Now that's a wedding cake
From Danny's photos of Mike & Shane's wedding. I have the shots of the service itself. Need to get those up.
Labels: weddings
From Danny's photos of Mike & Shane's wedding. I have the shots of the service itself. Need to get those up.
Labels: weddings
I did unexpected double duty on Saturday, shooting two weddings in S.A. in one day. The highlight of the day/night/early next morning was a big group jam-out of "Bohemian Rapsody" at my friend Jessica's wedding. That's the bride and her mom, old family friends both, getting down through the "nothing really matters" part, I believe. They earned the right to party hard: the family hosted the wedding in their backyard, and it was one of the best setups I've seen yet.
Yesterday I decided to go an extra step and put some information about the weddings I've shot on my site. The main order of business, though, was trimming the fat from the Flickr set. It's now down to a slim 23 photos (which is still more than double a standard portfolio, but I figure wedding shoppers want to see more than photo editors).
Check it out: Set | Slide Show
Several shots from Leslie and Bryan's sordid affair made it into the set, including a couple that I had never got around to editing. I did hate to leave out this one, which was great, but too similar to the shot above. Sadly, Clare's scandalous booze heist also didn't make the cut. Nor did Leslie's thwarted escape attempt, since, out of context, it kind of conveys the opposite of love and marriage.
Labels: all about me, photography, snapshots, weddings
It only took five months and a prodding email, but I finally touched up a couple shots Adrian and Karri asked me to make suitable for printing. It's always slightly amazing to look at the before/after of an image, so I thought I'd stick this one up. Crazy thing is, I'm not very good with this software compared to most folks who are popular on Flickr, to say nothing of the people who make a living with it.
Labels: photography, weddings
Weddings present a number of challenges, but the most unexpected for me comes during post-processing and image presentation. The most important task in terms of making your client happy and yourself look good is to simply weed through the hundreds, if not thousands, of frames and put your best shots forward.
The editing ranks as a secondary concern for two reasons: 1) even though it will bug a photographer to no end, most people won't notice if the shot lacks an absolute black and an absolute white with a smooth tonal range in between; and 2) there's really an upper bound on how great any wedding photo can be, especially from an artistic standpoint, which means realizing your particular vision for an image may take it from pretty good to good -- not from good to great, as you'd like.
That hasn't kept me from spending a rather inordinate amount of time on wedding photos these past few weeks, but I can pin that blame on my own perfectionism and sentimentality. When working for a relative stranger, part of the reason I come so cheap is that I make the client play the part of photo editor. They choose the 35-50 shots they like most and I'll give them a quick once over and forget about all the other frames. But when I'm shooting for friends, the workload quickly mushrooms into the hundreds since I'm a sap. My attachment to the people in the pictures influences my decision more than the pictures themselves. That leads me to like a lot more frames -- e.g., "Oh, man, this picture perfectly captures so-and-so's expression" -- as my shutterbug roots run roughshod over my efforts to act like a pro.
Technology, of course, only complicates things. For instance, I'm always torn over whether to put the images on Flickr, because I like to delude myself into thinking that prospective clients or employers might look at my photostream. Do I really want to slap up 200 technically shoddy wedding shots? How to weigh the value of my photostream against public (a few friends) clamoring to conveniently view the photos? C'mon, man, get over yourself. You've got public pictures of you drunk off your gourd; this isn't exactly genius grant application you're putting together... And so on.
As always the advance of technology, to which I owe my psuedo-career behind the lens, is also responsible for the traps I fall in without fail. In the same way that digital photography drastically reduced the price-per-frame -- lowering the bar for entry into the industry far enough to let me in as part of the Flickring masses -- it means I value each frame less, meaning I shoot with more abandon and end up with more fair to middling images. And because each image takes less time to "perfect," it's easier to say "Forget it, I'll do 'em all," and hurry through the edits. If I had to print these by hand, or just pay for the prints, or scan the images first, you can bet I'd be more selective. But I don't have to be, so in the end, I probably spend more time editing the glut, and the resulting large set is inferior to the more condensed alternative. It's visual verbiage.
I know this. Rationally, I get it. Yet I still can't break myself of the compulsion.
Anyways, speaking of verbiage, this whole deal was intended to say that I'll be using the blog to single out the 8-10 worthwhile shots, such as the one above, before they are lost to the depths of my photostream.
(And if you happen to be a client or employer reading this, please start with my Portfolio set before going through my spring break shots. Thanks.)
Labels: photography, snapshots, weddings
All the photos from Hugh's wedding are finally up. I really wish I'd had my new flash for this ceremony. Would've made a world of difference. Still plenty of good stuff in the set, though.
It reminds me of Eastern Europe for some reason. From Aileen's wedding.
