Wedding photography??

Hi,

I was seeking some of your opinions on the use of digital photography for weddings. I am planning a wedding for later this year and one of my perspective wedding photographers offers a substancial discount if I opt for digital rather than medium format film. he claims that many more shops would move to digital if the bodies and accessories weren't so expensive. I was a little skeptical hearing him say that. I know the costs associated with DSLR's or Digital Pro equiptment but it just seemed like a "sell".

I am impressed with how far digital has come, I did own a Fuji s602 and I felt like that printed amazing images. I can only imagine what the pro cams can do! I just want some other opinions on the use of digital for something as important as my wedding day. BTW, I am waiting on a reply as to what Cams etc he is using. In his initial email he only mentioned Canon Professionl digital cameras....... I am assuming he felt I was naive about digital in general as probably many of his clients are.

Your input is greatly appreciated.

Troy,

Today's digital equipment is certainly up to the task of providing outstanding wedding photographs. As with any equipment, however, the operator has much to do with the results obtained. Since your question was directed specifically towards whether or not the digital equipment was adequate, I'll stick to that topic. Choosing a photographer is a topic in itself.

Digital equipment is capable of providing stunning prints of practically any reasonable size, even 20x30. Of course, there are digital cameras, and then there are digital cameras...Some are better than others, just as with film cameras.

I'm not sure I captured the jist of your question in my response. If not, post again, and I'll try again.

Sincerely, Calvin Wilson

Troy said:

Hi,

I was seeking some of your opinions on the use of digital
photography for weddings. I am planning a wedding for later this
year and one of my perspective wedding photographers offers a
substancial discount if I opt for digital rather than medium format
film. he claims that many more shops would move to digital if the
bodies and accessories weren't so expensive. I was a little
skeptical hearing him say that. I know the costs associated with
DSLR's or Digital Pro equiptment but it just seemed like a "sell".

I am impressed with how far digital has come, I did own a Fuji s602
and I felt like that printed amazing images. I can only imagine
what the pro cams can do! I just want some other opinions on the
use of digital for something as important as my wedding day. BTW, I
am waiting on a reply as to what Cams etc he is using. In his
initial email he only mentioned Canon Professionl digital
cameras....... I am assuming he felt I was naive about digital in
general as probably many of his clients are.

Your input is greatly appreciated.

Click to expand...

It's not only the camera but more importantly the photographer and his or her skills that will make your wedding photography a sucess or not. I shoot weddings with a 1D and a D30 and prefer to use digital over film as it fits my chosen desire to work extensively with the images to get what I want for many of the shots. IE: Iso changes on the fly, Soft focus, vignettes, varied lighting an sharpening on selected areas, background effects etc. without having to scan negs and cleanup scans. I suggest that you see some of the work this photographer has done with weddings before committing. I am a little perplexed that he would price his digital work for less than film as digital does take much more time to post process than that of film. Time is the killer for many photographers when using digital professionally. The cost should be equal to or greater than that of film if he is using digital to achieve it's post processing advantages. Check out his work, you will know if his style and capabilities fit your desires once you have seen his work. Price should not differ between the two as the cost of film and processing is far less than the difference in cost of equipment and time required to prep the images for printing if he is indeed taking the time to prep them well. In essence, don't pick your photographer only for the equipment he uses but for his talent as an overall photographer and his artistic skills.

Troy said:

Hi,

I was seeking some of your opinions on the use of digital
photography for weddings. I am planning a wedding for later this
year and one of my perspective wedding photographers offers a
substancial discount if I opt for digital rather than medium format
film. he claims that many more shops would move to digital if the
bodies and accessories weren't so expensive. I was a little
skeptical hearing him say that. I know the costs associated with
DSLR's or Digital Pro equiptment but it just seemed like a "sell".

I am impressed with how far digital has come, I did own a Fuji s602
and I felt like that printed amazing images. I can only imagine
what the pro cams can do! I just want some other opinions on the
use of digital for something as important as my wedding day. BTW, I
am waiting on a reply as to what Cams etc he is using. In his
initial email he only mentioned Canon Professionl digital
cameras....... I am assuming he felt I was naive about digital in
general as probably many of his clients are.

Your input is greatly appreciated.

Click to expand...

Troy said:

Hi,

I was seeking some of your opinions on the use of digital
photography for weddings. I am planning a wedding for later this
year and one of my perspective wedding photographers offers a
substancial discount if I opt for digital rather than medium format
film. he claims that many more shops would move to digital if the
bodies and accessories weren't so expensive. I was a little
skeptical hearing him say that. I know the costs associated with
DSLR's or Digital Pro equiptment but it just seemed like a "sell".

