If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Gregory Blank writes:
Show people MF imagery beside 35mm and digital at an equal price and most I guarantee will choose the MF shots. No doubt ... but digital wedding photographers take care not to do that. A lot of photographers are actually charging more for the digital weddings than 35mm. The wonders of media hype. Digital is whole nother ball of wax which allows all kinds of less than qualified people to participate in wedding photography that really just don't belong. IMOP. This could be said of every technical change in photography that makes things easier. -- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Gregory Blank writes:
Show people MF imagery beside 35mm and digital at an equal price and most I guarantee will choose the MF shots. No doubt ... but digital wedding photographers take care not to do that. A lot of photographers are actually charging more for the digital weddings than 35mm. The wonders of media hype. Digital is whole nother ball of wax which allows all kinds of less than qualified people to participate in wedding photography that really just don't belong. IMOP. This could be said of every technical change in photography that makes things easier. -- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Mxsmanic wrote: Digital is whole nother ball of wax which allows all kinds of less than qualified people to participate in wedding photography that really just don't belong. IMOP. This could be said of every technical change in photography that makes things easier. Many of the things involved in film photo can be applied to digital capture, although there is IMOP a nominal amount of easier involved with digital (no loading film being the easiest part/changing asa). I find myself somewaht distracted in taking digital....making sure the exposures are spot on for reproduction. Because we are shooting fine jpeg not raw, one must have very accurate exposures with flash and ambient outdoors (Its like shooting blasted slides at the wedding not CN). I find the camera to be a lot less intuitive especially outdoors than film. Film is actually less critical even using 100 asa film. -- LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
I've been shooting for a long time, but suddenly I find myself facing an unfamiliar situation, and I could use some advice. I happen to live in a part of the country that has very few black people. Lots of Latinos and Polynesians, but very few black. I have been booked to shoot a wedding at which the groom is a very dark-skinned African. (No, he's not African-American. He's from Ghana.) And I'm told he has very dark skin. Same presumably goes for his family. The bride will be wearing white, which means the range between her dress and the groom's skin tone could be pretty significant. I will be using Nikon 8008 and/or N90 cameras, in program mode, with flash. I generally shoot Portra, with a rated ISO of 160, but I set the camera for 100. So what's the best course of action? Wash out the whites to get the dark skin tones? Keep the whites and risk losing the groom's face? Just let the computer decide for me? Any wisdom from someone who's handled this kind of shoot would be greatly appreciated. black skin tones reveal bad lighting much more than white skin does. A well exposed wedding photo should be able to show detail in both the white wedding dress and the black tux. go grab a catalog with shots of black purses and shoes, leather jackets. Do they screw up the exposure (would be evident in the surrounding details) do the models look blown out, does the background look fried compared to the shot with the white shoes? usually not. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Mxsmanic writes:
Randall Ainsworth writes: Mmmm...35mm weddings. Some people are making money shooting weddings digitally, so shooting 35mm is probably overkill. 6MP is better for a wedding than any 35mm film I've used. Weddings aren't about resolution, they're about *smoothness*. Mostly I use *both*, myself -- mostly because I don't have a second digital body, and also because the TTL flash works much better with film than with digital (my S2 not supporting the newer flash automation scheme that handles that). -- David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/ Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/ Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/ |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Mxsmanic wrote:
Expose everything normally. Dark skin in white clothing is no different from pale skin in black clothing. The only difference I've ever noticed is that black skin tends to benefit from diffuse lighting, and pale skin tends to benefit from more directional sources. But you won't have much control over that outside a studio. Hmmm. Ten responses, one of which actually answers the question. Thank you Mxsmanic. You are clearly a skilled photographer, an educated person, and a grown-up. A combination of attributes all the more valuable on Usenet because of its rarity. Incidentally, for anyone reading in due to interest in the original topic, a Google search (terms: photographing dark skin, IIRC) took me to a discussion group on a page used mostly by professional cinematographers. They seconded Mxsmanic's advice. And they did it without the childishness of all the posts here except his. The wedding, incidentally, went very well. I did decide to open the shutter an extra half-stop on some shots because not only the bride, but the groom as well, wore white. The rest of the Ghanians in attendance were all wearing either dark "Regis look" western clothing, or traditional garb that was a feast for the camera. I didn't worry about latitude at all with them. Finally, a word to everybody except Mxsmanic. The small but sincere photo studio I work for has been in business for a quarter of a century, and done thousands of weddings. (I'm the neophyte, with only about 250 under my belt.) And we've done every one of them in 35mm. In all that time, we have never spent a dime on any form of promotion or advertising other than business cards. Word of mouth keeps us hopping without it. I know that it's tough for you to believe that you don't know everything, or that your way of doing things isn't the only way. But it's so none the less. Put another way, excuse me if I don't really care how big your cameras are or how far you can **** with them. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Mxsmanic wrote:
Expose everything normally. Dark skin in white clothing is no different from pale skin in black clothing. The only difference I've ever noticed is that black skin tends to benefit from diffuse lighting, and pale skin tends to benefit from more directional sources. But you won't have much control over that outside a studio. Hmmm. Ten responses, one of which actually answers the question. Thank you Mxsmanic. You are clearly a skilled photographer, an educated person, and a grown-up. A combination of attributes all the more valuable on Usenet because of its rarity. Incidentally, for anyone reading in due to interest in the original topic, a Google search (terms: photographing dark skin, IIRC) took me to a discussion group on a page used mostly by professional cinematographers. They seconded Mxsmanic's advice. And they did it without the childishness of all the posts here except his. The wedding, incidentally, went very well. I did decide to open the shutter an extra half-stop on some shots because not only the bride, but the groom as well, wore white. The rest of the Ghanians in attendance were all wearing either dark "Regis look" western clothing, or traditional garb that was a feast for the camera. I didn't worry about latitude at all with them. Finally, a word to everybody except Mxsmanic. The small but sincere photo studio I work for has been in business for a quarter of a century, and done thousands of weddings. (I'm the neophyte, with only about 250 under my belt.) And we've done every one of them in 35mm. In all that time, we have never spent a dime on any form of promotion or advertising other than business cards. Word of mouth keeps us hopping without it. I know that it's tough for you to believe that you don't know everything, or that your way of doing things isn't the only way. But it's so none the less. Put another way, excuse me if I don't really care how big your cameras are or how far you can **** with them. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
wrote: Finally, a word to everybody except Mxsmanic. The small but sincere photo studio I work for has been in business for a quarter of a century, and done thousands of weddings. (I'm the neophyte, with only about 250 under my belt.) And we've done every one of them in 35mm. In all that time, we have never spent a dime on any form of promotion or advertising other than business cards. Word of mouth keeps us hopping without it. I know that it's tough for you to believe that you don't know everything, or that your way of doing things isn't the only way. But it's so none the less. Put another way, excuse me if I don't really care how big your cameras are or how far you can **** with them. Any way you cut it, 35mm weddings are amateurish. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Dark frames on bulb | Not A Speck Of Cereal | Digital Photography | 2 | November 15th 04 02:47 AM |
[SI] There is no god after all... | Al Denelsbeck | 35mm Photo Equipment | 14 | October 11th 04 04:51 AM |
Any good web resources on how to use a digital camera? | Joe | Digital Photography | 10 | July 13th 04 11:54 AM |
got rid of shadows on portraits, but now subject too dark - help? | Lynn | Photographing People | 7 | October 15th 03 10:44 PM |