I don’t. I have no idea what the standard practice in this area is. I assume if I were doing higher end weddings ($5-10K) there would be some sort of commissions involved with bridal consultants, but at my level, I get enough work without it. I’ve never paid a commission to anyone.
I probably have at least a dozen variants of that shot. 
Guys invariably watch sports before the wedding, and women generally munch on cookies and snacks before a wedding. It’s weird to see how consistent gender roles can be in these things, although two weeks ago I had the first group of bride and her bridesmaids watching college football that I remember seeing.
Oh, that’s tough. My favorite photo from this year is easily the “oops” shot I linked to above. It was one of those things where it’s just another typical processional shot and, then, a moment happens. I just felt a rush of adrenaline when I saw that shot happen (I got two frames) and I knew I finally had captured a really great moment. Weddings have lots of little moments, but these sorts of these aren’t common. All I remember is thinking please be tack sharp, please be tack sharp, and sure enough, the focus was right on the bride’s eyes. When you get the shot, you know it. It’s a great feeling.
Overall, my personal favorites are the three women in blue in Uzbekistan (that was taken in Khiva, at a market), and a black-and-white I have of a Serbian woman in Pakrac, Croatia (picture 9 on Non-Wedding Work). The former was just a shot of women at the market. I just like the expressions, colors, and lighting on that one. The later was taken at the house of this woman we used to help as volunteers. She lived in a little old shack, and had just served us some Turkish coffee and I asked if I could take some pictures. So with my 85 f/1.8 and TMax 3200, I snapped a few away. Once again, I like the expression and the lighting in that photo.
That’s just off the top of my head, I’m sure there’s others.
Not that I could think of. The only regrets I’ve had in photography are hesitating and NOT taking a picture. No specific story, but I know I’ve had a few times when I said to myself “Damn, why didn’t I just take the picture?”
I can also offer critique or general photo advice, if wanted.
On the journalism side:
-Do you carry a wide range of cameras & lenses, or just a few very versatile combinations?
-Ever had to doge government censors? I imagine it’s a lot easier to hide an SD card than 10 rolls of 35 mm.
-What do you do to make sure you get the shot and are not “fiddling with the equipment” at the crucial moment?
-How do you know something newsworthy is happening it time to go shoot it? Does the editor call you? Do you listen to police scanners? Or do you just get sent out “on assignment” with a reporter?
-Wandering a bit away from photography, What is your opinion of newspaper reporters? Judging by the number of mistakes we see in Canada’s supposedly high-brow national paper (Globe & Mail) I get the impression reporters are often struggling to understand what they’re reporting about, and that many prefer to be spoon-fed at official briefings rather than dig the facts out.
-Back to photo journalism, have you ever been in circumstances where the story made it very difficult to take pictures? Extreme climate? getting shot at? restless natives? fire flood disasters? At what point do you start thinking about your own skin vs. getting a Pulitzer shot?
Thanks for doing this thread.
I don’t know what you charge, but whatever it is it cannot be enough. The Dorothy and David gallery #24 is an amazing shot (there are many more, but this one made me gasp). Wow. Your work is amazing.
Ya got me. I lost the Holga I bought at Rockport a few years ago.
Your work is superb.
Cartooniverse, 2nd generation photographer, Nikon D70s. sprinkling of auto and old-school manual Nikon lenses.
For assignment, I generally always have two bodies on me. When I did more pure journalism, I would always have a 20-35mm f/2.8 on one body and an 80-200mm f/2.8 on the other body. These days, I’d probably use the 24-70 in lieu of the 20-35mm. My style has changed a little bit over the years. Oh, and flashes on both bodies, of course.
For sports assignments, I might have as many as three cameras on me at any given time. One with a 400mm f/2.8, and two others with the combination above.
I’ve never really done anything that hardcore. I’ve been to war zones after the fact (Kosovo, Croatia, Serbia) and I’ve been on ride alongs for a week in Johannesburg and that sort of stuff, but I’ve never had to deal with sensors. The sneakiest we’ve been was in Uzbekistan, where we had gotten in on tourist visas, we had to be a little hush hush about the fact we were doing journalism work, but that really wasn’t that big a deal. Just had to pretend we’re tourists.
Experience. That’s about it. You get to a situation, assess the lighting, set your camera, and shoot. It becomes instinct after awhile. I shoot mostly in manual these days, but with negatives, shooting aperture priority and letting the camera figure out the exposures is fine. There’s nothing wrong with using the automatic modes. Some great photographers I know rely on it. Some only shoot in manual. It makes no difference to me as long as you get the shot. If you know the camera’s metering system well and trust it, go for it.
