No joy for noobs--video has been yanked :(

Moving from basic to intermediate photography tips for a second, controlling the intensity and type of light can make a huge difference in the final photograph. Some flashes create an unnatural-looking bright appearance. In that case, experiment with the following solutions:

Use an external flash, attached to the hot shoe, and create a bounce flash off the ceiling or a wall
Attach a diffuser over the flash head to create a softer, less intense light

I think I laughed the hardest when he was insulting the corner sharpness. LOL!

Actually, a tripod is very handy at a wedding. I have used it at the back of the church or middle of the aisle with a 70-200 on it. It is also great for the big portraits. It allows the photographer to leave the camera still setup, walk up to the group, talk to them, and manage them. Then return to the camera (which is still positioned properly), make some minor adjustments, and take the photo while looking at the people (not through the lens). This makes it easier to see who blinked and who is not looking at the lens. I have assisted more than one photographer who use this method, and I think it is very effective. Of course, to each their own. It is all about personal preference and style. I have also assisted a dude who did the guerrilla tactic of doing it all hand-held and shooting like crazy, everything fast paced.

I had to add this...

Enjoy "smirk"

http://studiougly.com/2009/06/17/how-to-become-a-rock-star-wedding-photographer-2.aspx

monty11 said:
Such wannabe professionals should be charged with fraud as they give the profession a bad name.

I agree Monty, she obviously fooled someone into being a pro, and the truth she was not even close. She was just someone with a better than P&S camera who thought she took really good pictures, and could make money at it. There are those people who know nothing of shooting, and try and make a buck. I am glad the judge saw her incompetence.

As for your question regarding wedding costs, $1,300 is on the low side, and $5,000 to $10,000 is more of the norm for the North East. In other areas of the US, costs are more reasonable. On the high end I know of a photographer in North Jersey who starts at about $20,000 and goes up to the $40,000 area. This really is the upper end, and no he does not show-up at a wedding with an XTi with a kit lens.

Niko- You are right again, it does give the industry a bad name.

The Expansion of Digital cameras is the blame for all these "professional" photographers running around.

Niko's right. That's on the low end for wedding photography in the US. I'd bet average would be somewhere in the $1,000-3,000 range.

"Where is your 28-70??"

Hahaha, this made me laugh. Evidently Judge Joe Brown knows his stuff.

Niko would those charges apply to the weddings of mere mortals who actually work to make a living or are those the high street prices?

wow, this is hilarious, but definitely a warning to wedding shooters to conduct yourselves professionally and appropriately. That being said, if you act anything like Ms. Geese, you probably deserve to be made the fool. I just wouldn't even want to deal with someone like that on my wedding day, no matter how good or bad the pics turned out.

Charging $1300 is actually on the low end for wedding photography. I know some photographers that charge around $5000-$10,000USD for their wedding packages. Their photos look nothing like Damaris Geese's though

I tend to agree with the judge's points. If you noticed, he did point out that the camera body isn't the main issue, but the slow kit lens was. The tripod bit also seemed to be arising from the slow lens issue.

You can get quite big printouts made with a cropped sensor provided that you have sharp shots which they obviously didn't.

Actually I would have liked to see what result the "pro" would have achieved with a flash. A "deer-in-the-headlights" look?

I don't know what the rates for weddings are in the US but here actual pros who have been awarded with WPPI prizes and wield professional cameras and fast lenses, don't have the luxury of charging $1300 for the shooting and proofs.

Such wannabe professionals should be charged with fraud as they give the profession a bad name.

Weddings suck big time... well that is if there's a mismatch between you and the rest of the guests (I figure you've sorted out with the couple at first). Luckily I've done a few weddings for friends and they all had pretty nice families so I could hand over a lot of good and nice photos.

Eventhough it can make quite a bit of money, I'd rather stick to my concerts and do some other things when I feel like it. Just have to save longer for new equipment but always better than working on something you don't like :)

shit, I need to do weddings to get stuff for my hobby :) - 30 weddings per year would be enough for me :)

We are such geeks.!

and I am not going near weddings without a pro by my side.

