So, I have no idea if this guy is using any Leica, but this is the most inspirational wedding photography I've ever seen (according to my personal taste and preferences) I wished I'd use this guys when I got married 4 years ago.

Documentary Weddings

Namaste,

-- pat (modlabs@yahoo.com), June 05, 2002

Answers

the wedding candids are nice, but the portraits!! dreadful.

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), June 05, 2002.

maybe I should hold back on my superlatives - what I really liked what the b&W wedding story telling - very appealing to me.

-- pat (modlabs@yahoo.com), June 05, 2002.

Crimeny! Those are GREAT! All of 'em! I didn't see a bad photo on the whole site, portraits included. I just did some b&w's for a friend at her wedding, and caught some similar ( in a very loose sense of the word) to those on the site, but not NEARLY as good.

Thanks for the site... I'll be bookmarking those.

-- Bob (bobflores@attbi.com), June 05, 2002.

The documentary stuff is very nice, aside from some unavoidable technical flubs (I saw a lot of blown highlights). His ability to integrate himself into the event is commendable, and he gets a lot of very innovative angles and precisely captured moments.

Most of the portraits were too over-the-top for my taste. Some of the more conservative ones (like the couple with their nude baby) were very appealing, however.

Overall, I'd say he deserves the price he's asking. $15,000 for a wedding is more than I'd have ever dreamed about then I was doing it.

-- Paul Chefurka (paul@chefurka.com), June 05, 2002.

well, Joseph does some modlabs@yahoo.com), June 05, 2002.

let's try that again...

nice portraits

-- pat (modlabs@yahoo.com), June 05, 2002.

They should be good for the prices he is charging!!!

-- Karl Yik (karl.yik@dk.com), June 05, 2002.

Thanks for the link. This guy does nice work. I do weddings, and my style is similar to this. Paul- you mentioned the blown out highlights- do you really think these minor things detract from the impact of the images? Yes, if you are submitting a portfolio to some clients, or perhaps a school, the blown out highlights might speak against you as a photographer- but for showing beautiful documentary photos to people who commissined them, and who are the subjects, I think you would be hard pressed to find flaws in this stuff- unless it's just not to your taste.

Some of you have marveled at the prices- but look at what they are offereing for the prices they quote- $15,000 is the top end, and includes what is basically unlimited photo coverage of THREE seperate events, plus consultations, lots of print options and THREE websites- I'd say we are talking about a minimum of 90 hours worth of work for two or three people, judged on what the site says. For that much work, and that number of people, and that much delivered product, this is positively cheap- anyone priced professional web design lately?

Meanwhile, if you look at the bottom end of their pricing, it starts at $2500! Ok, that's only for four hours of coverage and one proof book, up to 400 images- and this is cheaper than me and the folks I work with...I wonder which packages they sell more of. The folks with money who value photography will happily pay the high prices, as I have discovered- and it seems this studio has too.

Go back and re-read the pricing guide if you are shocked by the numbers. Think about costs. If you are shooting pictures for a living, esp. wedding pictures, you will know what I am talking about- and this will start to look very respectable.

Thanks again for the link- nice inspiring pictures, and it's always good to know what the competition is doing!

-- drew (swordfisher@hotmail.com), June 05, 2002.

FYI, Joseph shoots mainly with EOS 1VH and L lenses, and with Contax 465.

cheers,

-- pat (modlabs@yahoo.com), June 05, 2002.

Drew - do I think the blown highlights detract from the images? No, not really. It's something I notice as a photographer, but in terms of what the images are conveying to those involved, they matter not a whit. I'd much rather see images that "get it" with one or two imperfections, than a raft of perfect but sterile poses. The pursuit of technical perfection is worthy, but can take your eye off the ball - which in this case is catching the feel of the event and the people involved. Joseph does that in spades.

I agree about the prices. For what they are getting, these prices are cheap. When I was shooting weddings in the mid-70's I did three hours of coverage (no assistant) with a proof book for about $300. Taking inflation into account, that comes out to around $1400 today, and I wasn't feeding very far above the bottom - others who did higher-end wedding charged well more than twice what I did.

What shocks people about these prices is the sheer dollar amount of the top-end package. Not many markets in North America would support this style of coverage, so most of us aren't used to think in terms of that many zeroes. Even if he's a big fish in a good market I'd bet he still shoots a lot more $5000 weddings than $15000 ones.

-- Paul Chefurka (paul@chefurka.com), June 05, 2002.

Intructive (perhaps) to compare this to Denis Reggie's work http://www.denisreggie.com/

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), June 05, 2002.

Or without the marketing (but still with hype) http://www.pdnonline.com /legends/reggie/

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), June 05, 2002.

I think the candids are VERY good. The guy has the reflexes of a great street shooter together with great composition. A QUESTION for us LEICA shooters: could a Leica M have handled this documentation? I don't think so. He ocassionally used off camera lighting, multiple lighting and it seems to me flash sync speeds reauired to be faster than the Leica 1/50th flash sync. What do you Leica users think? Could a Leica M have been uswed in these multiple flash situations. Buy the way when they I bet were used while the asssistant was hand holding the flash while the shooter was shooting. Some of the flash use was subtle and well done. Please repond.

-- John Elder (celder2162@aol.com), June 05, 2002.

Sorry about the typos!

-- John Elder (celder2162@aol.com), June 05, 2002.

You can always use him on your second wedding!

-- C. W. Satterfield (cwsat@istate.net), June 06, 2002.

Use him on your second wedding!

-- C. W. Satterfield (cwsat@istate.net), June 06, 2002.

John,

I do agree with you about his having the reflexes of a street shooter. I'm sure there are a variety of standard approaches or tips or tricks to the job, but, knowing nothing at all about wedding photography, it seems to me that taking on these highly time bound situations in a documentary fashion is a form of Russian roulette, professionally speaking.

How do you come away with a portfolio of great candids that will please the clients, time after time, without fail?

Pat, as an aside, why "namaste"?

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), June 06, 2002.

The cut-off heads and odd angles, the out-of-focus foregrounds -- I may be a meat and potatoes kind of guy when it comes to weddings, but when I look at these albums I feel too focused on the photograph and the process by which it was obtained (i.e., the specific decision made by the photographer to make the image). Reggie's work has me interested in the people.

-- Matt Sachs (mattsachs@attbi.com), June 06, 2002.

Yes they are good in a contemporary way, but I wonder whether in 10 years time whether the couple might not have wished for a bit more of the people and less the trendy tilted horizons, protagonists far in the distance and so on. But they definitely have a cool look. Is "cool and contemporary" really what one is after in a wedding? I guess if you get the buyers it is.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), June 06, 2002.

Mani, "Namaste" because I do yoga... (Iyengar to be specific)

Namaste,

-- pat (modlabs@yahoo.com), June 06, 2002.

dudes, I might enjoy Reggie's work but all that flash software showoff had me leave the site after 30 secs...

cheers,

-- pat (modlabs@yahoo.com), June 06, 2002.

I visited the site. I'm raising my prices.

-- Marc Williams (mwilliams111313MI@comcast.com), June 06, 2002.

RE: "I visited the site. I'm raising my prices." Sorry, on previous post I forgot to correct my e-mail address.

-- Marc Williams (mwilliams111313MI@comcast.net), June 06, 2002.