Is $2500 enough to start our wedding business?

NAwlins Contrarian said:

.. I've got to ask: how did a guy from Belfast find himself at the University of Houston?

Click to expand...

I received a swimming scholarship - so swam on the U of H team from 1979 until I graduated in 83…


(My graduation ring)

.. during which time my interest in photography grew while studying graphic communication - which I talked a little about here: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/68304289 on the 'Medium Format Talk’ section.

-
Creating images to tell a story... just for you!
Cheers,
Ashley.

ampimagedotcom said:

ampimagedotcom said:

.. I've got to ask: how did a guy from Belfast find himself at the University of Houston?

Click to expand...

I received a swimming scholarship - so swam on the U of H team from 1979 until I graduated in 83…

.. during which time my interest in photography grew while studying graphic communication - which I talked a little about here: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/68304289 on the 'Medium Format Talk’ section.

Click to expand...

Interesting world, and often smaller than you'd guess!

And because I can't resist, I'll have to say that based on what you've posted, it looks to me like your photographic career has gone ... swimmingly.

NAwlins Contrarian said:

And because I can't resist, I'll have to say that based on what you've posted, it looks to me like your photographic career has gone ... swimmingly.

Click to expand...

Yea - I've managed to keep my head above the water, as they would say

Long story short: rather than working in an ad agency, which is what I though my degree would have led to, I ended up producing the type of images that the guys & girls who worked in ad agencies wanted to use.

But I also shot a few wedding too, especially during the 80s & 90s - because a lot of those people who worked in the agencies got married, as did many of the people who I used to swim with or I went to school with, etc, etc.

Now a days when it comes to wedding photography, I would mainly produce images like this...



.. or this...



.. or even this...



.. for the marketing people who work in hotels to use in their advertising & marketing material, like this…



.. so rather than take hundreds of pictures, I may only produce 3 or 4 images in a day like that.

In other words, I work at the other end of the scale that OP talked about at the start.

-
Creating images to tell a story... just for you!
Cheers,
Ashley.

A big reason for the Pentax is the optical viewfinder. We’ve spent quite a bit of time learning the Zone System of exposure and it’s easier on an optical viewfinder. We’ve spent a lot of time on this and hope to use that during weddings for the creative shots. Our instructor has been very patient with us on these more difficult subjects. Still looking at some other cameras. Preferably optical viewfinder.

FletcherBill said:

A big reason for the Pentax is the optical viewfinder.

Click to expand...

Then a Nikon or Canon system would probably be a substantially better choice. However, as explained below, I seriously disagree with the notion that an OVF is a better choice for you.

FletcherBill said:

We’ve spent quite a bit of time learning the Zone System of exposure

Click to expand...

The Zone System has no direct application for digital. It's really geared for B&W film, and it works best (or at least, only applies in full) with sheet film or interchangeable backs where you can have e.g. N-1, N, and N+1 backs and swap out shot to shot.

Sure, the concepts of place and fall, modifying capture to make best use of the available dynamic range (ETTR and all that), and processing to get the printed tones you want based on the file you've captured, apply to digital too.

And I thought you mostly wanted to shoot events and weddings; that sort of work never lent itself much to the Zone System because it's usually too fast-paced. You gonna spot-meter the bride's dress as she walks down the aisle?!

As someone who still has, appreciates, and occasionally refers to my aging copies of The Camera, The Negative, and The Print, your saying that you "spent quite a bit of time learning the Zone System of exposure" really makes me think you've gone off the rails.

FletcherBill said:

and it’s easier on an optical viewfinder.

Click to expand...

No, and [expletive deleted] no. A good EVF, with its ability to simulate exposure and provide things like zebra-stripe highlight warnings, makes getting optimal exposures faster and easier.

FletcherBill said:

A big reason for the Pentax is the optical viewfinder. We’ve spent quite a bit of time learning the Zone System of exposure and it’s easier on an optical viewfinder. We’ve spent a lot of time on this and hope to use that during weddings for the creative shots. Our instructor has been very patient with us on these more difficult subjects. Still looking at some other cameras. Preferably optical viewfinder.

