branching out to small wedding -- opinions?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Leica Photography : One Thread

My kit has a Leica M6 with 35f/2, 50/f4a and a Metz 34-CS2 flash as well as a Nikon F100 with an 85f/1.8, 135 f/2 and SB-28 flash.

Currently I shoot live dance performances (mostly modern, post-modern, jazz, ethnic styles) for smaller dance companies and individual performers who don't have the money to go to a professional studio.

I'm thinking of branching out to small wedding, catering to the couples on a tight budget who appreciate journalistic or story-telling style wedding coverage (in other words, minimal set-up shots).

Will my kit do? Do I have to wait until I get a medium format camera? How many shooters out there have shot, or seen someone shoot a wedding entirely on 35mm format, and with a rangefinder.

I'm not offering people anything hugely complex. Definitely something better than Aunt May with a point and shoot or Dad with a Canon Rebel. My shooting style is pretty fluid and many dancers have remarked that I should shoot weddings. I thought it might be a good way to earn extra cash.

FYI, this photo stuff is just a side gig, I don't make a living on my dance photography. I do it to justify paying for such expensive equipment (and to be around pretty dancers).

Thanks.

-- victor (danzfotog@yahoo.ecom), February 21, 2002

Answers

Assuming you meant to write that you have a 50mm f1.4 lens for your Leica M, your outfit is just about ideal for the kind of work you're thinking about. Be aware that shooting cheapie weddings is not a money-making proposition. I experimented by doing four of them on open dates last summer, and total reprint sales came to $34!

If you plan to give them the proofs and negatives, don't just hand them the raw film after the wedding. Protect your reputation as much as possible by dropping off the film at a good lab and telling your clients to pick up their proofs and negs there.

As for medium format, if you're interested, email me off-list for a copy of my article "The Case for the 35mm Wedding," which ran in Rangefinder Magazine about two years ago.

-- Dave Jenkins (djphoto@vol.com), February 21, 2002.


Will my kit do?

In terms of capability, yes. You can even leave out the 50 and 135. But in order to tackle the job with any degree of professionalism, you'll need to back up your equipment in case of failure. There are a few ways to do it. The best way is to have an exact duplicate of your setup which you leave in the boot of your car. That way if something fails you don't break your groove. The downside of this is that it's the most expensive option. The second way is to get a previous version Leica 90/2-M, a Nikon 35/2, and a Sunpak 383. This way, if something in your Nikon kit fails you can still have the same coverage with the Leica and vice versa, and the Sunpak 383 is a nondedicated flash that will work equally well with the M6 and F100. A bit cheaper than duplicating your whole kit, and you can even decide if you want to use all Leica or all Nikon and have the other kit as backup. The final way to do it, and this is the bare minimum, is to add a quality point and shoot like a Contax T3 to what you currently have.

Do I have to wait until I get a medium format camera?

Not necessarily. Depends on what your clients' needs are. If they intend to make a lot of blowups to 16x20 or bigger, then I would consider medium format. My choice in such a case would be the Fuji GW670III, the so-called "Texas Leica". Nice and sharp (but noninterchangeable) 90/3.5 lens on 6x7 format, flash sync to 1/500.

How many shooters out there have shot, or seen someone shoot a wedding entirely on 35mm format, and with a rangefinder.

Sure, count me in.

-- Anon Terry (anonht@yahoo.com), February 21, 2002.


Hey Victor- During the summer I live off of weddings. I have shot more than 50 in the last three years. When I first got started doing weddings five years ago, I used a Nikon AF kit for journalism and Hassie or Mamiya medium format for formals.

Today, I carry two or three M bodies (usual one is a Hexar RF to give me the options it affords) and a few lenses- 15/28/50/90 is standard. I am looking to add a 21. I also carry a 135 occasionally, just to add something different, especailly in situations where there will be a lot of light. Aside from this being a much lighter kit than the big systems I used to carry, I find that shooting weddings M style makes the work better. My subjects are not intimidated by the cameras- they don't really notice me as a photographer. I get closer. I interact a little bit, I observe a lot, and I shoot. They don't notice me. The Leica was made for this.

The glass is so good that with wide apetures and/or careful focusing I can make 11x14 enlargements and not have any difference in quality. I find I don't need the medium format anymore. Film choice is critical here, and I suggest that you look through the archives- there are a number of threads going on this issue right now- but the newer films are so fine that this has helped me feel ok about leaving the medium format gear at home.

In fact, after working like this for a year, I have sold all my medium format stuff! Now all my work is shot either 35mm or large format. I teach, I shoot weddings, and any and all other photographic assignments from corporate to editorial to private, and I have switched over entirely. I use my M cameras for about 70% of 35mm work- of course some things require an SLR, but I find that with careful use and good modern film, meduim format is out of the picture for me. Any one else reached this point?

