WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHY HELP PART ONE:

I've had many done and with todays 35mm films...I have to say also "Damned
Good" ones.

Lynn

wrote in message
...
Randall Ainsworth wrote:

Ever see a 16x20 made from a 35mm negative?

Yes. Damn good, too.

From a sheer technical perspective, it's not as good as one from a medium
format, but both are nothing compared to contact prints from large format
gear.

My original point and one that I still cling to is that using a Hassie
doesn't automatically make posed wedding pictures with artificial light
into
something better.

I've had many done and with todays 35mm films...I have to say also "Damned
Good" ones.

You amateurs are so cute.

Randall Ainsworth wrote in
:

I've had many done and with todays 35mm films...I have to say also
"Damned Good" ones.

You amateurs are so cute.


We can't all be arrogant egomaniacs with small minds that only follow
30-year-old advice...


- Al.

--
To reply, insert dash in address to match domain below
Online photo gallery at www.wading-in.net

We can't all be arrogant egomaniacs with small minds that only follow
30-year-old advice...

I just believe in doing things right. And doing weddings on 1x1.5-inch
negatives ain't it.

Randall Ainsworth wrote in
:

We can't all be arrogant egomaniacs with small minds that only
follow
30-year-old advice...

I just believe in doing things right. And doing weddings on
1x1.5-inch negatives ain't it.


Uh huh. And this explains your being condescending and judgemental
over a single post innnnnnnn, what way, exactly?

You know the post I mean. It was the one you snipped out of your
reply.

But hey, knock yourself out! I'll remember your words each and every
time I make money off of attitudes exactly the same as yours.

Cheers!


- Al.

--
To reply, insert dash in address to match domain below
Online photo gallery at www.wading-in.net

Uh huh. And this explains your being condescending and judgemental
over a single post innnnnnnn, what way, exactly?

????

You know the post I mean. It was the one you snipped out of your
reply.

??????

But hey, knock yourself out! I'll remember your words each and every
time I make money off of attitudes exactly the same as yours.

Keep doing those 35mm weddings. I'll bet those 16x20s look great. And
leave the flash on the camera while you're at it.

"Randall Ainsworth" wrote in message
...

SNIP


Keep doing those 35mm weddings. I'll bet those 16x20s look great. And
leave the flash on the camera while you're at it.

Not sure what sort of market research you've been doing, Randall, but most
people (especially brides and grooms) I talk to find a 16"x20 wedding
portrait a bit over the top. People aren't that narcissistic.

And if bigger negs always equal better, why stop at 2 1/4 inch negatives?
Surely your customers laugh at you when you try to tell them your Hassleblad
is better than an 8x10 Linhof? Last I knew, 8x10 knocked the doors off 6x6.
And don't try to tell me convenience... you don't give that benefit to
35mm.

I think we all get the point that medium format provides sharper/less grainy
enlargements than 35mm, Randall. But to say you can't be a "professional"
photographer if you shoot 35mm is silly. C'mon. That's like saying you
can't be a professional violinist unless you play on a Stradivarius.

Nobody cares what brand of paint a painter uses or what brand of chisel a
sculptor uses.

Do us a favor and get over your big, bad, scary-talented self.

Do us a favor and get over your big, bad, scary-talented self.

You amateurs just don't understand...probably never will.

"Randall Ainsworth" wrote in message
...
Do us a favor and get over your big, bad, scary-talented self.

You amateurs just don't understand...probably never will.

Aren't you retired?

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.