Click to expand...

You've been here for months and have gotten tons of good advice -- and you seem determined to ignore it all and go right back to where you started.

I don't get it.

The only reason to go optical is money -- if you cannot afford a more modern mirrorless system. If you must to optical, go Canon. Because the DSLR lenses adapt well to the newer mirrorless system you have a way forward in a few months when you are ready to move up.

At the risk of repeating what's already been said --

The zone system never adapted well to shooting under time pressure with changing subjects and lighting. You just don't have time. Plus in weddings you need to be thinking about the subject, not shutter speeds and f-stops. Getting good facial expressions is far more important than perfect exposure. A mirrorless camera with zebras and blinkies in the EVF will help you place exposure much more quickly. Shifting from the bride tossing the bouquet to the bridesmaid catching it you don't have time for precision metering. You have to catch the moment.

(If you're not familiar, look up ETTR -- Expose To The Right. That's sort of the digital equivalent of the film zone system.)

Forget the zone system for weddings -- concentrate on content. Put your mental energy into capturing memorable moments. That's far more important than perfect exposure.

I appreciate you have a lot invested in your relationship with your instructor, but from what you write here I think it's time to move on.

Gato

FletcherBill said:

A big reason for the Pentax is the optical viewfinder. We’ve spent quite a bit of time learning the Zone System of exposure and it’s easier on an optical viewfinder. We’ve spent a lot of time on this and hope to use that during weddings for the creative shots. Our instructor has been very patient with us on these more difficult subjects. Still looking at some other cameras. Preferably optical viewfinder.

Click to expand...

You need to ditch your instructor, he's leading you astray.

You're just learning photography and you want to shoot weddings using the zone system, something that is no longer needed with modern equipment?

If you are seriously thinking that shooting weddings with your level of experience without getting sued after you stuff up you are delusional...

If you are really set on this career path, spend time learning your craft (probably years), seek some second shooter gigs with an experienced pro and take it from there, otherwise you are setting up for failure.

Over the years (like most photographers that I know, including Jacques) I have used many different cameras and lots of different lenses too - you will probably do the same - so I wouldn’t get to hung up on this... especially if the price is right.

If you like that Pentax and those lenses that your instructor is obviously very keen for you to buy from him, then I’d suggest you make him a counter offer (e.g. $500 for the lot) and put what he has taught you about negotiating the fee to the test.

-
Creating images to tell a story... just for you!
Cheers,
Ashley.

FletcherBill said:

A big reason for the Pentax is the optical viewfinder. We’ve spent quite a bit of time learning the Zone System of exposure and it’s easier on an optical viewfinder. We’ve spent a lot of time on this and hope to use that during weddings for the creative shots. Our instructor has been very patient with us on these more difficult subjects. Still looking at some other cameras. Preferably optical viewfinder.

Click to expand...

"We"? You and your "marketing expert" wife?

Hi, Shabang, you're not fooling anyone.

Jacques Cornell said:

FletcherBill said:

A big reason for the Pentax is the optical viewfinder. We’ve spent quite a bit of time learning the Zone System of exposure and it’s easier on an optical viewfinder. We’ve spent a lot of time on this and hope to use that during weddings for the creative shots. Our instructor has been very patient with us on these more difficult subjects. Still looking at some other cameras. Preferably optical viewfinder.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Zone system is tied to using spot-meter mode

caucasian skin tone in Zone VI, and bride dress within the camera contrast, the rest fall into place, equivalent on Minus 1 developpement can be done when processing raw

its not the same as film but it give you a better grasp of exposure than shooting on P mode and matrix metering,

knowing zone system tell you when and how much to use fill flash

i have been shooting news and wedding, since 1983, using spot-meter (separate from camera until the 1990 Nikon F4 and F5, on slide film

usually you take your reading before the action start and should also be able to judge light level by eye, within a stop.

ps : will the OP show us his portfolio ?

