where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
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
That's too funny.
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
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
shit, I need to do weddings to get stuff for my hobby :) - 30 weddings per year would be enough for me :)
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 :)
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.
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
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.
"Where is your 28-70??"
Hahaha, this made me laugh. Evidently Judge Joe Brown knows his stuff.
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.
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.
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.
I had to add this...
Enjoy "smirk"
http://studiougly.com/2009/06/17/how-to-become-a-rock-star-wedding-photographer-2.aspx
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.
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
No joy for noobs--video has been yanked :(
You must log in to post.
