Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/07/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Which is to say there are those who photograph the wedding that was, and those who photograph the wedding as they think it should be. The latter, in my considered opinion, tend to turn out really, really crappy stuff, and who take over and ruin what should be the bride's day. But that's just my opinion - obviously there are millions of brides out there who love that kind of schlockography. Of course there are also millions of brides out there who who hang Keanes and Kinckade's over their sofas. ;-) On 7/14/05 9:16 PM, "Michael J Herring" <creativevisions@verizon.net> wrote: > I did wedding photography for 12 years. There are two main schools of > thought when it comes to this type of photography. > One type of photographer wants to be the "director" and he acts > appropriately. > Theses guys are often many times clowning around - more or less acting like > the "life of the party". > Others take a photojournalistic approach. > Different strokes for different folks. > > Mike > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@comcast.net> > To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org> > Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 10:38 AM > Subject: Re: [Leica] Bill Pierce on the Leica today > > >> I have to disagree, Mark - Unobtrusiveness is an issue in any shooting >> situation in which you don't want to become part of the story, in which >> you >> don't want to be shooting people reacting to you shooting. The last thing >> I >> want when shooting a wedding is having people aware of me. Obviously they >> often are, but the less they are, the better. But of course this comes >> down >> to personal photographic style, vision, whatever. And there's more than >> one >> way to shoot anything. :-) >> >> >> On 7/13/05 4:33 AM, "Mark Rabiner" <mark@rabinergroup.com> wrote: >> >>> On 7/12/05 9:27 PM, "John Payne" <jpphoto@hci.net> typed: >>> >>>> Here's another view on unobtrusive photography by one who has done it >>>> hundreds of times. it matters not if I am shooting a band in a bar or a >>>> wedding reception with an M series camera or a Nikon d2x, people react >>>> to me >>>> or not the same way. What can change this might be the way the >>>> individual >>>> shooter may bring to the event. A red dot or not, an dslr or not, >>>> does >>>> not seem to be much of a factor as much as the way of shooting and the >>>> behavior of the photographer in getting him or her noticed. I've shot >>>> with >>>> M cameras, nikon film and digital, lenses of all sizes, and not noticed >>>> people reacting differently towards me based on the actual size of my >>>> cameras. It's more on how you use them and how one interacts with the >>>> subjects. Each week I have several portrait shoots that involve 100-300 >>>> frames with a d2x and 70-200, and I don't see people acting differently >>>> towards me/my camera than with a Leica, Hasselblad, etc. A >>>> photographer's >>>> personality might be differnt with a rangefinder than a medium format >>>> camera >>>> due to his or her's familiarity with the equipment. It might simply be >>>> what >>>> one is used to instead of characteristics of a certain camera system. >>>> Not >>>> to say camera size is never an issue but it's rarely one from my >>>> experience. >>>> Just a thought, >>>> John Payne >>>> >>>> >>> If you're shooting a wedding you're "the man". >>> You don't pick a camera to "blend in" you don't even want to blend in. >>> You want to look like "the guy" and not be using less of a camera than >>> the >>> guys nephew. >>> That's been my direct experience. >>> >>> If you are shooting a band it's the same thing unless you're somehow just >>> there doing it on the sly for some reason. >>> The band photography I've done I've been paid to do and it's the band >>> whose >>> been paying. So I'm "the man" in that situation too. >>> A flashier camera can help as much as hurt it amounts to when your hired >>> to >>> shoot clients. >>> >>> Obtrusiveness is a street photography issue. >>> Not a "hired to be there" issue. >>> >>> You are very much NOT "the man" in street photography. >>> You're the guy who killed Lady Di and the one who wants to put nudes of >>> their kids on the internet. You don't have an official reason to be there >>> and you have a good reason to want to blend in. To not be putting a metal >>> munching media machine in their face. To be "invading their privacy" as >>> they >>> walk down Times Square. >>> >>> But a hired "official" photographer in a situation in effect "a shoot" is >>> almost better off NOT blending in from my experience. I get less flak >>> shooting a Hasselblad in such situations which is what I typically do. >>> And >>> sometimes a metal munching ELM with a big nerdy flash bracket. >>> I need to get a little birdy. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Mark Rabiner >>> Photography >>> Portland Oregon >>> http://rabinergroup.com/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information