Poor canon rebel.. .. :-)

:-) BTW I am hoping to be a second tog at a wedding soon.. F2.8 lens and prime 1.4 for me :-) lol

100 weddings x $1300 = $130,000

canon 50mm 1.4 = $349
24-70 f/2.8 = $1279
70-200 f/2.8 = $1799
85mm 1.8 = $369
35mm f/2 = $299
2 580ex ii speed lights = $890

everything = $4985 + tax

thats barely 4% of what they earned if they really have done over a hundred weddings

That's too funny.

If you are shooting with a rebel and "don't" know how fast your lens is (still rolling on the floor in laughter) she probably doesn't know that she shouldn't be bringing a tripod to the wedding. I almost wonder if Joe was mocking her incompetence in suggesting that she doesn't know F/stop and Iso and why didn't she "use a tripod...

Also meeting a client at walmart... EPIC FAIL

jbl said:

Funny thing is that when he asked about tripod, in a fraction of second I thought all what you just typed... and I'm just you got that flash in a fraction of second too.. we are soooo geek about photography.

Hahaha, The worst part of it was when he was asking her if she used a tripod for this picture and she was like yes. It was an outside shot of the bride making a face... Some people shouldnt be photographers.. Im all for using the tripod in certain situations. Esp landscapes but thats just one thing you need to leave at home when you go out to shoot a wedding.

NikoDoby said:
Poster why do I get the feeling you have already been on an episode of Judge Joe Brown?

I was Frrammed! I be innocent and these punk ass kids from them block framed me up homes. The "MAN" is just racist, he be hatin' on my Polish brothas and sistahs.

;p

JorPet said:
That had me laughing out loud.

"how fast is your lens?"

"I don't know..."

That's my favorite quote too... but the guy should have known that the 70-300 is a 5.6-6.3 lens right?? or maybe there are some 4.5 - 5.6.. damn if I don't know that maybe he doesn't... after all it's pretty much a kit lens.

smarterchild said:
One comment that made absolutely no sense was the comments about a tripod. Who would lug around their camera during a wedding on a tripod to get low light portraits? A tripod stops camera shake, it doesnt allow you to be able to stop motion blur. Shooting 3second expsures of the bride and groom exchanging vouels and walking down the isle would be impossiable, thats why proffesional photogs need fast lenses for indoor weddings

Funny thing is that when he asked about tripod, in a fraction of second I thought all what you just typed... and I'm just you got that flash in a fraction of second too.. we are soooo geek about photography.

Poster why do I get the feeling you have already been on an episode of Judge Joe Brown?

Yeah but if they couldn't use the flash and have slow glass, the tripod would be helpful for at least the formal shots in the church before the ceremony.

Besides Judge Brown is old school you just gotta have the tripod.

this is the stuff i want to avoid in the future! hahah, i do think she didnt get to speak in defense. But also being a "pro" photographer, she shouldnt of asked her client to meet her at walmart because she just got the prints back. I do believe it is the photographer that makes them pro, but with digital, you lose the difference in quality. If she was shooting with a 6megapixel camera, it would be out performed by a 12mp dx or FX. The point is, photographers must have decent equipment to provide "proffesional" image quality and clarity. the lens speed didnt matter as much to me in the case, i felt the camera body was the bigger issue. If i was a photographer with her equipment and charging 1200 per wedding, i wouldnt be able to sleep at night knowing the outcome with that equipment in a indoor wedding.

One comment that made absolutely no sense was the comments about a tripod. Who would lug around their camera during a wedding on a tripod to get low light portraits? A tripod stops camera shake, it doesnt allow you to be able to stop motion blur. Shooting 3second expsures of the bride and groom exchanging vouels and walking down the isle would be impossiable, thats why proffesional photogs need fast lenses for indoor weddings

I know Niko. I was just explaining for the sake of some members who aren't familiar with the "formula" of the show.