Click to expand...

What matters is the photographer, not the equipment he uses. Really. I married off 2 daughters, one about 4 years ago, one just recently. I was the wedding photographer for 1st daughter, Hasselblad + Canon 35mm. The tension was too much for me! I told 2nd daughter to get a pro photographer, but since she liked her sister's portfolio so much she wanted me to at least do the shots when she was getting ready for the receptions. I used a D30, examples below, with 2 flashguns:





I have the first photo at 8x10" framed sitting right next to a similar one from first daughter's wedding, from a Hasselblad. Both nice shots, but everyone prefers (grudgingly, because I tell them it's digital!) the one from the D30, a mere 3 megapixel camera! Oh, by the way, the pro shots were very pedestrian... Choose your photographer wisely, not his equipment.

Troy said:

I just want some other opinions on the
use of digital for something as important as my wedding day.

Click to expand...

The question for me is not one of quality differences but rather how long will the originals be there.. I'm simply afraid that I might accidentally loose the digital files or that they will not be readable in 50 years time.

Please note that my comment concerns photographs that are important to me such as my upcoming wedding, my future children etc.. I do use digital myself, just wouldn't do it for the mentioned things...

--
Regards
Kenneth Darling Soerensen
Portfolio at http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=255231

The question should be about quality. It does not matter what medium since film can be scanned to CDs. I shoot with both medium format and digital. The best of both worlds. Find a photographer that works with both film and digital. Good Luck

Kenneth Darling Soerensen said:

Troy said:

I just want some other opinions on the
use of digital for something as important as my wedding day.

Click to expand...

The question for me is not one of quality differences but rather
how long will the originals be there.. I'm simply afraid that I
might accidentally loose the digital files or that they will not be
readable in 50 years time.

Please note that my comment concerns photographs that are important
to me such as my upcoming wedding, my future children etc.. I do
use digital myself, just wouldn't do it for the mentioned things...

--
Regards
Kenneth Darling Soerensen
Portfolio at http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=255231

Click to expand...

anythign and everything has its downsides ???

the thougth of having to keep up on digital files is a pain but I can have 2 or more master sets
if my house goes down I still have a set in the safe box at the bank ???
or at other location etc...

I think the back up idea is something that most dont think very long term on and should put more thought into

Kenneth Darling Soerensen said:

Troy said:

I just want some other opinions on the
use of digital for something as important as my wedding day.

Click to expand...

The question for me is not one of quality differences but rather
how long will the originals be there.. I'm simply afraid that I
might accidentally loose the digital files or that they will not be
readable in 50 years time.

Please note that my comment concerns photographs that are important
to me such as my upcoming wedding, my future children etc.. I do
use digital myself, just wouldn't do it for the mentioned things...

--
Regards
Kenneth Darling Soerensen
Portfolio at http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=255231

Click to expand...

--
Chad D (aka Honu)
http://www.panotools.com
http://www.happyfish.com

Kenneth Darling Soerensen said:

Troy said:

I just want some other opinions on the
use of digital for something as important as my wedding day.

Click to expand...

The question for me is not one of quality differences but rather
how long will the originals be there.. I'm simply afraid that I
might accidentally loose the digital files or that they will not be
readable in 50 years time.

Please note that my comment concerns photographs that are important
to me such as my upcoming wedding, my future children etc.. I do
use digital myself, just wouldn't do it for the mentioned things...

--
Regards
Kenneth Darling Soerensen
Portfolio at http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=255231

Click to expand...

Yes, the photographer is more important than the equipment. Consider this for photos taken on film. What will the color negatives look like in 50 years? Will you even have the negatives? There will be only one set of original negatives.
I do digital weddings now and my clients like the results. (D60)
--
Roy H

Kenneth Darling Soerensen said:

Troy said:

I just want some other opinions on the
use of digital for something as important as my wedding day.

Click to expand...

The question for me is not one of quality differences but rather
how long will the originals be there.. I'm simply afraid that I
might accidentally loose the digital files or that they will not be
readable in 50 years time.

Please note that my comment concerns photographs that are important
to me such as my upcoming wedding, my future children etc.. I do
use digital myself, just wouldn't do it for the mentioned things...

--
Regards
Kenneth Darling Soerensen
Portfolio at http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=255231

Click to expand...

