Shooting White Trash Weddings
Blog › Forums › Photography › Shooting White Trash Weddings
- This topic has 8 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated Dec 29, 2008 at 5:17 am by
Shannon Drawe.
-
AuthorPosts
-
Dec 10, 2008 at 5:53 pm #7866
Cameron MortensonMemberOK…so I have a camera…and certain family members and friends who couldn’t pay for a real photographer have asked me to photo their weddings.
Dec 10, 2008 at 6:07 pm #66045
John BennettMemberI’ve done two weddings for cousins just getting out of school. Suffice to say both weddings were on tight budgets. It was either me, or what ever they could compile from guest with the PnSs.
Thats the only way, I’d ever agee to do a wedding. You couldn’t pay me enough to accept one. Waaaaaaaay too much stress and responsibility for my liking.
That said.
Absolutely shoot in RAW.The hardest part (imo) in doing a good job of it is capturing all the whites without blowing them *and* having them turn out white with accurate skin tones.
Being able to adjust your WB in post and remove colour cast if neccessary is a god send to wedding photographers.
Dec 10, 2008 at 6:57 pm #66046
Chad SimcoxMemberIn this situation I would shoot RAW + JPG. They’re going to want most if not all of the photos and you’re not going to want to process every single shot.
http://society6.com/grainfarmer Fly Fishing and Landscape open edition Photography prints.
http://grainfarmer.vsco.co/ iPhone photos
http://instagram.com/chad_simcox InstagramDec 10, 2008 at 9:38 pm #66047
David AndersonMemberCameron, I would shoot everything in raw.
I have on a couple of occasions shot Jpegs at big shoots and regretted it later.
The slowest element of shooting (IMHO) is the editing and whatever you shoot there’s no getting out of it.
So what I would do is shoot raw, do a tight edit and then balance up the final shots, even if you only make a tweek here & there and do a blanket contrast/sharpen/color adjustment you’re going to get much better shots then shooting Jpegs and as stated above you wont risk blown white dresses and dodgy skin-tone thats very slow to fix after the fact.
www.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
Dec 10, 2008 at 10:59 pm #66048lee church
Memberlol
Dec 10, 2008 at 11:26 pm #66049Corey Kruitbosch
MemberAlso, remember that you can batch process (copy RWA ssettings) RAW files in both lightroom and Bridge…
Dec 11, 2008 at 1:52 am #66050
Cameron MortensonMemberOK…I’ll keep it in RAW.
Dec 28, 2008 at 12:50 pm #66051
Cameron MortensonMemberWell…the wedding was over a week ago and I finally had the chance to go through everything this weekend, do simple fixes, and load it up on a flash drive for them to print as they like.
Dec 29, 2008 at 5:17 am #66052Shannon Drawe
MemberThe RAW v. jpg debate comes up often. The only thing I wanted to mention in reading this thread was the “save RAW & jpg” idea. That is all fine and good. What you sacrifice is battery life and fps. The on board processors have to work much more to save two image files than they do one file of each image. Not a big deal, but those of us who did weddings for a living (before this second great depression hit), learned early that the battery drain was not worth the file gain. Plus there really is no apparent improvement in workflow. For goodness sakes, hire a professional – it’s the same principal as hiring a guide (and I will hire a guide if you hire me for your photography). See how trickle dow works, shannon
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.