February 28, 2015, 06:22:36 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - bigmag13

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
Canon General / Re: Why Wedding Photographers’ Prices are “Wack”?
« on: December 24, 2013, 04:35:57 PM »
first, I want to say that I am happy so many ppl replied to this topic. It gives balance to my idea of what I should charge. I am VERY new to selling wedding photography and all the ideas about what to charge clients helps me to delivery what should be a fair price at the sit down. I remember seeing the VERY article the OP used to spark this lil hootin'nanny. I actually wrote a similar post that had way less ranting to my photo bizs' FB page ( something inside told me not to post to my actual website such an article).

A lot goes into this art we all love so much... time, money, sweat and pain to name a few. Even though I agree with most of the opinions that disagree with the articles rantiness I disagree way more with the posters who think 3000 US is too much.

 For my own wedding my wife and I had a chance to hire Ken Sklute of AZ ( the Canon explorer of light Ken Sklute) as he was going to be in town to do my wife's colleagues wedding. The price he gave us then was 3500 US. I learned that this was discounted from his usual fee because I think
1. He was going to be in NY anyway and
2. He knew how much of an avid Photography student I was, how I knew of him and how much I admired his body of work( I like to think this anyway, lol).

We had already budgeted to have him shoot our wedding when my wife all of a sudden wanted video as well as photos. The event company mention to her a studio that did both video and photos. She asked that we at least take a look and we did. they were charging the same for stills and 1000US for video. We went over to their studio and my Wife and I were BLOWN AWAY by the images they had on their website and hanging all over their walls. they seemed like a very capable and fun company to hire. Further thinking I should put the cork on my wallet at this point I asked this studio if they would just give me the Images so that I could create my own album and save some money. I asked for the RAW files, they said NO PROBLEM. after all was said and done we found out the hard way that they F@*king Sucked!!!! 
first off the photog tells me the day of that he only shoots jpegs. Then I saw that they shot the most grainy high iso no WB photos I have seen in a long time! We were lucky to salvage two family group shots and 3 B&G pics to hang on the wall. they took 9 months to return video and that was decent to their credit.

Bottom line is that, who is anyone to say how much is TOO MUCH? If a persons work is worth it it's worth it. There are plenty of $500 wedding photographers out there. " Good luck with that" is what I say to potential clients who bring it up. for all of the time I spend making sure the job is top notch I have to charge accordingly.
This is something that sticks with me because my wife and I got had by a looser who probably used someone Else's  images to display. So I will NEVER for the life of me give back bad work to a client, and that just costs what it costs.


Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 15, 2013, 05:52:10 PM »
Now there are other lenses, but these are the most crucial IMO: (I have / or have had, all these lenses)

Canon EF 14 2.8 L II (2007) has bad IQ, lot's of CA/coma in the corners, beaten well by the Zoom lens 14-24 2.8 Nikon, as well as the Samyang 14mm.
Canon EF 16-35 2.8 L II (2007) has bad IQ,, lot's of CA/coma and soft in the corners. It has it's strengths in weight and portability but need an IQ upgrade.
Canon EF 24 1.4 L II (2008) has REALLY BAD IQ!! CA and so much coma in the corners that it basically useless in low lit sutations wide open. Beaten well by Samyang 24 1.4! Wake up Canon!!
Canon EF 35 1.4 L II (1998) has bad IQ, lot's of CA/coma/soft in the corners. An old lens well beaten by Samyang 35 1.4 and Sigma 35 1.4, needs an upgrade, but IMO 24 1.4 is more important to prioritize!
Canon EF 50 1.8 II, (1990), the oldest 50mm is the best 50mm Canon has. Corner sharpness is bad, but still beets all other 50mm from Canon, still this lens suffers from CA and is beaten well by the Nikon 50 1.8 and Sigma 50 1.4.
Canon EF 50 1.4 (1993) is suffering from severe CA wide open, well beaten by the Nikon 50 1.8 / Sigma 50 1.4.

