April 19, 2014, 01:51:02 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 - Robert Welch

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
That said, I question how the OP was contacted by the bride. This question was brought up earlier in the thread, but never answered by the OP. Unless the pro photographer himself gave her the contact info, then it would seem the OP promoted himself at the wedding, at least to the extent that he provided the bride or someone close to her with information as to who he is and how to contact him. This is way beyond the bounds of what is ethical in such a situation, whether hired by the photographer, or in this case allowed to 'tag along' at his client's event.

Sorry I thought I did. The bride asked my number to the cameraman (who I met the same day) and the cameraman called the photographer to have my number telling him that he needed me for a job. I didn't give any detail to anyone at the wedding because I thought it wasn't professional neither ethical to promote myself while another photographer was hired to photograph the event.

By cameraman, I assume you mean a videographer? Sounds very strange that the bride would inquire about you in this way, and not go directly to the photographer (assuming she knew you were there with him). Anyway, sounds like you have handled this in the best way in the end.

If you do ever go into wedding photography professionally, you will have learned a good lesson in all this, at least in regards to having other photographers working with you, as well as the manipulations than can occur. It's important to have a good contract with the client, and if you do have assistants, have clear contracts with them. There is much more to the business of wedding photography than just taking pretty photos. Seems you got a good taste of some of the variables and potential pitfalls here.

I am a full time professional wedding photographer. First, let me say, the pro who allowed the OP to 'tag along at a wedding and learn the ropes' is apparently a fool. As a professional wedding photographer, I would never just allow someone to tag along, it's not my place to do so. It's my customer's wedding, and if they hire me with the expectation of a second shooter or assistant, that is one thing, but it's not proper for me to invite someone who isn't directly under my responsibility as an assistant/shooter in a contracted situation. So the original blame for this situation really falls on the 'pro' photographer, he should have either hired you as a second shooter, therefore he would have assumed ownership of the images, or he should have said he had no need for such services at this time and would let you know when he might need your services. If you aren't of sufficient skill to second shoot, then he could have hired you to just assist him by carrying and handling his equipment, and he could train you outside the context of a paid wedding job until you were ready to second shoot for him. In no case is he free to just allow you to tag along at a paid wedding gig. I question this photographers status as a professional, based simply on how he handled the situation.

That said, I question how the OP was contacted by the bride. This question was brought up earlier in the thread, but never answered by the OP. Unless the pro photographer himself gave her the contact info, then it would seem the OP promoted himself at the wedding, at least to the extent that he provided the bride or someone close to her with information as to who he is and how to contact him. This is way beyond the bounds of what is ethical in such a situation, whether hired by the photographer, or in this case allowed to 'tag along' at his client's event.

My advice for the OP, consider yourself fortunate for the experience, that is your 'reward'. Give the professional your original files, make sure he understands the bride was interested in them, and tell him he is free to provide them to her under any terms he desires. That is his 'reward' for giving you the opportunity (I say this mainly because the bride does deserve access to the photos, not because the pro deserves to be compensated, but it's really up to him since he was hired as the photographer).

To say that professionals are just picking the situation apart on this thread because we are being 'protectionist' is a statement I'll often hear from the non-professionals who in some way aspire to be professional, but not willing to go the distance to do so. I always laugh at this, because if they put the hard work into achieving the status that people will seek you out and pay your asking price to photograph them, then you to will share these 'protectionist' views and realize what you did to get there deserves the rewards you command, and those who try to shortcut their way to professional status don't.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Replacement Mentioned Again [CR1]
« on: March 11, 2014, 02:12:52 PM »
@UNFOCUSED, that is an interesting assessment, I think you have some good points.

Yes, these topics on the 7D2 are getting old, but that's only because it's taking so long for the camera to come out. Fair to say it's a highly anticipated camera, we'll see if it lives up to that anticipation. I find the report that it will have dual card slots is interesting, it will be the first non-pro camera (other than the 5D3) that Canon has included dual card slots. I guess if it does, then Canon will consider it the equal of the 5D3, or maybe what I'd call the 'Quasi-pro' level camera, higher than the pro-sumer, but not quite top-o-line model. Anyway, that does pose the question, who is this camera for? We'll see then it's released, and what the camera has included. There is a wide range of possible end users Canon could see for this camera, and I will be very interested to see who that winds up being.

Canon General / Re: Off Brand: Nikon Announces the D4S
« on: February 25, 2014, 03:51:34 PM »
;D  ;D  ;D The only comparison that would be hard for me is Warner Bros vs Disney (Looney Tunes vs. Mickey, Donald, etc) ;D  ;D  ;D
Why so hard? Mickey is better/smarter then Donald ;D ;D ;D
They are both Disney so no comparison! The comparison I mentioned was Warner Bros vs Disney!