One more thing about the 35mm wedding. I am doing a lot of albums these days on CD rather than trad. prints. I have a good scanner, so I spend a few hours scanning, setting up and burning to CD, I keep copies of all the albums, and high res files of any images I want to keep, maybe I keep a couple of great negs here and there ( I have a clause allowing me to do this in my wedding contracts, and I will omit it if the client has any objections) and then give the client their negs and proofs. It keeps my archive clear of this stuff and makes them very happy. It's also significantly cheaper for me to work this way, for me and the client. Naturally doing this digital post production takes time, and I build that into my fees, but it means that 35mm is even more appropriate- I can get incredible prints from a high res file- 20x24 from a 35mm neg or chrome with no loss of quality- so who needs meduim format? Of course to get this, you need a good print service, but hey, I live in NYC, so that's easy for me...

Ok, sorry to go on so long. Feel free to email me if you want more info.

-- drew (swordfisher@hotmail.com), February 21, 2002.


I shoot the type of weddings you are describing, but I do so with an autofocus Canon, 50 1.4, and flash. So much happens so quickly and in low light (kids and babies are often fast-moving targets) that I don't usually have time to savor the shooting experience with a manual camera.

Don't forget that couples and families who want wedding photos aren't terribly interested in artful effects and cool angles. They mostly want handsome, tasteful prints of the people at the gathering enjoying themselves--it's important that your shots flatter them and show their happy faces.

I blend in, move around, make conversation, and ask for some shots, but usually I'm continually tugged on the sleeve "to get a shot of ____." You'll find that since you know what good photography looks like, no matter what equipment you use, your pictures will be better than Dad's with his Rebel. The journalistic approach, for me, is the only way to go. It usually gives the couple exactly what they want-- a record of their big day (plus, as you might appreciate, you get to be around the pretty bridesmaids).

Also, since somone else mentioned payment, I ask the couple to pay for my time and a package of prints. I don't charge extra (just cost) for reprints. I figure my skill is in documenting (not arranging multiple strobes, setting up medium-format slick shots, or producing poster-size prints of the happy couple). One can probably make more money doing things differently, but I prefer to be paid for what I bring to the table. A day rate plus expenses works for me.

This approach also works for bar mitzvahs, birthday parties, anniversary parties, etc.--events that don't necessarily call for too many staged group photos.

I admit I'm spoiled here in New York. The couples who like this are generally the low-key artsy types. The bridesmaids are often actresses, who will need headshots later. Others want portraits of their children a few months down the road. You get the idea.

You need to be out in the crowd, not stuck on the lawn in front of the softboxes and the trellis with the ivy.

-- Preston Merchant (merchant@speakeasy.org), February 21, 2002.


To quote Dave Jenkins: "Be aware that shooting cheapie weddings is not a money-making proposition."

If you're lucky, you'll be working for people who simply don't have money but who do appreciate your work. More likely, you'll be working for people who don't value photography because they don't believe it requires significant skill. These people will expect you to produce top-quality results, provide excellent service, and work for virtually nothing.

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), February 21, 2002.



Hello Victor. I would stick to 35mm only (medium format is not a budget shoot) Your r'finder combo. is enough and indispensable for low light shots. Perhaps borrow/consider a stronger flash,Metz 60,which allows for white ceiling bounce shots,softer than direct flash.As for the"budget" angle,charge more,they respect you,and get a deposit.Otherwise after a time you you will be selling yourself too cheap.

-- Sheridan Zantis (albada60@hotmail.com), February 21, 2002.

Two years ago I sold a House in Marin County to a wedding photographer. She paid me $400k for the house - had the money for the down and qualified for the mortgage with her wedding income. She must do all right shooting weddings. I asked her what equipment she used and she told me 35mm but it is the photographer's vision that people pay for. Good luck and go for it.

-- Don (wgpinc@yahoo.com), February 21, 2002.

I agree with the others: 35mm only is very popular for weddings. MF formals are considered "superior" and you can charge more for them -- but many people just do not want them, nor do they understand the point. Personally, I think the formals in MF are what makes a good wedding photograph, as there are always many people already taking 35mm shots and you can always gets copies of theirs. Not everyone else is a bad photographer. On the other hand an MF formal (doesn't have to be cheesy) is something more unusal and the result is, or should be, special, one cannot match the quality of an MF camera with a 35mm shot, even a Leica particularly of groups of family or friends. Some people agree with this and some don't. Many people just want cheap and cheerful.

I take both types of wedding shots and if I take formal black and white or color MF, the wedding couple really appreciate it, but if they express some degree of lack of interest, then I just take 35mm - no need to force them into something they do not think they want.

I am not a pro but I have taken a good number of weddings for various people.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), February 21, 2002.


Mike Dixon's response is "right on the money". There is alot of truth in so few words.

Regards,

-- Alan Purves (lpurves@mnsi.net), February 22, 2002.


Typical of this "Leica-syndrome". i.e "dad with his Rebel.." i do weddings and the Rebel is way faster and easier than the Leica M's.Cameras are tools.Use a Rebel...than see.i love the zoom,the AF,the ability to multi-exposure,the simple but effective flash. Since a change in the way i present and do the albums,photo re-orders usually equal price of wedding shoot.Sure its not as sharp.i'm in the business of making good and happy memories.No need for all those sharp photos...Good luck.Its a great field.No big monies but fun and it pays the rent!

-- jason gold (leeu72@hotmail.com), February 23, 2002.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