Tag: photography

IAQ #2: What are things that bother you from other photographers?

Every now and then in a client consult, the couple I'm meeting with will throw something at me that is unexpected or interesting or makes me pause. The first time, I made it into a post, and now I'm thinking I should really take the time to blog about this stuff - under the headline Infrequently Asked Questions (IAQs). Some of the things my potential clients throw at me is fascinating to me to dissect and possibly interesting or useful to someone looking to hire me. The other day, the people I was meeting with asked me what bothers me about other photographers - their images or the way they conduct themselves. Everyone (or nearly everyone) I meet with is hiring a photographer for the first time, trying to determine what is important and what doesn't matter; how much they need to spend to get the images they want, without really knowing what they want. So really, this is a great question, assuming they actually like me and my images. So here we go - things photographers do that bother me, with hopefully enough respect: It goes without saying that professional photographers should act the part: be dressed appropriately, take quality photographs, conduct themselves like business people, not doing anything illegal or unnecessarily dangerous or disruptive and generally act like professionals.

Processing - anything but "classic"

(By the by, this is a list of things that bother me. It's a matter of personal taste in some cases. /disclaimer) Piss-yellow skies, overexposure, black and whites with no black and no white - processing is the last creative choice we make with our images. When I process mine, I do it so they will look good forever. It's important to me that the images I'm creating for my clients can be hung proudly with their parents' and, maybe on down the road, their children's wedding images. "Vintage" processing, weird saturation effects, one part of the image in color and the rest black and white... these are trends and they are not effects photographers are going to employ 10 years from now. That means your images are going to be dated. For some folks, that's fine - they enjoy the look and I don't begrudge them that. But it sure as heck bothers me personally to see perfectly good images manipulated so much.

Tilt-shift lenses, camera tilt, flowers in focus with the couple out of focus and all those nit-picky things

These things are even more subjective. Sometimes using a tilt-shift lens is a sensible creative choice and there are plenty of photographers who employ it well. Unfortunately, for the rest, they are ruining what might otherwise have been a great image. Tilt-shift is the vaseline-on-the-lens of our day. It's popular now and it's going to be out of fashion soon enough... you can already see what we might call the "pioneers" of tilt-shifting heading out of the arena, even as us mere mortals struggle to make something useful. Every now and then, the tilt-shift lens is a freakin' amazing tool, but most of the time it's a weird distraction. Camera tilt. I super hate camera tilt. Seriously. I really don't consider myself that OCD, but horizons have to be straight, or I start losing it. I probably spend more time correcting straight lines in my editing than just about anything else. Flowers, hands, feet, etc. etc. in focus, with the couples' faces way out of focus. Drives me nuts. When I see this done in a way that makes any sense at all, I absolutely flip out, because most of the time it's outrageously annoying. "Creative" photos taken at the expense of flattering light/angles, etc. So this is sort of a whole 'nother ballpark. I see many photographers go after the "creative" shot - interesting angles, unusual composition, great use of color, generally fascinating images... but the bride and groom look fat, or bored, or you can hardly see their faces, or the couple is so small you can't even tell who's in the picture. This, to me, is a failed image. If you have a brilliant composition but your clients look bad, they're not going to want to put it on their wall, full stop. It's important to me that, even when I'm making a more artistic image, I still have my clients in flattering light, and posing them so that they look their best. Otherwise, what is the point? Above all, any of these non-traditional photography devices used specifically for family portraits makes me spaz out. There is no way any family wants a 45-degree tilt on their photos. No one is going to frame that and Grandma is going to throw a fit about it. (Or silently stew, depending on your family.) I give a pass to unsuccessful creative attempts *every single other* place in the wedding but freakin' family photos need to be clean, pretty and flattering.

The shot perfection - unobtrusiveness spectrum

And now we come to something that is completely a matter of taste. I was at a photography conference a few months ago, where one of the speakers was discussing a few parts of the wedding day. To my discomfort, he was telling a story of how he got the bride and her mother near this great window light, and then proceeded to ask them to hug and smile at each other, adjusting them as he went. This particular photographer was directing a moment, not capturing something genuine and spontaneous. For some, that is fine. For others, this would absolutely destroy their wedding day, as their photographer is constantly inserting themselves and making their presence known. This is a spectrum I talk about with most of the clients I meet. On the one end, you have a photographer who sets everything up - first dance should be more or less in this spot, mom should make sure to look up to the left a lot during this speech, if your cousin could just step a little away from that column... the tradeoff, of course, is that your photos will almost certainly be more perfect. Everyone will be in the absolutely best light; they will always be at the most flattering angles. And your entire wedding day will feel like a movie production, with you as the lead actors. On the other end of the spectrum is the photographer who doesn't even set up lights because the flashing is distracting, or doesn't "do" family pictures or picks one spot during the ceremony and stays there the whole time, so as not to be seen. The tradeoff, of course, is that you will be totally unaware of your photographer, and enjoy your day without distraction. Most photographers fall in the middle. I fall pretty far to the unobtrusiveness side, particularly during the ceremony. Some photographers have no qualms about getting up on the very altar, and shooting back towards the audience. This of course means that all your guests were seeing your photographer take this photograph. The one time I felt I had to turn away a potential client was because he specifically wanted these kinds of images and that's just not how I roll. When the groom gives his bride a knowing glance, when a bridesmaid claps excitedly, when mom starts tearing up - I will do my best to see and creative beautiful images from these moments. But I'm not going to script a wedding. I'm there to document, not direct.   I think that wraps up the big ones for me. Naturally, there are tons of things photographers do - at weddings and before/after - that drive me nuts, but these are the ones that really matter for clients. Some will want in-your-face multi-person teams wielding tilt-shift lenses and making everything a subtle shade of pink. Others are hoping to spend most of their day blissfully unaware that they've hired a photographer, and receive images that, while perhaps not particularly trendy, will hopefully stand the test of time. (Uh yeah, that's what I do, just in case we were wondering if this was a commercial. It is.) Until the next time you feel like reading an enormous block of text on a photographer's website.
Permanent link to this post (1359 words)
by Amber Categories: IAQ, MusingsTags: , ,