I’ve never been much of a spot news guy, but in college we did listen to scanners and sometimes act on them, like if a plane crashed or a big fire happened. I’ve always been more interested in longer stories. Most of my work with newspapers and magazines would be to go out and get photographs to illustrate a story. Sometimes I would accompany the reporter, but most of the time I would have to go by myself and make it happen. So, yes, usually the editor would call me with an assignment.
As anywhere else, some are good, some are bad. I’ve had the good fortune of working with very motivated young reporters. I was chief photographer at the Budapest Business Journal in Hungary and, at the time, we were pretty well known for breaking stories the Hungarian national media would miss. But that’s very much because the company was full of young, English-speaking journalists, many fairly fresh out of school, and looking to break the next big story. It was very much a point of pride. So I’ve had good luck. I got the sense the people I worked with were very intelligent, although I have certainly seen reporters who obviously were clueless. Overall, I have respect for reporters.
Well, we had to surreptitiously take pictures of prostitutes plying their trade on a trucker’s route in Hungary. That was kind of interesting, considering the mafia pimps were parked with their jeep-type vehicles across the street watching the hookers, but we managed to do it driving by a couple of times in the car. I also had an assignment for Business Week to take pictures of the black markets in Belgrade, just a month or so after NATO bombed them, and I thought this was going to present an interesting problem, but I was surprised at how open everybody at the black markets were. Nobody refused a picture. In fact, I came home with free pirated CDs and a request to send them a copy of the magazine!
Usually, for me, the biggest challenges are lighting and that sort of technical thing. Then again, I don’t really do front line war reporting or anything that sexy. I certainly have close friends who do that kind of stuff, and they have stories to tell, but I won’t pretend to be that interesting. Running around Alexandra while wearing a bullet proof vest in Jo’burg with cops raiding shanty shacks is about as exciting as it’s gotten for me. I’ve never been in a situation where I truly felt in danger.
No problem.
Thanks. It’s always interesting to see what people like. It’s often quite different what I, as a photographer, like.
I’ve been wanting to work that into my wedding work a little bit, but I just haven’t been able to get myself to let go of all the digital equipment. It’s just such a pain in the ass these days (or at least, not as straightforward as just uploading files) to develop medium format film, scanning it, etc. I suppose it’s really not that hard. Heck, I have a black-and-white roll of Tri-X I shot at a wedding last year that I still haven’t developed. Digital can make you a bit lazy.
Yeah. It’s been 15+ years since I developed my own negs. I simply have no room or time. When I shoot B&W, I send the undeveloped negs into NYC to Duggal by FedEx ( Shipping unprocessed negative. :eek: ) and get back strips and contacts.
Then I indulge myself and rent space in the city in the Photo District and dive in for the day.
Let me add my lens and gear envy to the growing list. The pile of gear is meaningless of course, if you cannot capture the right moment. You’ve apparently got that down pat.
What photographers, wedding or otherwise, inspire you?
Is there any technical reason for anyone to use film anymore? I was thinking something like the grain of high quality film might allow better resolution than digital. Are news photos that we see in the paper all digital these days? How about crime scene photography? I suppose for evidence storage reasons those are all still done on film.
Have you ever shot a wedding on the top floor of the Harold Washington Library? A coworker once attended a wedding there and told me about it the following Monday, because she knew I would love the idea of getting married in a library. (She was right!) I just want to know if it’s as awesome as it sounds. (I did once go up to the top floor to see the space afterwards, and it did seem like a good spot for a wedding.)
Oh, good question. Henri Cartier-Bresson, Margaret Bourke-White, James Nachtwey, David Alan Harvey, Immogen Cunningham, Sebastiao Salgado, Jan Saudek, Andre Kertesz…These are the first names that come to mind.
Negative film has better dynamic range than digital, as far as I know. As for resolution, I’ve seen tests that say the 16.7 mp Canon 1 Ds Mark II outresolves medium format film, although I’ve also seen sources say that you’d need a resolution in the 20s to equal 35mm (not medium format film). I don’t know. From my experience, I don’t notice myself wanting for additional detail on even a 6 MP image, and now I have 10 and 12 MP cameras to work with.
The only reason I, personally, would shoot film is for black and white (I just like the look of black and white film. There are film stock simulators out there, but I prefer shooting actual Tri-X or TMax or whatnot) and high speed color negs for effect.
I simply love digital. It gives me more flexibility than film and superior performance for most applications.
[quo]te
Are news photos that we see in the paper all digital these days?
[/quote]
If it’s not 100%, it’s pretty close. You can’t really be a news photographer shooting film these days. Not if you’re on deadline and competing with other news organizations.
I don’t know anything about crime scene photography. I wouldn’t be surprised either way.
No, I never have. I’ve done two weddings at The Newberry Library, but never one at Harold Washington. I know which space you’re talking about, though. I think both spaces are quite nice for a wedding.