Jerome, That's a nice wedding album! Regards, Bob S. On 9/3/07, Stan Halpin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think you have a good eye. I enjoyed your photos. What comes across > to me is the people involved - they seem real, not just props in a > staged wedding. > I see what you mean about the white dresses. But didn't you shoot in > RAW? Can't you easily adjust for the exposure and color balance issues? > > Disclaimer: I have been groom and best-man (total of five times) more > often than I have tried wedding photography (as a back-up volunteer - > four times). > > stan > > On Sep 3, 2007, at 8:45 AM, Jerome wrote: > > > [impatient? scroll down for the link] > > > > I shot my first wedding this past Saturday. Luckily, I was *not* > > the paid > > wedding photographer. Instead, some friends of mine who have a > > videography > > company let me tag along under the guise of their "still-shot > > assistant". > > In any event, I thought I'd share my experience in hopes of any > > helpful > > comments, criticisms, etc. Long story short, I learned that I am > > not ready > > for "prime time" just yet. But the practice was invaluable. > > > > To state the obvious: shooting a real wedding was a whole lot > > different > > than sitting around the house thinking about it! And getting > > practice in a > > situation where there was almost no pressure was great0, especially > > given > > the fact that I'm not all that thrilled with the results. If I was > > getting > > paid as the main photographer, I would definitely be stressing > > right now > > over the quality of the pictures. But one thing I will say is that I > > LEARNED A LOT!! For example... > > > > 1. My autofocus is WAY too slow. FYI, I shot with 2 K10D's, a sigma > > 70-200mm 2.8, 24-70mm 2.8, and the Pentax 12-24 lens. Granted > > Pentax is > > known for having slower autofocus than Canon and Nikon (begin debate > > here)... but I've never seen this become a huge factor until > > Saturday... > > maybe because I mostly take pictures of waterfalls, landscapes, and > > my son > > who can't walk or crawl yet. Anyway, I missed a lot of shots while the > > camera hunted for something to focus on. And many of the shots I > > did fire > > off were blurry beyond salvaging due to my shutter speed being too > > slow. > > In the end, I ended up having to switch to manual focus for almost > > everything just for insurance purposes. > > > > 2. My #1 objective was to not be seen or be a distraction to the > > other > > photographer, and with that I thought I could get away with not using > > flash for the entire ceremony. Big mistake. This particular church > > is on > > television almost every day, and so they have great tv lighting. I did > > some test shots the night before and the light temp seemed perfect > > w/o a > > flash. Well, I don't know what happened from one day to the next, > > but all > > of my photos in the sanctuary came out with the worst reddish > > yellow hue. > > Example here: > > > > http://exposedfilm.net/wwsmith/yellow.jpg > > > > I haven't a clue how I didn't pick it up during the ceremony, but I > > didn't. So of course it was a fight to neutralize everything in > > Photoshop. > > > > 3. Probably the most important thing I messed up... I blew the > > exposure > > on all of the brides dress photos (d'oh!!). I think this is the one I > > would've got murdered for if I was the "real photographer". > > Absolutely no > > detail in her dress. Just a big white mass. My guess is that I > > should have > > exposed for the dress and let everything else fall into place. If the > > tuxedos ended up pitch black, I think that would've been better. But a > > bride expects to see every trim line, lace, and bead on her dress > > in the > > photos. So I messed up big time on this one. According to all of my > > photos, the bride just had on a big bright white sheet. > > > > But the tuxedos look sharp! (ha) > > > > 4. This is the only one that I couldn't do anything about. Being > > 5th in > > line behind 3 videographers and a paid photographer, I didn't want > > to move > > around too much, so my angles were limited. To be honest, even the > > paid > > photographer was in a number of spots that I don't think I would've > > been > > comfortable in (seemed a little intrusive). The funny part is, I've > > got > > about 5 shots that would've been great... but they've all got some > > body > > part of the other photographer in them (head, arm, shoulder, etc.) > > It's > > actually kinda funny. But hey, at least I know I stayed out of his > > way. > > > > > > 5. My flash recycle time was unbearable. I used the AF 540FGZ on both > > bodies, and switched batteries on each one during the wedding. I > > missed SO > > MANY shots because the flash was recharging. The first thing I did on > > Sunday was to order the Power Pack III from B&H. Hopefully that > > will make > > a huge difference the next time around (which is next Saturday, I > > think). > > Obviously I really need two, but alas there *is* a budget. > > > > And without further ado, here are the wee bit of keepers I managed to > > salvage from the shoot. As always comments and suggestions are > > welcomed > > and encouraged. > > > > http://exposedfilm.net/wwsmith > > > > I'm looking forward to my next opportunity to see if I improve. > > > > Thanks for reading. > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > PDML@pdml.net > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >
-- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net