Jacques Cornell said:

"We"? You and your "marketing expert" wife?

Hi, Shabang, you're not fooling anyone.

Click to expand...

ROUSSEL_Photographer said:

Jacques Cornell said:

FletcherBill said:

A big reason for the Pentax is the optical viewfinder. We’ve spent quite a bit of time learning the Zone System of exposure and it’s easier on an optical viewfinder. We’ve spent a lot of time on this and hope to use that during weddings for the creative shots. Our instructor has been very patient with us on these more difficult subjects. Still looking at some other cameras. Preferably optical viewfinder.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Zone system is tied to using spot-meter mode

caucasian skin tone in Zone VI, and bride dress within the camera contrast, the rest fall into place, equivalent on Minus 1 developpement can be done when processing raw

its not the same as film but it give you a better grasp of exposure than shooting on P mode and matrix metering,

knowing zone system tell you when and how much to use fill flash

i have been shooting news and wedding, since 1983, using spot-meter (separate from camera until the 1990 Nikon F4 and F5, on slide film

usually you take your reading before the action start and should also be able to judge light level by eye, within a stop.

ps : will the OP show us his portfolio ?

Click to expand...

ShaBill doesn’t have a portfolio. He has a red dot.

ROUSSEL_Photographer said:

ROUSSEL_Photographer said:

"We"? You and your "marketing expert" wife?

Hi, Shabang, you're not fooling anyone.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Jacques Cornell said:

Jacques Cornell said:

ps : will the OP show us his portfolio ?

Click to expand...

ShaBill doesn’t have a portfolio. He has a red dot.

Click to expand...

That what he says but I will believe it when i see it

FletcherBill said:

A big reason for the Pentax is the optical viewfinder. We’ve spent quite a bit of time learning the Zone System of exposure and it’s easier on an optical viewfinder.

Click to expand...

The only way you can really know how the camera responds to an exposure is to look at the data reordered, looking through the OVF will tell you nothing as to what is happening with regard to the exposure. If you are using your cameras metering system, the OVF is of no use other than framing your subject

FletcherBill said:

We’ve spent a lot of time on this and hope to use that during weddings for the creative shots.

Click to expand...

How light or dark the image is nothing more than the processing done to the final image.

If you are using the cameras histogram as with most cameras they are underexposing by as much as 1-2 stops for the optimum exposure.

FletcherBill said:

Our instructor has been very patient with us on these more difficult subjects.

Click to expand...

Most instructors get it wrong, just as with film there was a recommended exposure, but anyone that was really looking to get the best out of the film only used it as REI and did their own indexing of how the film responded to the exposure and derived their own exposure for that model and even batch of film and how they developed that film.

FletcherBill said:

Still looking at some other cameras. Preferably optical viewfinder.

Click to expand...

Ian Stuart Forsyth said:

Most instructors get it wrong, just as with film there was a recommended exposure, but anyone that was really looking to get the best out of the film only used it as REI and did their own indexing of how the film responded to the exposure and derived their own exposure for that model and even batch of film and how they developed that film.

Click to expand...

yes 40 years ago we even had a densitometer to analyze negatives of calibration test and do charts to find out real ISO and best development time based on each camera + meter + enlarger + chemicals. Printing paper a minimum exposure to get a deep black from film base

so much easier now with digital to shoot a grey card in all zones, print results or view on a calibrated screen to find out how much some company lie on iso, what contrats you get at various iso-style

histogram IMHO opinion just tell you the levels but the zones of each image section

Sorry if my english is a bit confused ; its not my first language

ps : i still dont trust matrix metering and rarely use it

Thanks for the context Russel.

Our instructor had us learn the zone system first and has now moved onto the histagrahm. Taking eyes away from the viewfinder to see the graph in the rear display seems a bit less efficient. Still learning all of this.

ROUSSEL_Photographer said:

ROUSSEL_Photographer said:

Most instructors get it wrong, just as with film there was a recommended exposure, but anyone that was really looking to get the best out of the film only used it as REI and did their own indexing of how the film responded to the exposure and derived their own exposure for that model and even batch of film and how they developed that film.