Prints fade and discolor over time (like 50 years you mentioned) regardless whether they are from digital or film. Films are fragile, espeically color films. Back ups are always a good idea. Here is where digital far outshines film: it's a royal pain in the ass to duplicate film using chemical process, and the quality degrades every time you make a copy. In fact, for archival purposes, most films are scanned and preserved digitally. That's how they preserve books and microfiche libraries now; presumably, they are expecting preserving for hundreds of years into the future.

Thanks for posting your pics. They're great!

Thanks to all of you for posting your advice, it is well taken. I didn't mean to imply that I cared more about his equiptment than his skill. I have already seen his work on the web and have an appointment to see his portfolio in person. I was asking this question from a standpoint of liking his work already. I just wanted to know if I would be limited with what I could do with the pics in the future. Most of the photographers here in Raleigh start at $2000 and go up from there. They are also mainly using film. I guess it is also partly my curiousity as I consider my self an enthusiast.

Thanks again for the help and rest asured I'll be doing the things one should do when deciding if a certain photogrpaher is write for the occasion.... making sure he can take the photo's I want to have as memories and making sure he works well with us (since he is goign to be at my wedding!).

Thanks all!

Why? I switched to digital a little over a year ago. I am able to do much more with digital imaging than I could have with film (not having an onsite lab) so I raised my prices....quite a bit.

Look at the photographers work, check out several photographers. Don't assume a photographer is a photographer. Don't assume that digital prints should look any different than film prints. I still have both up in my studio and ask my clients if they can tell which is which. They can not.

Digital is much less forgiving than print film when it comes to exposure and focus, it is more subject to lens quality, camera shake and it requires much more time to process the images to proof state than film.

Look at photographers in your area, many of them. Look at the individual styles, technicial skills and people skills. Look at several digital studios (they are popping up all over the place now) and choose your photographer based on what you see, what you here from past clients and what he offers. Usualy if you are buying a discount, you are getting a discount product (IMHO).

Frank

Troy said:

Hi,

I was seeking some of your opinions on the use of digital
photography for weddings. I am planning a wedding for later this
year and one of my perspective wedding photographers offers a
substancial discount if I opt for digital rather than medium format
film. he claims that many more shops would move to digital if the
bodies and accessories weren't so expensive. I was a little
skeptical hearing him say that. I know the costs associated with
DSLR's or Digital Pro equiptment but it just seemed like a "sell".

I am impressed with how far digital has come, I did own a Fuji s602
and I felt like that printed amazing images. I can only imagine
what the pro cams can do! I just want some other opinions on the
use of digital for something as important as my wedding day. BTW, I
am waiting on a reply as to what Cams etc he is using. In his
initial email he only mentioned Canon Professionl digital
cameras....... I am assuming he felt I was naive about digital in
general as probably many of his clients are.

Your input is greatly appreciated.

Click to expand...

In defense of the photographer I should calrify more. He has done a complete switch to digital (with 35mm just in case the client wans a few shots in film). He told me that I he could do medium format if I wanted but quoted me a figure which was higher than using his digital cameras in order to make up for the cost of film, processing, and renting some of the equiptment which he no longer has because of the switch he made.

I should not have used the words discount as these were not his words. It just seem like a discount to me because I like his work so far, and I like the idea of using digital. I will be paying approx. $250/hr. just for the photography which is good for me..... its not hurting my pocket and as I said before his work looks good.

Thanks!

Digital RULES!. The overall performance and workflow is above reproach, but again it's a question of being prepared with the proper hardware. Meaning that only with the greatest of care can a D60 or even a 10D be suffiicient to capture most of the wedding event with proper exposure and in focus. Again that's not saying it can't be done, but would without question require MORE care than that of using a 1 Series digital. I have to say that going from a Dxx series to a 1D was a real revelation. The 1D allowed me to completely concentrate on the artistic part of the shooting of the day and not worry about the "gee is it in focus" or "gee was that exposed correctly" types of issues which will plage the typical Dxx shooter at such events. The number of those abandoning the large format cameras in the wedding field is astounding...........(oh and NO large reprints are NOT an issue as some would like to think.)

Troy,

Here is a link to a forum filled with Wedding Photographers who shoot digital.
http://www.bridephoto.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum ;f=1

I think digital is certainly fine for weddings, considering the photographer has talent.

Troy said:

Hi,

I was seeking some of your opinions on the use of digital
photography for weddings.

Click to expand...

--
Donovan

D60 w/BG

Canon 50mm f/1.4
Canon 135mm f2.0 L
Canon 28-70 f/2.8 L
Canon 100-300 f/4.5-5.6

550 EX
ST-E2

Thanks you guys, this is the exact info i am looking for!