Slowly the editing versions of photos from Leslie's wedding will begin trickling in on Flickr. My goal is to quickly edit 3-5 photos from Leslie's wedding each night. At that right, it'll only take me three months to finish! OK, so I won't be editing every frame, but some, like the one above, really needed it. Big fan of the weird composition in it; needed to bring that out.
UPDATE: Hmm, reading that paragraph again this morning it's pretty obvious I wrote it when I could barely keep my eyes open, huh?
It's the moment you've all been waiting for, when the curtain is pulled back from the magician's lair of my dazzling photographic abilities, and you can see the pure, unadulterated vision of my vision. Mostly, it's pretty underexposed.
Leslie, Clare, and Amy convinced me to put every photo I thought was any good from Leslie and Bryan's wedding online, without editing. It went against every impulse I have as an artist and a businessman -- and if ever there were two words to describe my outlook on life, those ... two ... probably aren't them -- but I gritted my teeth and clicked Upload.
If you want to see what a shoot looks like before I spend 10-15 minutes per frame editing, this is your chance. Exciting, I know! Nearly all of these are dark, because it's easier to salvage underexposed images than overexposed ones (quicker shutter speeds also help ensure sharpness), and just as many need cropping. Not much time to fully frame a shot at a wedding.
Returned from SF this morning and even managed to get a few photos from the trip online already. Many more to come in the days to follow, the great majority from Leslie & Bryan's wedding. Talk about a wedding -- man, one of the best I've been to, and I've been to a lot. Congrats, y'all!
Hot damn, there's like three puns in that one use of retreat.
Obviously, it's been a long week, with the end of the legislative session and all, so I'm really looking forward to my trip tomorrow back to the Bay.
Leslie and Bryan's wedding is the main event, but I'll also be meeting Danny out there so we can keep the 15-year dynamic duo going. I'm especially eager to see Leslie, Clare, and Amy all together in one place for the first time since ... college? Eesh, might be for me. And, of course, I can't wait to hang out with Seemay, Reid, Chad, and the gang. Why did 80 percent of the close friends I made in college move to the Bay Area? I guess once you visit the answer is self-evident.
Anyways, need to cut this short, because I still have an insane amount to do between now and take-off in like 18 hours. I can't believe I'll have to be back in Austin and working again within less than 72 hours of my departure. Isn't a journalist's life grand?
The puns, by the way:
1. Re-treat — as in, to treat myself again.
2. Retreat — as in, I give up trying to understand the Lege and must flee the scene.
3. Retreat — as in, a sojourn to a place of tranquility, peacefulness, and a distinct absence of gavels.
Labels: all about me, san francisco, snapshots, weddings
Weddings, weddings, weddings. Trying to finish this wedding from months ago, which I'm basically doing for free, so I can have a clean slate for Leslie and Bryan's in — wow — one week!
Some of you — like two people who read this blog, maybe — will remember Hugh from high school. The photos from the the first part of his wedding are now on Flickr. Photographically, these were bad, bad times. The light in the chapel was atrocious, easily the worst I've ever shot in. So very yellow, yet so dark. The crappy old hand-me-down flash I had at the time just didn't have the reach, so I tried to fudge by shooting at ISO 1600. Didn't really work. At least I got the kiss.
Anyways, thankfully the reception was in a room with a much lower ceiling, so I could flash away. While the service was one of the worst I've ever shot, the reception might've been the best. And that's where all the fun is, right?
...in which we catch a glimpse of our author and photographer, 60 years down the road, squatting with a disposable camera on the dance floor...

Labels: photography, snapshots, weddings
Ah, engagement portraits. These are always fun because each couple's joint personality eventually comes through. I don't really have any skill at posing people, so I just point the camera, make some jokes, serve some beer, and let them go. Usually works out. Although, with Leslie and Bryan, there were an inordinate amount of hilarious, but utterly unusable out-takes. Will get those up soon.
Labels: clare's back, phoots, snapshots, weddings
Visiting in tandem with Clare. Very sophisticated shots from the engagement-portrait shoot forthcoming, too.
Labels: clare's back, snapshots, weddings
My God, I forgot what a chore editing wedding photos can be. Looking ahead to several weddings I have to shoot in the coming months, I went back to the last one I did, which I'd never finished editing and assessed what I did right and wrong. I'm bad about liking too many photos when I shoot a ton like this, and that was the case here, where what started as a two-hour project took more like five. But at least I have an example of what I can do when I really shoot the hell out of a wedding.
Ah, whew, by the end of it I didn't know whether to laugh
cry
dance
cry some more
take a shot
get carried off by a horde of women
or hide under the covers.
Whatever, it's done. High five.
Labels: photography, snapshots, weddings