite than at other events, IDK... but it sounds like you, Thomas, are both discreet and polite.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,810
    Using a similar logic, Clyde Butcher should be complaining about all the amateur LF photographers. They can go to the same spot with same or even better equipment and take the "same" photograph.... Yet, his prints command high prices because he does something that's unique and valuable. His lighting skills, compositional abilities, waits for hours or days for the perfect shot. Not many amateur can claim that.

    Doesn't wedding photographers bring the similar skills to the clients? Under pressure and constraints, return quality photograph to the client without fail? I'm talking about real pros here... not bought a camera 6 months ago kind of pros.

    Sure, amateur can take similar or sometimes better photographs but often, it's by chance. He or she can't reliably do it every time and in adverse conditions. I don't claim to be a professional because I cannot promise I will give them their money's worth. If I have an event where failure isn't an option, I surely don't hire someone for free or for cheap.
    Develop, stop, fix.... wait.... where's my film?

  6. #36
    blansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Wine country in Northern California
    Posts
    5,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Diapositivo View Post
    Sex.
    Damn, that one slipped right by me.

    Absolutely correct.
    I couldn't think of anything witty to say so I left this blank.

  7. #37
    David Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    near Dallas, TX USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,173
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by blansky View Post
    The dynamic that the OP is pointing out is the same only different than what happened before digital and camera phones. I had stupid people stand in front and try to screw up my wedding photographs with their Instamatics back in the 70s and 80s.
    Same here. I actually had one wedding back in the 70s where the members of the wedding party had cameras and would move out of position at the altar during the ceremony to get their pics! Classy to the end.

    But the usual scenario was during the staged group and couple portraits at the altar after the ceremony. (Do they even still do those? - I'm so out of touch... ) I would give a little speech to the assembly before we started; something to the effect that the bride's father was paying me a of of money and he expected me to get the pictures. Everyone was welcome to take their version of each individual shot immediately AFTER I took mine, but not before. Also, don't stand in the aisle as I will be backing up without looking. Then, I kept talking constantly, so that I had "command" of the room, as it were.

    It almost always worked and I only backed into a few people.

    As for the rest of the proceedings, such as all the hoopla at the reception, I tried to stay out of the way and nobody seemed to get in mine, either.

    Today, when asked to do a wedding, I simply say "No".

  8. #38
    blansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Wine country in Northern California
    Posts
    5,029
    Quote Originally Posted by tkamiya View Post
    Using a similar logic, Clyde Butcher should be complaining about all the amateur LF photographers. They can go to the same spot with same or even better equipment and take the "same" photograph.... Yet, his prints command high prices because he does something that's unique and valuable. His lighting skills, compositional abilities, waits for hours or days for the perfect shot. Not many amateur can claim that.

    Doesn't wedding photographers bring the similar skills to the clients? Under pressure and constraints, return quality photograph to the client without fail? I'm talking about real pros here... not bought a camera 6 months ago kind of pros.

    Sure, amateur can take similar or sometimes better photographs but often, it's by chance. He or she can't reliably do it every time and in adverse conditions. I don't claim to be a professional because I cannot promise I will give them their money's worth. If I have an event where failure isn't an option, I surely don't hire someone for free or for cheap.
    I don't think the scenic analogy really works although on this site even scenic photographers have complained about idiots setting up in front of them.

    The problem at events like weddings is a lot of what happens, down the isle stuff, kissing stuff, father handing off bride stuff etc, happens once, for a millisecond of emotion that can't really be staged again. You can have all the skill in the world but someone flashing when you have a stunning available light shot, or someone stepping in front of you when you have a shot framed that can't be duplicated.

    Hey, I've shot over 500 weddings. I can handle nuisance photographers, I can cajole wedding party and guests but my point is, it's still is a major distraction and takes energy and often wreaks shots.

    As for the advanced amateurs with the often underlying feeling that, "I can take picture just as good as the paid guy", well maybe you did nail a shot or two that he missed. But if you think you are pretty good at it, try doing a full wedding, with all the pressure to perform, with the mother of the bride fighting with the ex-wife of her husband and the brother of the bride drunk as a skunk, and the groom performing for his buddies and the pregnant bride trying to hide the fact, and bring it all together with a cohesive wedding album as good as the ones they expect and saw in your studio, which were actually of attractive people, then see how you fare.
    I couldn't think of anything witty to say so I left this blank.

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,810
    There is nothing I disagree in what you said although I still think my analogy is good....

    Here's a question. I understand they are nuisance and it can wreck the product or cause you to miss out the "moment." But hasn't that been true ever since the camera became affordable? I see there's more of it but that's really a problem with people becoming ME centric and generally not being aware of their surrounding, isn't it? Is someone who got a good shot and gave the couple his/her product really a new threat? (assuming he didn't obstruct you to get the image)
    Develop, stop, fix.... wait.... where's my film?

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,786
    Quote Originally Posted by tkamiya View Post
    I see there's more of it but that's really a problem with people becoming ME centric and generally not being aware of their surrounding, isn't it?
    Age/maturity, self-centeredness, and "bubble-headed impulsiveness" are big parts of the issue, as I see it.

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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