Canon need to pull their finger out of wherever they are currently (the Cinema division) and respect and prioritize the DSLR customers which have put Canon where they are.

Have you even tried these lenses or are you chart watching? Your comments are extream and very irritating to those of us who actually use these items in a professional guise....which the L lenses were created. They weren't designed for web trolls who claim knowledge, but their experiance seems to come from looking at web reviews. I use a 35mm f1.4 L, 24mm f1.4 II L and 16-35IIL day in day out professionally and have for many years. If you think those lenses are junk because of a few minor aberations...then you really need to get a grip. No lens is perfect, end of subject. All of the lenses above, I use wide open and I have produced great photos which sell and sell. A fast prime shot a f1.2 or f1.4 is a remarkable thing and a lens which is delivered to the customer with pro build, AF and great optics for around £1200 is quite remarkable. These lenses are astonishing and can produce amazing photographs in the right hands. If you pass over these gems because of some crazy elitest attitude...it really is your loss....but please don't come on here and spout your views as verbatim...as you will be challenged!
Consider this, most of the best photographs ever taken were taken on quite lowly kit...Steve McCurry, Cartier Bresson...to name a few. Perhapse we should be more critical of our photographs than our lenses? I suspaect that 99% of modern lenses and cameras out perform their users.

Well said!

hmm... never considered making a jpeg copy the galleries because I have LR set up to export as jpegs. So it would be best in my case to use a drive for jpegs only for the sake of burning discs? I'm going to send a big gallery to a folder on an external and test this. if this shaves 2 mins off I'm happy!

I shoot weddings and events. after each event i like to upload all files to one or more my external drives ( wd passport, my book for mac and a rosewill case with a seagate inside of it). I make sets of the edited files for the clients but now want to burn copies on disc for extra back up. what is the fastest way to burn CD's/DVD's? I use a mac 27" i7 2009.
Even though I host each clients gallery on my site I'm a lil nervous bout all data on discs only.

- side note, I am fortunate to not have suffered the loss of data on drives after an upgrade to Mavericks. Sry for the ppl who have.

It happened with my 24-70 attached. at an event none the less!. I framed a shot and noticed no response with the focus. I checked my AF/MF switch and it fell off the body. seems that the lens lock tab is too close to the zoom ring for me. after that episode I always check from time to time if my lens is locked down. especially my 70-200 when mounted by the tripod collar.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D Mark iii questions (mostly AF)
« on: October 25, 2013, 11:55:04 AM »
I also shoot weddings and events with a two body set up. I came from a single 5d2 to owning a 5d3 along with the 5d2. when my 5d2 was taken from my car I quickly purchased a 6d to replace the stolen 5d2. BAD CHOICE for me! although I love that the IQ and ISO of the 6d had me not for want for great pics, the button orientation was the drawback for me. I was just too used to the 5d button lay out. My second camera ever was a 50d so with my nose to it's back for a few years the 5d systems layout became natural. hence, the toggle button along with the quick select dial allowed me more control in situations where i need to keep my eye in the viewfinder.

some points.

1-The dial of the 5d3 is more responsive to me. ( I think the 6d's dial is too plastic-ky and cheap and doesn't select my choices responsively.)

2- The 5d3 is WAY BETTER made! ( the little aluminum mode indicator disc fell off the 6d after about 3 weeks, and the rubber gripping started to peel after a month).

3-The ability to select AF points with an assuring toggle while looking thru the VF. ( I've missed a few shots using the 6d selector dial to change AF points).

4.-Which is a biggie, two card slots. I shoot J-peg and RAW. I use an Eye-Fi card to instant upload for display if the client adds that service to their package. ( I tried the Wi-Fi feature of the 6d during events and found that it's way to tedious to apply at events.)

In the end I sold the 6d and bought a second 5d3.

I think you should WORK THE BEST YOU CAN with what you can afford now, and try to get the gear that allows you to do the MOST for the type of work you will constantly do in the future.

