business transferred to glasseyalley.com!
First of the year
[insert motivational phrase here]. Something like ‘start as you mean to go on’ maybe? Is that motivational? These are two shots from the resulting haul of photos from my first wedding of the year and as you’ve figured out by now, my first wedding with a 5D. I’m pretty happy with the results, my good shot to junk shot ratio is tilting in a favourable way. It’s getting to feel now that I no longer have to take 6 shots of a particular scene to get one good one. The 30D was relegated to my shoulder all day. The first wedding I’ve done with only one camera. There was still a bit of lens swapping going on. Moved between the 70-200 f2.8IS and the 50 f1.8 a bit.
Overall a very positive move, even if some of the gadgeteers are scoffing that the 5D is two year old technology. It’s still better than alot of current cameras. Definitely the best camera I’ve used so far. So good in fact that my financial controller has sanctioned the acquisition of at least one new lens. It’s a red letter day in the rymus household.
So why only fairly generic detail shots? Where are the portraits and the candid moments caught by this now increasingly motivated second shooter? I’m fairly hesitant to start posting full results from weddings to flickr (or anywhere online for that matter). Ok so I still own the copyright and all that legal stuff but I’m unwilling to deal with any complaints that may surface from anyone seeing themselves on my flickr stream or this blog.
When time becomes freer, I will be updating my own website with a portfolio of wedding shots. I think they’d be more suited there in a portfolio format than being posted on flickr perhaps… Opinions?
February 8, 2008 - 5:04 pm
I’m not a Flickr fan anyway, but the idea of using that as your portfolio isn’t logical from a business point of view. You have much more control on your own site, and let’s be honest, why would you want to put your best work into a sea of… everything. If you need help with it – I hardly think so, but you never know – gimme a shout.
Oh, and from someone delighted to be having you doing my wedding, glad to see the generic shots. Personally, I like to keep my vanity to myself.
adam
February 8, 2008 - 5:16 pm
I’m considering removing a lot of my photographs from flickr for similar reasons.
Photos are gorgeous by the way, particularly the one of the bouquet.
February 8, 2008 - 11:17 pm
I’ve always wanted to see your wedding stuff. I like what I see so far . One of these days I may even say yes to the constant requests I get for doing one myself (wedding photographer that is, not marriage).
February 9, 2008 - 11:46 pm
Another vote on moving away from Flickr as a portfolio page. It’s just not professional and this is coming from someone who needs to work on her own site for the same reasons.
One thing though, if you’re going to be presenting yourself as a wedding photographer via your webpage/blog (always a good double whammy) then just showing the generic shots won’t be enough will it? How about a clause or section in your contract which covers this so the bride and groom know that their images will be used for marketing purposes? You can always give them the chance to opt out if they feel very strongly that they don’t want this.
February 11, 2008 - 7:19 am
I would have to say stick to a portfolio format rather than flickr. If there’s anything I learnt from my stint over in Ireland – people aren’t very open to having their photographs openly available to a mass of people. Unless of course it’s on your portfolio, and even then – they wouldn’t want all their photos on right?
I too would like to offer some help with the portfolio ;D
February 11, 2008 - 1:59 pm
I completely agree with everyone regarding the relative unprofessional look of flickr… Will be putting everything onto my own website (not this one) in the near future.
I had thought about running a separate blog on the other site but that’s just double the bloody admin work then. I will obviously have to show a selection of shots on the portfolio – a few generic detail shots and some of the more formal posed & informal candid shots. Last thing I want to is alienate or out and out piss anyone off because their beautifully rendered visage appears on a portfolio of past work; I’ll absolutely have to get the go ahead from anyone who’ll appear on the site.
Anyway, less of this serious talk, I require food.
February 14, 2008 - 10:02 am
Hi Ryan,
The 5D is great, isn’t it ? I’ve got mine 18 months and it never ceases to amaze me just how good it is. The images at ISO 400 – 800 are just great.
For weddings, I’ve found that the 24-105 is a great all-around lens. It’s wide enough for group shots and the 105 end is usually sufficient for portraits. It’s f4 and has IS, and the images are very sharp. Never have to change lens, as a result.
Re: putting wedding images online, if you set up a dedicated website, then prospective clients will know from the start that some of their images will end up online as advertising for your site.
BR,
John