Click to expand...

yes 40 years ago we even had a densitometer to analyze negatives of calibration test and do charts to find out real ISO and best development time based on each camera + meter + enlarger + chemicals. Printing paper a minimum exposure to get a deep black from film base

so much easier now with digital to shoot a grey card in all zones, print results or view on a calibrated screen to find out how much some company lie on iso, what contrats you get at various iso-style

histogram IMHO opinion just tell you the levels but the zones of each image section

Sorry if my english is a bit confused ; its not my first language

ps : i still dont trust matrix metering and rarely use it

Click to expand...

FletcherBill said:

Thanks for the context Russel.

Our instructor had us learn the zone system first and has now moved onto the histagrahm. Taking eyes away from the viewfinder to see the graph in the rear display seems a bit less efficient. Still learning all of this.

Click to expand...

One benefit of using modern mirrorless bodies is that you can display the histogram in the viewfinder.....a definite boon over dSLR bodies.

FletcherBill said:

ROUSSEL_Photographer said:

FletcherBill said:

Most instructors get it wrong, just as with film there was a recommended exposure, but anyone that was really looking to get the best out of the film only used it as REI and did their own indexing of how the film responded to the exposure and derived their own exposure for that model and even batch of film and how they developed that film.

Click to expand...

yes 40 years ago we even had a densitometer to analyze negatives of calibration test and do charts to find out real ISO and best development time based on each camera + meter + enlarger + chemicals. Printing paper a minimum exposure to get a deep black from film base

so much easier now with digital to shoot a grey card in all zones, print results or view on a calibrated screen to find out how much some company lie on iso, what contrats you get at various iso-style

histogram IMHO opinion just tell you the levels but the zones of each image section

Sorry if my english is a bit confused ; its not my first language

ps : i still dont trust matrix metering and rarely use it

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Box Brownie said:

FletcherBill said:

Thanks for the context Russel.

Our instructor had us learn the zone system first and has now moved onto the histagrahm. Taking eyes away from the viewfinder to see the graph in the rear display seems a bit less efficient. Still learning all of this.

Click to expand...

One benefit of using modern mirrorless bodies is that you can display the histogram in the viewfinder.....a definite boon over dSLR bodies.

Click to expand...

Just what I was about to write. You can have a review image flash in the finder with the histogram.

How many weddings have you shot so far? Or have you shot any?

Maybe some weddings soon. We’ve been working on exposure and focus and recompose techniques. Trying to nail the basics first. We have been practicing on scenes with pure whites and blacks.

FletcherBill said:

Maybe some weddings soon. We’ve been working on exposure and focus and recompose techniques.

Click to expand...

Shabang, does your Leica have only a single central AF point? Because this technique became unnecessary for small-format shooters about, oh, 30 years ago.

FletcherBill said:

Trying to nail the basics first.

Click to expand...

Old and outdated is not the same thing as "basic".

FletcherBill said:

We have been practicing on scenes with pure whites and blacks.

Click to expand...

I sense you're gathering more material for another book. I guess the first one hasn't sold well.

FletcherBill said:

Maybe some weddings soon. We’ve been working on exposure and focus and recompose techniques. Trying to nail the basics first. We have been practicing on scenes with pure whites and blacks.

Click to expand...

If you are for real --

Is your instructor actively shooting weddings? Have you been able to shadow him or second-shoot with him on any weddings?

Maybe I'm ranting, but you've been on this forum more than a year. You should be getting some real-world experience by now -- at least shadowing and observing, if not actually shooting. Most people would have been shooting within six weeks and had a business running within six months.

This is beginning to sound like the old thing about "Learning to swim from a book". You need to get in the water and get some experience.

Gato

BTW -- focus and recompose is old news. Modern cameras have face and eye detect and will put focus right where you need it for most wedding photos. For the rest you can use the touch screen to put the focus point anywhere in the frame you need it. Is your instructor teaching you these techniques?