March 04, 2015, 10:01:22 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 - Tabor Warren Photography

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 15
Wedding Photography / Re: Wedding - Kat and James
« on: November 12, 2014, 01:55:51 PM »
Great work!

You know, we are considering hiring on a fourth photographer. You should come to the mid-west US sometime!  ;)


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Possibly ok after dropped?
« on: November 09, 2014, 11:09:10 PM »
Most venues require liability insurance in case guests damage private property.  The wedding party provides that insurance.  You have to document the incident and the bridal party's insurance should cover damage done by an inebriated guest.

Again back to damaging your reputation.... I would pursue it through your insurance first. While the brides insurance might cover it, they will possibly be anywhere from hesitant to peeved at using it on your account.

I would check with the newlyweds first (or parents, if they're already off on honeymoon), to see if they have this kind of coverage. I can't imagine why they would be peeved; it's one-off coverage, not ongoing like car insurance. If I were the groom and my photographer came to me with this kind of claim and I had purchased the insurance, I would welcome a claim (unless I was liable for any deductible), because then the price of the premium wasn't wasted.

If I inquired and the bride & groom did not have this coverage, I would just tell them OK, thanks, and then take it up with my own insurance provider.

I like this advice the best. Be civil (as you've already shown you are), and simply explain that a guest ran into you while you were loading out and it caused you to drop your incredible camera. I imagine it will be received well.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Possibly ok after dropped?
« on: November 09, 2014, 06:29:10 PM »
I would definitely send it in to insurance. Only two of my items have been dropped, (17-40 and 70-200ii) they both seemed to work fine for about a month, but as time progressed the 17-40 has shown me that it does not manually focus anymore and there is a slight separation near the zoom ring. The big tele still works like a champ though. Even if the 1DX is great now, it may have a glitch that hasn't shown its face yet.

I'm sorry to hear about what happened.


:-[  I gotta throw out an apology to the OP because unfortunately it appears that this thread has (yet again) devolved into a Mac vs PC debate and I don't think the OP has received much in the way of useful advice about his request.  I started out just wanting to counter the all too common 'Mac just works' lines and ended up writing a dang novel and falling into the tempting debate trap.

I don't think we went THERE per se.  ;D  He got the standard advice:
1) A desktop is more powerful
2) Some useful hardware suggestions
3) Some specific suggestions of systems

All we're missing is the "You should get Linux" guy.  Otherwise, it was pretty civilized and tame :)

You should TOTALLY get a Linux! Just kidding, I love my macs.  ;D


Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Need Best Monitor for Photo Edits
« on: November 07, 2014, 11:44:23 PM »
We only use 27inch iMacs, and I've got to say, I love everything about them!


Once you go Mac, you won't ever go back... Kind of. I bought a Toshiba after owning two 27in iMacs, but the Toshiba was not for editing purposes. Looking back, I wish I had bought a Retina MacBook Pro, as bchernicoff has suggested. I have edited on MacBook Pro, Toshiba, and Dell and the Mac is substantially better for laptop editing (of the three). I would up the ante on screen size since, even on my 17in Dell, I was constantly having to zoom, I could only imagine what it would be like to try to edit on a 13in screen.


Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Canon EOS-1D X Body $4799
« on: November 04, 2014, 07:05:07 PM »
You reliably post these shady web sites selling expensive cameras for minimal discounts. Here is my question. If you are prepared to shell out 5k for a camera body, would you spend a little bit more and purchase it from a reliable retailer, or save a few bucks on one of these gimmicks.. Why even post deals if they are not from reputable camera shops / retailers?

I have bought from all of the companies CR has posted about and have had excellent experiences with all of them, BVI included.

I love seeing these deals and would buy this from BVI in a heartbeat.


Software & Accessories / Re: BlackRapid FAIL - grrrrrr
« on: October 30, 2014, 12:57:32 AM »
I have two BR double harnesses, neither of which have ever given me grief... until about a week ago. Within days of one another, 2 of the 4 rubber pieces have fallen off. I recovered both, but now I need to contact BR about possible replacement rings. (rings, gaskets, o-rings?)

No where near as bad as the OP's experience. Best of luck to our fellow BR folks.


EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II
« on: October 29, 2014, 02:13:01 PM »
The 35L is by far our most used lens, and we need to get another. So, order now, or wait until next quarter?  ;D I'm actually going to wait since we don't truly need it over the winter, but I still hope it comes to fruition.


Lenses / Re: Is this 70-200 2.8 II worth buying?
« on: October 28, 2014, 02:12:38 AM »
It's worth it to me!

