Or at least understand how to properly operate your camera.

3/22/2009 9:57:39 AM

Quote :

"so apparently the bride requested that most of her pictures use tilt shift. why would someone request that???????"

its clear these people are rich hipsters/indie douches

tilt shift is the most popular thing going right now among that demographic

i'd put even odds on her asking for it by name or by bringing some photos in from her favorite flickr accounts lol

i'll put the message out there again

TWW Digital SLR thread wedding photography business

3/22/2009 12:59:23 PM

^ lol I think you're right. When I said something about how I didn't understand why he blurred that door picture she goes, "Well it's called tilt shift and I requested it." Oh, okay

3/22/2009 11:44:05 PM

THAT HANSELTILT SHIFT EFFECT, HE'S SO HOT RIGHT NOW

3/22/2009 11:55:27 PM

3/23/2009 8:04:42 AM

GOT DAT TILT SHIFT BOAT

[Edited on March 23, 2009 at 8:27 AM. Reason : embolden Ø]

3/23/2009 8:25:19 AM

Someone should tell her that is dumb, gratuitous, and improper use of a "tilt-shift effect."


^That, on the other hand, is rad as fuck.

[Edited on March 23, 2009 at 11:44 AM. Reason : .]

3/23/2009 11:43:33 AM

Why do they call this a "tilt-shift" effect? Tilt-shift lens are for perspective correction and they don't usually have this narrow depth of field bullshit.

3/23/2009 11:57:41 AM

Because they are dumb.

The narrow DOF can be achieved, though.

3/23/2009 12:00:14 PM

i just think miniature faking is awesome



back to topic

3/23/2009 2:33:04 PM

if by awesome you mean tedious and gay

3/23/2009 2:55:35 PM

Quote :

"real people don't rush into marriage"

who the fuck are "real people"?

3/23/2009 3:23:28 PM

hey marko and meckola

are you making fun of tilt shift?

cause I still think its neat... I think I might be uncool

3/23/2009 3:25:46 PM

^^^^ How does miniature faking work?

3/23/2009 7:53:19 PM

I saw some article on it years ago, I seem to remember these guys building models of cities and photographing them. It was badass.

3/23/2009 7:54:42 PM

Wow, what the fuck are you talking about?

3/23/2009 9:08:18 PM

Quote :

"are you making fun of tilt shift?"

no way i think it's pretty cool if not used in a pretentious way

like that vid i posted- click and follow it to the main vimeo host and watch some of that guy's stuff in HD. it's incredibly simplistic but it looks awesome

Quote :

"How does miniature faking work?"

in short, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilt-shift_miniature_faking

explains it with pictures



[Edited on March 24, 2009 at 9:15 AM. Reason : one more Ø]

3/24/2009 9:03:48 AM

^ Neat!

Next people will be asking for their weddings to be shot using this effect

3/24/2009 8:54:44 PM

oh man, I just got the pictage of the event. I really wish I could link you guys to some of these photos

3/24/2009 10:49:37 PM

I'm addicted to hearing ya'll opinions on photographers now

What do you guys think of this one?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lindseymarlaphoto/

3/26/2009 11:48:57 PM

Whoa nausea


Kiwi tilt

3/26/2009 11:52:28 PM

A few gems





Rule of thirds anyone?


lol


Out of focus-on purpose??

3/26/2009 11:55:03 PM

oh wow, I didn't even bother to check that you could link them, I figured they would have been spaceballed.



Holy tilt Batman!

3/27/2009 12:01:15 AM

lol I WAS NEVER THAT BAD

with people, just ducks. I get it now, NEVAR AGAIN I sincerely and utterly apologize to Jbaz for the hell I gave haha.

Now back to awesome wedding photographers making money

3/27/2009 12:03:12 AM

The first couple of pages of wedding shots are pretty "meh" in my opinion. Looks more like if you got your friend who owns a DSLR to shoot your wedding. After the first couple of gallery pages the photography seems to get more interesting and better. The kids and "model" shoots seem better at least. The wedding photography in the latter pages seems better too, but it's still hit-or-miss.

