Talk:Wedding photography

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on 211205. The result of the discussion was keep. An archived record of this discussion can be found here.

Contents

[edit] Copyright issues section

The Copyright issues and Albums, prints, and other products sections have some overlap. My opinion would be that licensing issues are worthy of their own section. Beechhouse (talk) 12:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External links

I think the external links need to be removed as they are spam. (Kappa65 23:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC))

WPPI doesn't add anything to the page and could be removed, NAPP is irrelevant and could go too. WPJA may have some interest? Beechhouse (talk) 12:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
NAPP has been removed and I have removed WPPI. I have added an external link to some tips on technique instead. Beechhouse (talk) 22:40, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Why are individuals deciding what links are relevant and which should be removed? WPPI is extremely relevant to wedding photography. A link to FolioSnap has also come and gone serveral times. Who's running this circus?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.240.63.134 (talk) 11:19, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

When you say that it has come, you mean that you have added it. And I removed it. Why am I deciding that it's removed? Good question! Thanks to my understanding of this page. Please read it carefully. If you disagree with it, please express your disagreement on its talk page. -- Hoary (talk) 11:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Photography article suggestion

Can I make a couple of suggestions regarding this article?

I think a reference to contracts would be useful in this article, particularly since (If I recall correctly) that in some countries, copyright of photographic imagery belongs to the person who actually commissioned the work. (I know, I know it doesn't sound right, but that's what we were told at school - which was why the contracts were so important to the fore-mention pricing model).

I think common expectations of the photographer would really enhance this article too. I.e. what kind of photos are often requested (family!!), dress codes of the photographer and the role of the assistant etc. etc.

Also, while I believe the statement of a reduced exposure latitude is true, I would double check the one that regarded the resolution of film VS the digital format. I've spoken to a few industry experts in Australia who say that high-end 35mm sized sensors are getting up to the quality of Medium format film.

I am not a regular wikipedian so I don't know what's the appropriate protocol for a newby.

Cheers RD

That would be original research for the most part, unless you can find sources to cite. 193.95.165.190 14:18, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wedding Photography

Hi,

This article was written from a photographer's point of view. It would be good to have a section on what bride's concerns are as well.

At this time, the best digital cameras with a full sized sensor that is the same size as 35mm film are in some ways as good as professional 35mm film, and in some ways (such as color accuracy) slightly better than 35mm film. As yet, the only way to get the kind of quality found in medium format film cameras is to get a medium format camera with a digital back. I say this based on tests recently performed by Popular Photography magazine comparing photographs taken with Canon's Mark II Ds digital camera (16 megapixels, approx. $8000) vs. photographs taken with Canon's top professional film camera EOS-1v with Kodak professional film.

Some mention should be made of Dennis Reggie who, during the 1980's developed wedding photojournalism. Along with a move toward 'natural' in other areas of society (such as in natural food or natural looking makeup) he stopped doing traditional poses and instead focused on capturing the event as it happened with a minimum of interference from the photographer, much like a news/sports photojournalist.

I'll have to write more at a later time as I need to get to sleep.

Ed C.

[edit] Why is wedding photography so expensive

I thought a note on this subject would be helpful for brides planning their weddings. Firstly, I am a professional wedding photographer, and I am often asked that question. I think it's important to note that most professional wedding photographers have been photographers for quite some time, and as such have aquired skills and competencies over a period of years that reflect their vision and artistry. In many cases the professional photographer has aquired degrees specifically in photography, or a related field, giving them required knowledge in camera work, exposure, posing, lighting, and a myriad of other skills related to business administration, marketing, and many other areas necessary to running a succsessful photography business. Good wedding photographers don't just happen, the skills required to do such a job are vast. The wedding photographer carries a tremendous responsibility on the wedding day, there are many moments to capture as well as group and family photos that must be shot for the couple's parents and grand parents, and all on a day that can't be repeated. Anyone who thinks that wedding photography is easy has never done it. I hear all the time from other photographers who do not shoot weddings things such as: "I don't know how you do it, I shot one wedding for a friend and I wouldn't try it again." In addition to all the things the wedding photographer must be aware of, he or she must also provide the creative artistry and skill necessary to develop a wedding book that presents the wedding day in a beautifuly artistic manner that looks as good as a layout in Modern Bride magazine. Not only does the good wedding photographer need to possess all of the skills and abilities mentioned above, he or she must be using the latest professional photographic equipment available. From cameras and lenses to lighting equipment, professional camera gear is extremely expensive. A good studio these days may well spend six or seven thousand dollars on just one camera body. In addition, all the lenses required for top of the line images will also cost the photographer thousands of dollars. The last thing I would like to say about the expense of good wedding photography is this: A couple who came to see me about photographing their wedding had done so with a relatively little time left before their wedding, and waited quite some time before hiring a photographer. Their statement to me when asked why they had put off hiring a photographer was this: "Well, we had to get all the important stuff done first." This couple appeared to have made photography of their wedding a very low priority. This is puzzeling to me because the food and cake gets eaten, the flowers wilt and die, but the images of that very special and important day will live on for a great many years after the wedding. I know of couples that have spent a thousand or more on the wedding cake, three or four thousand on the dress and $10,000 for food, but only a thousand for the photography. If there is one area you do NOT skimp on, it's the photography

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.105.195.8 (talk) 16:15, 7 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] All the above

All the concerns above are worth noting. However, the difficulty adding this information is in referencing your sources. Wikipedia doesn’t allow original research, no matter how expert you might be on the topic. Basically you can only add information based on credible external sources. So if any of you can find and footnote your sources adequately, you are free to add the information as suggested above. --Mactographer 11:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I find it somewhat ironic that Wikipedia requires original images, or at least public domain or otherwise copyright free images, yet disallows original writing on the same subject matter. Go figure...

--Mactographer 11:27, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia requires original writing - you can't simply copy and paste other people's work - but bars original research. It is different! -- SiobhanHansa 21:29, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Images

The images on this page seem to be mainly examples of wedding photography - it would be great if there could also be some images that illustrate the profession more. For instance, a picture of a standard wedding photographers kit, one that shows a full studio, a picture of a photographer taking a particularly exacting photo, etc. Images that show the activity talked about in the article rather than simply the product. -- SiobhanHansa 21:29, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] East Asian Wedding Photography

This article seems focused on western or perhaps even just American wedding photography. In some east Asian cultures the wedding photography includes a session at a studio and usually some outdoor shots at a scenic location. The bride wears a number of different dresses during the photo shoot and the groom usually changes a bit too (even if just the tie and cummerbund). Anyone know enough about this to include it in the article? Or is there another article about it somewhere that I'm unaware of?

Here's a link to some information to show what I'm talking about. [1]

I don't think I know enough about the topic to write about it myself. Readin (talk) 23:08, 21 December 2007 (UTC)