WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHY HELP PART ONE:

Any website with your photos?

Mariusz

U¿ytkownik Randall Ainsworth w wiadomooci do grup
dyskusyjnych ...
Aren't you retired?

I no longer do portrait photography for money. But I'm looking to
get back into photography at least as a partial living. It may involve
people photography, might not...don't know at this point.

Retired? More like...in transition.

Any website with your photos?

No portraits, just pictorials:

http://users.techline.com/randya

thanks
nice shots, however after all the discussion I would expect something shot
in medium format rather :-)

Mariusz

U¿ytkownik Randall Ainsworth w wiadomooci do grup
dyskusyjnych ...
Any website with your photos?

No portraits, just pictorials:

http://users.techline.com/randya

nice shots, however after all the discussion I would expect something shot
in medium format rather :-)

I just switched to digital a few months ago. Doubt that I'll ever use
film again. I have lots of medium format stuff from years past, but
don't have a scanner.

Keep doing those 35mm weddings. I'll bet those 16x20s look great.

Yeah, we all know how popular those 16x29 wedding albums are these days. Added
value as the bride gets a workout as she shows off her wedding images.

sigh. Another dinosaur roars his death rattle.

Yeah, we all know how popular those 16x29 wedding albums are these days. Added
value as the bride gets a workout as she shows off her wedding images.

sigh. Another dinosaur roars his death rattle.

There's more to selling weddings than just albums. 35mm for weddings
is just unprofessional...always has been and always will be. Keep that
flash on the camera though...that always looks good too.

"Randall Ainsworth" wrote in message
...
Yeah, we all know how popular those 16x29 wedding albums are these days.
Added
value as the bride gets a workout as she shows off her wedding images.

sigh. Another dinosaur roars his death rattle.

There's more to selling weddings than just albums. 35mm for weddings
is just unprofessional...always has been and always will be. Keep that
flash on the camera though...that always looks good too.

That is untrue.

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 08:53:35 -0700, Randall Ainsworth
wrote:

Yeah, we all know how popular those 16x29 wedding albums are these days. Added
value as the bride gets a workout as she shows off her wedding images.

sigh. Another dinosaur roars his death rattle.

There's more to selling weddings than just albums. 35mm for weddings
is just unprofessional...always has been and always will be. Keep that
flash on the camera though...that always looks good too.

I agree with this, but only if you're talking about film. I've yet to
see really decent 16X20 enlargements from the usual film types.

Am getting significantly better results with 35mm (digital), using a
Kodak 14n. Most certainly the resolution is there, and shooting in
RAW mode permits capturing about 10 stops of exposure latitude, plus
the ability to color correct even before bringing the image into
Photoshop for touch-up. There is absolutely no problem whatever in
producing excellent, sharp 16X20s using the Epson 2200 pigment-based
printer. I'll admit, however, that the 14n winds up being bigger and
heavier than any Hassleblad or Bronica around, but I'll never--I
repeat NEVER return to film.