There are some good shots, but they're not all really good shots is the point I guess. The lighting seems hit or miss. A lot of the colors don't seem to pop. Too many non-macro shots with very shallow depth of field and no great focal point, etc. If these are the best she could come up with as a batch representative of her work I'd probably look elsewhere. I don't mean to criticize because it's not bad by comparison to some of the stuff we've seen, but it just doesn't seem great to me.

Lots of Kiwi crop going on there too:






And wtf is this:



[Edited on March 27, 2009 at 12:07 AM. Reason : looks like everyone is picking on the same shots, lol.]

3/27/2009 12:05:30 AM

The girl I know who used this photographer said she paid $2500, to give you guys a base for your criticism

3/27/2009 12:07:27 AM

Just reading this thread....

I'm honestly surprised that the OP photographer didn't add gratuitous LENS FLARE to everything. Seems like the kind of guy that would.

3/27/2009 12:10:11 AM

Apparently the kiwi crop is a hot item....

Since dropping that crop I've done a lot better getting shots STRAIGHT in camera....go figure

3/27/2009 12:11:48 AM

^ If by hot item you mean questionable wedding photographers seem to like it...

3/27/2009 12:38:55 AM

http://www.waltersandwalters.com/

this is who my sister used.

3/27/2009 12:53:40 AM

Aside from a few examples of gratuitous tilt, that is pretty quality.

3/27/2009 12:57:52 AM

^^ Oh wow, I really like his stuff. Too bad I bet it costs $texas

3/27/2009 1:02:52 AM

no kidding

3/27/2009 1:03:20 AM

I'm thinking the same price as those shitty guys.... though I may be wrong.

I like them too though I dont get the underwater one...

3/27/2009 1:03:46 AM

haha I haven't seen the underwater one yet.

And yeah, you're probably right. I totally don't get the pricing scale for wedding photography apparently.

3/27/2009 1:05:25 AM

http://melaniemansfield.com/public/completewedding04/

http://www.melaniemansfield.com/public/completewedding01/

A friend used her and I thought the photos came out great.

3/27/2009 1:41:15 AM

http://www.bgstudiosanddesign.com/weddings.html

I think considering how cheap this guy is these photos aren't so bad. The pregnancy photos kind of creep me out though.

^ Their website is making my server cry

[Edited on March 27, 2009 at 1:54 AM. Reason : .]

3/27/2009 1:52:34 AM

Wowie saturation

I wanna know how their pictures got so sharp, is it the camera, the post processing? What?

3/27/2009 1:54:22 AM

I think they were $5k.

I don't know how much people usually use on wedding photography.

3/27/2009 2:32:58 AM

From my very little research, it seems like the average rate is $1500 - $2500.

3/27/2009 2:42:26 AM

Quote :

"Wowie saturation I wanna know how their pictures got so sharp, is it the camera, the post processing? What?"

It's called using a good camera. That's the difference a good DSLR makes. I love the WindowsXP saturation theme throughout, but I wish they had left a few alone or done something a little less....harsh

3/27/2009 3:08:26 AM

If you're going to shoot a picture in a door, you would think you'd center the door frame.

http://catwilbornephoto.blogspot.com/

3/27/2009 7:44:54 AM

aha, I missed this one. She's a fan of the Kiwi tilt I see.

3/27/2009 9:09:52 PM

lol Kiwi, you have a photographic term named after you

the Kiwi tilt

3/27/2009 9:20:38 PM

that's pretty bad ass in my opinion....

Noen define non-shitty dslr....

3/27/2009 9:42:15 PM

sometimes, it's ok to put the camera level

3/27/2009 10:46:54 PM

Quote :

"Wowie saturation I wanna know how their pictures got so sharp, is it the camera, the post processing? What? "

Competence helps.

Also, using a camera that isn't the most entry level offering and lenses that don't come as part of a kit will go a long way.

3/28/2009 3:34:06 PM

I figured as much, can't wait to get some money for an upgrade

3/28/2009 8:10:08 PM

How much is a competence upgrade?

3/29/2009 9:18:53 AM

this hurts my head.

3/29/2009 9:27:56 AM