Well, Bugs Bunny is clearly smarter than Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck put together. Actually, putting Donald Duck with Mickey Mouse just makes Mickey dumber...so I guess that was dumb anyway.

The main reason smartphones are encroaching on the P&S camera market is the flexibility they have with the image after taking the photos. With a camera, you take the photo, and there is really little else you can do until you get the photo out of the camera and into a computer.

Little else?  Obviously, you haven't seen the Canon PowerShot N Facebook Edition with the dedicated FB upload button. 

 ;) :P ::)

Yes, this is Canon's attempted answer to the problem, but is it enough just to have access to Facebook? People already have a phone, over 50% are smartphones from what I understand, and all those smartphones already have a camera in them. It's simply a question of "is the camera in the phone good enough?".  As has been pointed out, the answer for many is yes. How many people were buying a cheap P&S for image quality anyway? Everyone knows, a good camera cost more money, so nobody was fooled into thinking they had some awesome camera when they buy the cheapest one Walmart had in stock. How much worse is the smartphone camera than that? Not enough to make a difference, apparently.

Canon could try to put more feature in the camera to make it more like using a smartphone, but at that point, why not just get a smartphone? Nokia seems to be one of the companies that is really working hard to get a better camera built into the phone, but one of the big issues is, can it still be used as a phone? That is the ultimate criteria for those who might be looking at a camera vs. just using the phone camera. The bottom line is, the best camera to use is the one you have with you, and everyone has their phone with them most of the time. So by default, it becomes the best camera.

The main reason smartphones are encroaching on the P&S camera market is the flexibility they have with the image after taking the photos. With a camera, you take the photo, and there is really little else you can do until you get the photo out of the camera and into a computer. With the smartphones, you take the photo and that simply begins what you can do with the image from there. The quality of the image is no longer important, past a certain point at least. It doesn't matter how good the compact cameras are, the smartphones will continue to grow in usage for photo taking in their place. For more serious photographers, the cheap P&S was never really for them to begin with.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Not Coming? [CR1]
« on: December 14, 2013, 02:12:43 PM »
This rumor sounds very credible to me. Just looking at the current state of the DSLR market, it's taken a severe tumble in just the last year, and there isn't much reason to think there would be a major change in that direction.

I think Canon is simply seeing the writing on the wall, there is no more market for a $2k APS-c camera, no matter how good it is. At least not enough of one to justify tooling up to make such a camera. The 'pent up demand' for one probably went away when they came out with the 5DmkIII and 6D cameras. The pros and serious amatures probably have largely gone that direction. How much better can they make the 7DmkII over the 7D? Or better than the 70D? Would they be able to see enough profit after making the investment to manufacture such a camera?

Given the decline in sales for all the camera companies, they have to tighten up on new camera releases. They can only afford to make cameras they are certain will sell very well. Also, given the exchange rates and need to keep the pricing on new cameras as high as possible, a high-end APS-c camera would simply be to costly for an adequate volume of sales. I'm convinced these are the metrics Canon (and Nikon) have determined, and the only cameras they can sell much above the $1,200 range are going to be full frame models. That means, no 7DmkII.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 10D, 100D or 700D?
« on: December 12, 2013, 10:37:00 AM »
Yes, the 10D is a great camera for free! And it does have a flash, if it's working. The other real problem with the 10D though is it isn't compatible with EF-S lenses, the 20D and the Rebel were the first ones with that compatibility. Otherwise, for no money my money would be on the 10D.

The 5D release cycle looks to be between 3-4 years, so the idea Canon will be releasing a 5DmkiV next year seems premature. Considering the 5DmkIII, along with the 6D, are selling quite well (according to Amazon's best selling DSLR list), it would seem more likely Canon will continue milking the profits from this camera for 1-2 more years at least.

The D800 and D610 would be Nikon's best selling full frame cameras, and while they don't seem be be selling as well as the Canon FF models, they are doing quite well themselves. So I would seem off base to call them a flop. I know a lot of D800 owners personally, many who shot with D3/D3s/D4 have it as an extra body for times when more resolution is desirable. I've also known many who have owned one and sold it, so retention after the original sale may be a problem with the camera. It is a unique camera, and either it meets your needs or it doesn't. If it meets your needs, then there is nothing else that will. The Df is an interesting model, though. It already seems to list high on the best seller list. It will be interesting to see if it stays there. It's got a fantastic sensor, and many unique features.

