Blown smoke and time wasted

[JoitheArtist]

Geez...yeah, camera idiots are irritating. I researched my new camera for month before settling on one that fit my needs and didn't have lots of extra junk that I didn't need. (Note: I got the Canon SX110, and couldn't be happier--it's EXACTLY what I wanted, and then some!) I hate seeing a good camera wasted on someone who really needs just a point-and-click.

A lot of people don't understand that cameras are simply machines. Wonderful machines, true, but machines. It's not an eyeball, it doesn't capture the same range, and a lot of people simply fail to grasp that basic concept.

Can I also register my distaste for the flash? I know sometimes you need it, but I see people take every pic that's not in broad daylight with a flash, then wonder why the colors and contrast are all screwy. My mother is one of these. She always wonders how I nice portrait shots. Gee mom, could it be because I don't plunk people under a fluorescent light and turn on my flash?

(another note: I'm nowhere near professional, but I do love taking pictures, and usually take a couple hundred a week [which then gets narrowed down to maybe 40 a week that I actually bother to edit on GIMP and upload to DeviantArt])

[ArcticChicken]

See, this is why I love digital cameras. I don't have to be good, I just need a big memory card.

Though I would love to take some photography classes, I don't want to be a professional, but I'd love to know enough I don't have to take 20 pictures to get the one I want.

[JoitheArtist]

but I'd love to know enough I don't have to take 20 pictures to get the one I want.

Actually, that's one of the first things they tell you in a photography class! You gotta take a ton of pics to get the one you want, no matter what.

[CrazedClerkthe2nd]

G

Can I also register my distaste for the flash? I know sometimes you need it, but I see people take every pic that's not in broad daylight with a flash, then wonder why the colors and contrast are all screwy. My mother is one of these. She always wonders how I nice portrait shots. Gee mom, could it be because I don't plunk people under a fluorescent light and turn on my flash?

Amen to that!

I will try to light anyway I possibly can using nearby sources before using the flash. I almost always like non-flash photos better than flash photos as I think the natural light makes the pictures look more realistic.

I have never processed film, but I have done touch up work on hundreds of digital prints. One of my biggest pet peeves was people who got upset with me because I couldn't magically make their almost black pictures look magnificent. I'm talking photos that were taken with far too little light.

Even if I brighten the image, I still won't be able to extract data from it that was never there to begin with (the lack of light obscured the details). So many people just could not wrap their heads around this and just assumed that if I added enough brightness to the picture it would look good.

[Nyx]

What I wish could have been said: Then you should have had a REAL PROFESSIONAL take the photos.

I was thinking "then you should have brought us professional work"

[Victoria J]

This thread made me laugh.

Lots of idiots with cameras - I'm one of them but at least I don't think I know what I'm doing. I bought my film SLR cheap when everyone else was going digital and it remains the single most expensive impulse purchase I've made. I still love it. I love my father's (now somewhat outdated) SLR digital, but I don't have money for something like that. My sister (who is 8) can't understand my camera at all - I took her photo and she rushed up and was trying to work out where she could see it. She just couldn't get her head round "well, you take another 10 or so photo's, then you go to a shop and wait 3 days (not fast but best prints I know) and then you can see what you took."

I have to say that I find using an SLR much easier because you don't have the problem with framing and finding everything is offset - I think a simple SLR is actually quite good for someone who doesn't know what they're doing.

I just wish I could afford a really good lense.

The wedding stories made me think of my parents - they had a pretty informal wedding and I believe a friend took the pictures. None of them came out. My mother still has the only photo - a single polaroid of them cutting the cake.

It's probably for the best - they were in a hippie phase. My mother has a blue floral laura ashley dress and my father has an open shirt collar with a necklace/medalion showing. And a frightening amount of facial hair.

My mother was slightly hurt when I laughed outloud when shown the picture. But she cheered up when she realised I thought he looked funnier than her.

Victoria J

[ArcticChicken]

Actually, that's one of the first things they tell you in a photography class! You gotta take a ton of pics to get the one you want, no matter what.

Oh, well in that case....I still want to take a photography class, because there are some things I can't get to turn out at all, but I feel better about my "skill".

[Reyneth]

All of these posts just make me feel more justified in my stance regarding my sister's photography at her wedding (2010). They're on a tight budget. And she's apparently more willing to spend lots of money on booze than the photographs (priorities!).

As a serious amateur who has "seconded" at least five weddings and was the primary/only photographer for two more, I put my foot down when she told me they would just have her fiancee's uncle take the photos. He's never done a wedding at all. No, sorry. Not having it. Photos are VERY important and they're the one thing that really last.

I had my mom get a quote from one of the teachers at her school who is a professional wedding/portrait photographer (but part-time, as he's a teacher first) for just the digital files + copyright. $1,400. Another photographer her friend used was $1,100. Sister's fiancee's aunt used a professional amateur for her wedding and loved the photos - and come to find out I do know the guy, he worked at a competing photo/camera store, was best friends with a coworker and was the one person I trusted to process the photos I took at one wedding when my store had closed. I'm waiting to see what his quote will be.

If it comes down to it, I will pay most if not all of the cost for any of the above options as my present. Because photos are *that* important and I WILL NOT let my sister get screwed because she relied on the cheap option of someone who has no idea what they are doing.

My mom thinks I'm crazy. I'm slowly digging myself out of debt, so spending that money on a photographer for my sister's wedding is apparently insane. She thought I should coordinate efforts between her older brother who was a journalist and took photos at her wedding, her neighbor who is a great artist and good photographer, the uncle on fiancee's side and myself (when not busy with Maid-of-Honor duties). I told her in NO uncertain terms that won't be happening because I know the majority of the burden will fall on me, including "scheduling" and coordinating the formal and family photo shoot, posing the photos and always being hyper-aware of what is going on to not miss the photo opportunity. All of which I HATE and leave you with not actually enjoying yourself.

Why don't they get that good photography is worth it? I'm not talking thousands of dollars, I'm talking one less beer per person. Or 25 less people's dinners to pay for. *sigh*

Can you tell what the priority at my wedding (if I ever get married) will be?