At this stage in the game, all of my lenses have flaws, several have ticks/scratches/blotches even missing on the front element. Our photos look great, and if you are unsure, I would call them about a return policy. My 2cents is that it is still one heck of a lens for the price (even after tax).

All of that being said, I bought my 70-200 2.8L ii during a price war B&H/Adorama were having. I got the lens, B&W Polarizer, B&W ND filter, Canon backpack, and a 32GB CF card for $1,800. (Adorama won by the way)

I know good deals happen and I just happen to be ready to pounce when I saw that deal winter of last year. Either way you go, I think you'll be fine.


EOS Bodies / Re: It's just me but...
« on: October 26, 2014, 09:46:21 PM »
I agree with your sentiment, however, I feel like I am in Neuro's shoes a little.

For me, it's about what isn't currently meeting my needs first, and what would better meet my needs second.

I'll just state that CR3's I'm excited for are;
35 1.4L ii
5Div or 5Dx (whatever it may be)
16-35 2.8L iii or some other uwa, however, a touch more sharpness in the corners and I'm a happier camper.

I keep sittin', waitin', wishin', for one of these to surface as a near future upgrade, until then nothing else has really floated my boat. (I do enjoy playing with the 24-70 2.8Lii though)


Lenses / Re: Night Sky
« on: October 22, 2014, 11:21:35 PM »
Not a novice, and I hate to jump into an existing forum, but I believe the answer may also help the OP.

I shoot weddings, but I live way out in the boondocks (though orange on the map that was linked).

For astro work, I was thinking the 5Diii and 24 1.4L, but I have no idea what to do for settings. When shooting at the moon, I did fast shutter work, but what about the Milky Way like the OP was asking about. Is it something I should attack wide open, stopped down, quickly, open shutter? I do not need exact specs, just a quick response, but I do believe I should turn it on its side and aim South, yes?

Anyway, I hope the answers help the OP as well as myself. It's not too often I am in the dark in photography, but astro work would definitely be one of those areas.

Thank you all greatly for your help!


Wedding Photography / Re: Post Your Best Wedding Photos
« on: October 20, 2014, 11:10:45 PM »

Why so tilty?

I imagine it is their style. My wife and I rarely tilt, but my photos are almost always center. In fact, I have to tell myself not to center the subject to give the wedding/session a little more variance.

My wife's photos are rarely ever centered. You can almost always tell her pictures from mine based on where the subject is. It's kind of funny actually.  ;D

Also, $Winter I love your use of black and white. That is something else I am not too prone to utilize, however, as you've shown it can have quite a captivating effect. Great shots, seƱor!


Business of Photography/Videography / Re: Website Advice Please
« on: October 19, 2014, 10:11:03 PM »
Hey Tony,

I use Wordpress and Smugmug separately with good success.

When you visit my main website;, you can see the different tabs I've added to the navigation bar as well as one that says "gallery site", that tab, as well as the ones below go straight to my Smugmug page and it is an easy way for friends/family to find the galleries they are looking for as well as new clients to view examples of our work.

I too knew very little regarding html, however, I have learned a little at a time over the years and am getting pretty savvy. Also, I optimize ALL of my photos for Google, save them as key terms in PS. Export via the "Save for web" option reduce size, quality (slightly), upload into Wordpress, and SEO them extensively once they're there. It takes some dedication, but it is hard to do an image search in Google for anything related to what we do without at least one if not a dozen or so of my photos instantly popping up.

***edit to add: I use ePhoto, a theme created by a company called Elegant Themes. I also pay for hosting via Host Gator, whom I'm not thrilled with, however, I like them enough to at least recommend checking them out.***

I hope this helps!


Lenses / Re: 70-200 2.8 II or 100 2.8L and 135 2 and 200 2.8
« on: October 17, 2014, 11:29:52 PM »
I wish you had listed the 35L as an option, best baby/toddler/kid lens we own (Proud father of a 5 year old, 2 year old, and 9 month old).

However, since the 35L was not an option, I would go for the big tele. Yes it is heavy. Yes it is amazing.

I use "the big tele" at least 5 times a week for weddings and portrait shoots, but the weight really doesn't bother me at all. My wife, however, rarely carries the thing around and has a hard time with it when she does. If we ever split gear, I'll take the big tele, and she'll take the 100 2.8L or the 85 1.2L. We both do just fine, but I definitely prefer the 70-200 f/2.8L ii.

Last little note, I rarely take it out when we go out as a family. When we head out to the park, or spend the day at a theme park/traveling, we only take a 5Diii, and the 35.


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 15