How to Choose a Wedding Photographer

There's a lot of advice out there about choosing vendors. And in my opinion, much of it creates extra work for folks getting married that's really unnecessary. For instance, some websites (I'm looking at you, The Knot) have enormous lists of questions to ask photographers: What gear do you use? What do you wear to the weddings? Do you require a meal? The truth is, the answers to most of these questions are totally irrelevant to the point of the inquisition: is this the right photographer for you? So I've put together this guide to help couples figure out if their photographer is the right one for them. I'm assuming here that we're getting down to photographers in your budget. As far as I'm concerned, there are really only three major things couples need to consider when choosing a wedding photographer:

Personality

Do you like him/her? When she cracks jokes, do they make you laugh or make you cringe? So she talks all about the "romance" of your "special day" - does that make you swoon or barf? Personality matters because you will be with your photographer all day at your wedding. If he is obnoxious on his website (or in a client meeting), it's really going to bother you on the wedding day. If you get the impression she is going to be rude to your family, that's a bad sign. It's not worth having someone your friends liked or whose images you like if you think he is going to be an asshole on your wedding day.

Imagery

Do you like her photos? Do you want your wedding photos to look like the ones in his portfolio/blog? I don't think most couples need to take it any further than this. They should consider images from the photographer taken under similar lighting conditions - outdoor ceremonies, for example, or hotel ballroom receptions. Some photographers are better than others at capturing certain parts of the day. But in general, it's plenty enough to like the photos and want photos like that. It's also fine to evaluate photographers on the worst images you see. Remember that we are choosing our very favorite images for portfolio and blog post. If some of those are no good, there's a good chance you're going to get a lot of crap in your final images (see questions below).

Approach

So the two above I consider sort of gut-level instinct things. Are you moved by her images? Does he make you laugh? The third is a bit more difficult to parse out and I believe should entail a conversation with your photographer. All photographers see, but each photographer has different things that they are looking for. This is approach. Some photographers do a lot of posing and directing, bring a ton of lighting gear and generally impose themselves on your day. Each one of your images is going to be stunningly beautiful... and you will know you are being photographed every second of your wedding. Some photographers bring almost no gear, barely talk to anyone and shoot everything from afar. Some photographers move quickly, aiming to capture as much of the party as possible, others request hours to get artistic bride and groom portraits. It's important for every couple to consider what they want their photographer to go after - each is going to have a slightly different approach. You want to make sure your photographer values the same things you value. You also want to choose a photographer who has a defined approach and isn't just agreeing with whatever you say. To be really good at one or the other way to photograph a wedding, a photographer has to be experienced with that style. We can't do editorial (fashion-type images) for one couple and super-gritty street-type images for another couple. That would result in mediocre images for everyone. Photographers perfect their craft through repetition - and if a photographer is offering any kind of style, any kind of approach (or using wording to that effect on their website), it probably means he doesn't have a speciality at all.