But Nikon's line up seems a bit fractured, I think they have missed the boat on making a singularly popular camera, like Canon has with the 5DmkIII and even with the 6D. What the demand for a higher MP camera from Canon is really would be a hard question to answer. Maybe Canon hasn't found the market would be strong enough to support such a camera from them. Or maybe they are still looking to get some updates to more of their lenses in place to support a super high MP camera. It has been reported that next year is the year of new lenses from Canon. That would make sense as there isn't much of a need for a new camera in the lineup other than a high end, high MP model. And to release such a camera before there were sufficient lenses to really take advantage of the added resolution would probably hurt sales ultimately. There is probably need for improved wide angle zoom lens, something to compete with Nikon's 14-24. If Canon does release a high MP camera, the current WA lenses are not likely up to par to do such a camera justice. The 24-70 & 70-200 mkII models are certainly good enough, but the 16-35 or any other wide is in desperate need of improvement to bring them up to the same level as those lenses. The line of newer prime IS lenses could be expanded to include a 50mm, and maybe a few more, like the 85/100/135, and maybe the 20mm too, to round out the lineup.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The Unthinkable: Swapped out 5D3 for 6D
« on: December 06, 2013, 04:41:16 PM »
I don't see a problem with going from a 5Dmk3 to a 6D. I own both, and they both have great features.

If you don't need the sturdier build, the more versatile AF, the dual card slots and slightly better flash sync speed, then by all means save the money and use the 6D. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a snob, IMO.

In truth, I can take a photo with either camera, and without knowing which one was used I'd defy anyone to be able to guess.

Lenses / Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« on: November 09, 2013, 11:41:31 AM »
I wonder if they will discontinue the 24-105L. It seems they are replacing it with the 24-70/4 IS in the kits, which I expected. Does that mean they will phase out the 24-105L? If so, that would affect the value of the copies out there on the used market, though probably not greatly as the market got flooded. Also, it's possible they will replace it with a mkII version, upgrade the optics & IS, which would keep the used value of the current model flat.

Over all, it's a great walk-around lens, as others have said. I still use mine for weddings, though I've taken to using my 24-70L also, which I'd like to upgrade to the mkII but have rediscovered my version as being quite good on the 5DmkIII, after having used it exclusively on a 1DmkIII for many years it's become a 'born again' lens on the better camera. I missed the $1,695 sale on the mkII and maybe I'll catch it when it comes around again, but for now I'm happy with the original version on my 5D3 and the 24-105L on my 6D. It gives me one camera with great flexibility for focus, and another that is light weight and versatile with the longer reach and IS. I agree with the others, for $500, you might as well keep that lens.

Lenses / Re: 24-70ii @MFD quality concerns. Please help
« on: October 05, 2013, 11:07:01 PM »
Maybe someone else knows, but I'm unsure what MFD is referring to?

I've never seen any test that show anything less than stellar performance from this lens. But not sure what it was you are referring to.

Lenses / Re: Is it worth to try to use Canon FD Lenses with EOS system ?
« on: September 23, 2013, 10:40:12 PM »
There is one advantage with the FD lenses is the manual focus control is easier to use, this is an advantage for videographers. If the AF isn't good enough for a videographer to use on a particular body, then the use of manual focus lenses with an adapter is preferred by a lot of videographers.

I use both at weddings, but mostly I'll use one or the other, I'm not switching bodies a lot. For the ceremony, I'll switch back & forth a little, maybe the first dance. But most of the rest of the time I'm using one body or the other primarily.

I do like having both because there are strengths to each camera. The 6D is lighter and more 'nimble' to use, so I like it for the reception when I've been shooting for many hours, it helps reduce fatigue. Also, the low light AF is so great, I can get accurate in-focus shots in practically no light at all. Just this weekend, I was at a reception at a private residence, people were all around the house, many in the lower level where there was little to no lights. I was following the bride and groom around using the 5D3 and it was having a hell of a time locking focus. I was finally able to switch cameras, and suddenly the 6D was instantly locking focus where the 5D3 would hunt for 5-10 seconds. It's literally night/day difference between those two cameras in that situation.

I do wish they had put dual card slots in the 6D, though, it was the one feature that made me think I didn't want to bother with the camera. I'm glad I rethought that, though, it is a great camera.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: IQ comparison; or how meaningful is DXO
« on: September 05, 2013, 11:22:26 PM »
When it comes to applying the DXO ISO ratings to actual usage, I once heard someone suggest to round their ISO rating up to the next standard ISO setting (i.e. 1000 to 1600, 2000 to 3200), then double that. The result will generally be a reasonable high ISO to use the camera on with decent results for many applications.

In my experience, this translation has applied pretty well for the cameras I've owned, to some degree. My 40D & 7D are DXO rated about 700, and I generally don't like to use them much above 1600 if I can help it (the 7D does a little better if pushed higher, but some of that may be because of the higher resolution, meaning enlargement isn't as high). My 1DmkIII is rated about 1000, and while I feel at 3200 it's being pushed a bit, it is usable there, but I try to keep it no more than 2000-2500 if I can. The 6D & 5Dmk3 are both rated just above 2000, and both those cameras work very well at 6400. So, in broad strokes, this method seems to have some validity.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6