Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Paul Chefurka wrote: > > That's a pretty good description of the Compleat Wedding Photographer, and it explains why there are so few of them. > > If I ever went back to shooting weddings (had to go back to shooting weddings) I'd stay away from the pure reportage style. A wedding is to some degree a formal affair, and IMO deserves some degree of formality in the photography. The point of formal poses is not just record-keeping, it's also to make your subjects look as good as possible. This is something you simply cannot guarantee with a purist PJ approach. > > I was trained in a "casual" style that mixed formal poses, relaxed poses and pure candids in about equal measure. It was a wildly successful formula - clients could tailor the final album for the feel they wanted, and the photographer was assured of coming away with enough usable stuff to please everyone. > Backs of heads are great but the fronts are better. Smiling if possible not chewing I hate to say it but line 'em up and shoot 'em. Looks great and they love' em. At the reception most of the people are playing with their cameras. Can't get em when their eating. DANCING is great! Throwing the bouquet is great. Cutting the cake is great. Maybe i should have a wedding page on my site. With a disclaimer that i no longer do them. Would i need a good lawyer? Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA Updated ALL MY DESIGN webpage!! http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/ Chick the "personal work" Link! and "tears" a few "family scans"