I'd use the 24-70 on the 6D and the 70-200 on the 5D3.
I had to use this set up after my 5D2 was stolen.

---@RLPhoto Im concerned with running into consistency issues. Being that their 2 different models. Does anyone have both cameras and could do a side by side comparison?---

I find IT IS too cumbersome for me to use two different body/button configs shooting weddings. I have lost shots because of this dif in bodies. I got the 6D this past July and I do love it! I think the files in the 6D are a lil cleaner and sharper at high iso (1250-6400). also after having two cards slots I cant go back to having just the one. I do zaps at the receptions and use the SD for jpegs.  but I will buy a second 5D3 just to feel as sure handed as I can for the clients sake. ( 6D w/ extras for sale) 

Black & White / Re: A Light Read
« on: September 15, 2013, 07:18:25 AM »
OP, your photo reminds me of renaissance painting style and I like it (Staged or not). Except that there is too much black space on the right side which results in a loss of balance. I would either crop it out or while taking the pic would keep a table with something on it lit with a reflector from the right side.


I shoot weddings and events.  One of my favs about back focus is that it meters when you snap and tracks your subject. As far as handing my cam over to a person, I just put it in P or AUTO.

I keep all my gear in two HPRC cases. Go Pelican or HPRC brand. Both water tight and can take SERIOUS KNOCK AROUNDS!!!

When you do this, you need to keep desiccant packs in the cases are it does no good.  If the air is humid when you latch the case, you're just trapping that humid air in the case. Desiccant packs will absorb that moisture.  You can find packs that re-usable.  After they become saturated, they turn pink (I think some may turn blue).  You then just toss them n a low temp oven for a specified period of time to dry them out for re-use.

I usually pack my cases upstairs before I take them down to the basement. I will be sure to get Desiccant packs as I have heard they help for long term storage. I usually open the cases once a week. should I still pack Desiccant even though I pack upstairs?

I keep all my gear in two HPRC cases. Go Pelican or HPRC brand. Both water tight and can take SERIOUS KNOCK AROUNDS!!!

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Insurance for your camera gears...
« on: June 10, 2013, 09:51:37 PM »
I have CNA through Hill and Usher. the site I first contacted was  "http://www.packagechoice.com" I also live in NYC and I find the price reasonable. the premium is scalable to the amount of equipment I think. My gear is in the tagline and this reminds me to add my recently purchased 6D and 135L. contact them and give it a go. tell em I sent you,  ;).

and +1 about the intent to make money. You are not covered with a home owners policy if you INTEND to make money. If you intend to make money they see it as biz and not a  hobby.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Amazon vs B&H for purchase?
« on: March 03, 2013, 08:25:28 PM »
Also try Adorama.com out of NY. I prefer them over B&H and have NEVER had a problem they are very patient and knowledgeable also. they ship fast, I have had no probs with my past returns and I believe a person from there org is active on this forum!

I use a "late 2009" Imac + aperture for my processing.  I found that 16gb ram and the use of a firewire connected external drive sped things up exponentially (I was previously using a USB2.0 connected drive for file storage).

I found my memory through Crucial DOT com

I did this as well but added a third external because I shoot lots of pics. I have a USB2 as a time machine back-up and two fire wires for files. I try to keep my eternal as free as I can by not saving pics to it. thank goodness for LightRoom!!!

Software & Accessories / Re: Lightroom 4
« on: March 01, 2013, 08:25:45 PM »
I use LR to keep track of my images.  Without LR I would have piles of files, and unless I knew were something was I could not find it.

For example, I need to examples of high ISO images - unless I remember that I shot ISO 4000 on this trip for this image I would be search for ever.

I am surprised by the number of different searches I have done in LR and the information I track.

I export of PS and only recently have started to reimport (automatically the edited image back into LR).

Overall I think LR was a great investment not only for the software but also for the time I spent cataloging files.


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5