Questions couples don't ask their potential photographers, but should

- Can I see two full weddings? (Either albums or online galleries). Portfolios are a photographer's favorite 50 or so images they've ever taken. A blog post are their 30-40 favorite images from that wedding. You want to know what the whole thing looked like. You'll need a good 80-100 images for a wedding album. And many photographers don't show family photos in their blog posts, though they are some of the most important images from a wedding day. I wouldn't recommend asking for this from every photographer you consider - but once you nail it down to your top 1 to 4, ask to see full weddings and look at some images at random - you want to see a high overall level of quality. Pay particular attention to dimly-lit receptions. Professional wedding photographers light receptions in a way to both retain the ambiance of the room (for instance, not overpowering colored uplighting in a hotel ballroom) and maintain consistent exposures on the subjects' faces (the people dancing in the front of the frame are bright). If they're doing this well, the lighting will also be flattering to the dancers - you shouldn't see great big greasy bright spots on faces. This is also a style thing - some photographers blast the dancers right in the face, giving it a "tunnel" effect, others "drag the shutter" to create light streaks. These are stylistic choices. - Do you have liability insurance? Some venues require this. And it's probably not something you will ever have an issue with, but it's a good question to ask as it differentiates fly-by-night unprofessional folks from people with clearly established businesses. - What if you can't be there for the wedding? All photographers should have a non-performance clause in their contract - what happens if they are unable to show on the wedding day, because of debilitating illness, Act of God or the like (and go ahead and ask what those criteria would be for your photographer). Accidents happen and your wedding photographer should have a clearly articulated plan for dealing with emergencies. - How do you back up images after the wedding? Your wedding photographer should likewise have a very good answer to this question. If they don't talk about redundancy and offsite backups, your wedding images could go down the tubes because of hard-drive crashes, fires, etc. Again, it's almost certainly not going to be an issue for you, but we should be planning for the worst-case scenario. - Voice your concerns. What are you worried about on your wedding day? Give your photographer a chance to address your concerns - even if you're a little embarrassed about them. Maybe you gained a little weight recently and you're worried about looking heavy in the photos. Maybe your mom is super-domineering and you're concerned she'll try to run the whole show. Maybe you're worried your photographer will make everyone uncomfortable on the dance floor and they will be self-conscious and not have a good time. Don't be afraid to talk to your photographer about these issues - better they address them before you book.

What about budget photographers?

Not everyone can afford a professional wedding photographer and that's alright. I didn't hire one - I couldn't (and my wedding photos are pretty mediocre). Obviously, there are significant advantages to having a professional at your wedding, but it doesn't mean you can't have nice wedding photos. Let me break it on down for you: if someone in the DC area is charging less than $2,500, they are probably in their first two years of business. Why? Because that rate is not sustainable for a business. Professional, full-time wedding photographers need to charge quite a bit more than that to support themselves in this region. There's nothing wrong with wedding photography as a side job, but there is a difference in the product and service you'll receive. One of the major advantages to hiring a professional is experience. All kinds of stuff happens at weddings and your photographer should be able to handle just about anything thrown his way. The longer they've been at it - the more lighting conditions they've worked under, the more five-minutes-before-the-entrance bridal portraits they've had to excel at, the more broken gear and rained-on equipment and etc. etc., the better they are going to perform on your wedding. You won't find a photographer who has been doing this for 10 years charging anywhere near $2,500 - they bring so much more to the table than the first-year-in guy. But all that aside, some folks just can't afford a professional. And if photography is really important to you and you are in this boat, the one thing* you can do is look for the rising star. Because most of us start out our businesses charging much less than we intend to charge when we gain experience and perfect our lighting, our approach, etc. But sometimes photographers get very good at their craft before they feel confident enough to charge for it. And that is the key to finding a budget photographer. You don't want someone with more than two years of experience because if they are not charging enough after that time, it means they can't. The photographer three years in who is sitting at $2,000 for wedding coverage is obviously doing something wrong:

Experienced, technically competent, cheap - pick two.  Read more... (1820 words, estimated 7:17 mins reading time)

This is a preview of How to Choose a Wedding Photographer. Read the full post (1820 words)
by Amber Categories: MusingsTags: , , , ,

My favorite kind of light

feet on window sill, backlitI'm going to have the most beautiful wedding to show you tomorrow, but wanted to elaborate on a scene from yesterday.  I had my feet up on the window sill in my hotel room here in Seattle (editing said wedding) and noticed the lovely light. This is my absolute favorite kind of light to shoot in: backlighting.  Now if you're not a photographer, you probably think it's kinda silly to have a favorite light.  But I bet your photographer friends (and mine) have a favorite light, too. What I love about backlighting is that it creates this wonderful bright rim around the subject (here, my feet) that makes it stand out from the background.  This is especially effective if the subject is in front of something dark, like in the first photo below of Sarah and Scott. The other brilliant thing about backlighting is that it lights up any little bits of things floating around in the air near the subject, or other elements between the subject and the dark background.  You can see this in the photo at right, where you can see every water stain on the dirty window and in the photo below of Sarah and Scott, with the much more attractive little bits of pollen lighting up around them.  I love this effect and think it is singularly beautiful. Shooting backlit can be a little more difficult than using other types of light because most cameras will not want to expose for the subject, but for the background, particularly if you are including a lot of background in the image.  In this instance, it is critical to switch to manual mode to get the proper exposure for the subject.  Once you have the correct exposure, then you can shoot away without worrying if the camera is guessing correctly - this actually makes it much, much easier to properly engage your subjects! happy couple portrait at huntley meadows park A couple more examples.  From my shoot at Temptation Horse Farm: temptation horse farm portrait From Lisa and Scott's wedding: pedicab wedding getaway - just married From Aimee & Richard's engagement session at Dumbarton Oaks: engagement session at dumbarton oaks I hope this was useful to someone, if not, I hope you liked looking at my backlit photos!  They are normally some of my favorites from any session.  
Permanent link to this post (369 words, 5 images)
by Amber Categories: Musings, Photo TipsTags: ,