Having given it some careful thought, I think it happens because of a lack of comfort on the scene.

Consider that it doesn’t matter if your a photographer or a subject, you’ve doubtlessly had the feeling – you’re out taking photos (or having your photo taken) and you’re just not relaxed, not at ease.  You’re worried about looking uptight, worried that the smile is too forced, worried that the whole shoot is going to end up bad, and pretty soon your self-confidence has packed it’s bags and left, and you just want the session to be over.But what went wrong in the first place?

For the subject, all it usually takes is the idea of being in front of a camera.  Face it, unless you’re a supermodel, you’re probably not very comfortable having your photo taken.  A photographer pushing a honking huge lens in your face and telling you to “say cheese” brings flashbacks of your wacky aunt at your 3rd birthday party.  Terrifying flashbacks.  You get tense, you plaster a forced smile on your face, and after five minutes it feels painfully frozen that way.

Having the photog tell you to relax is hardly relaxing.  But you need to – you need to trust the photographer, trust that he’s able to make you look good.  You hired him, after all, so that trust was implied at the beginning of the relationship – not it’s up to you to see it through.  Do what he asks you, even if it seems a little silly.  Let the walls down.  Help him make a portrait of you.

As photographers, we need to really focus on that word “relationship.”  Because that’s what a successful session with someone needs to be: a relationship, where they open up and expose a bit of their true self to us, and in return we translate that self into meaningful images.  But if we’re too wrapped up in f-stops and shutter speeds, if we forget to do out part in forging that relationship, who can blame the subject for locking up.

When I’m behind the camera, I’m all too painfully aware that most people aren’t comfortable having their photo taken.  True, you get the occasional ham who is completely in their element.  But most people aren’t.  It takes a lot of conscious effort to help them feel comfortable.  And it’s not always easy – especially if things aren’t going quite right on the camera side.

Anytime I’m working with a subject, I take Joe McNally’s advice to heart: I spew an unending stream of dialogue.  I say any fool thing that comes into my head.  I make faces and get animated.  I comment on the weather, I tell little stories, and most importantly, I keep directing positive comments at the subject.  ”You’re doing great!  Yeah, there we go, just like that.  Perfect.  Wow, that one was great!”

It doesn’t matter exactly what I’m saying, the point is, I’m talking to the subject.  And I’m listening to what they’re saying in response.  I’m trying to forge that relationship, trying to get them to lower their guard, to elicit a few genuine smiles, a few laughs.  It’s almost as if you have to make the camera secondary; the shoot becomes about interacting with the subject, and the camera just happens to be in your hands, like an afterthought, shooting frames as they come.

Most of the time it actually works.  And once the walls are down, you find that the creativity comes back.  I pretty much figure that the first 30 shots of any shoot are pretty likely to be useless.  That’s the warm-up phase, the time when you’re getting the subject comfortable with the shoot.  After that, that’s when the magic happens.  I may not include a single shot from the first pose & setup, or even the second.  It all depends on how things go.  But the important thing is, I walk into the shoot knowing that, and I don’t become discouraged by it.

Sometimes it’s even harder – sometimes you don’t get that perfect shot until the very last one.

Who cares!

All that matters is that you got it, that the relationship was formed, and the subject goes home happy.

- Senior portraits: finishing Mandy’s and then I’ll have a second shoot later in the summer with a high school senior. I’m working to further finesse my outdoor portrait technique, so you can expect some tips and pointers on lighting, posing, etc.

- Mandy’s Graduation Party: I’m listing this one here, but it’s by no means an official shoot.  This is going to be candid shots throughout the afternoon, until either the natives refuse to let me chronicle anymore of their antics, or I’m…um…unable to handle the camera anymore.

- Mid-Atlantic Air Museum’s WWII Weekend: I love airshows, but this will be the first one I’ve been to in years, and the first time I’ll really get to try my hand at aviation photography.  WWII warbirds are some of the most beautiful aircraft ever built, and the chance to photograph these living legends is thrilling.  I’m doing a lot of reading to get ready for this one – it’s gonna’ rock!

- Summer Vacation: taking a week this summer and heading off somewhere.  The destination is still vague.  It’ll most likely be Vermont, with the possibility of quick trips both around the state, and maybe even to neighboring regions.  (I’m itching to revisit Franconia Notch in New Hampshire, for instance.)  It’s an actual vacation, with the goal of getting away and relaxing.  But there’ll be photos, at at least one day dedicated purely to photography.

- NE Strobists GTG II: The first workshop back in February was a huge success and a ton of fun, and everybody said they’d like to do it again.  So I’m looking into options and am going to see if I can’t put something together for this Autumn.  Last time we booked a hotel conference room, which worked out, but wasn’t very inspiring (we ended up outside on a loading dock, shooting models atop dumpsters).  This time I’m going to find a much cooler setting that we can use for a more environmental portrait look.

- Specialist at the Park: I’ve accepted a position as the 2010-2011 Specialist at Salt Springs State Park.  Starting in June and running for a full year I’ll be hosting a series of 5-7 workshops at the park, where I’ll cover everything from basic camera use to more advanced/specific topics, such as landscape techniques.  I’ll also be photographing some of the Park’s events, and will be putting together a gallery collection to be displayed next Spring.

SUNRISE FROM THE FIELD AT SALT SPRINGS

Having been out at the same place the previous night, we had an idea of what kind of scenes she wanted, and I had a pretty good idea of how to light them.  Forwent the multi-strobe setup this time and settled on a single 430EX on a light stand with shoot-through umbrella.  Later, I added a second 430EX to a Justin Clamp, which was clamped to the light stand, and also sported an umbrella, for some clamshell-style lighting.

(On a side note, if you’re using Speedlites and don’t have a Justin Clamp, get one.  ASAP.  Super cool piece of gear that’s got all you need to mount a Speedlite & modifier pretty much anywhere.)

I’m shooting with the 7D + 50mm, at f/2.2, ISO 200, and a shutter speed that knocks the BG down a stop or so.  Still using the 580EX on-camera as a master

Here’s one with the clamshell lighting, which helps cover the 3/4 body length better than a single umbrella, while also providing flattering light.  This is one of those classic senior portrait poses – stick the subject in a tree and tell ‘em to grin.  Not very progressive, but it’s constantly repeated for a reason – because it works.  I shot a series and picked this one for two reasons: first, because it cropped out the light pole at far camera right, which was a distraction in the other shots; and second, because the wind gusted through and pushed her hair back just enough to give it some pop.

The wind was another of those mixed blessings.  It can take dead, limp hair and make it look alive.  But it also has a nasty habit of catching umbrellas and tossing your light stand into the next county.  I keep saying I’m going to find/order some sandbags, but in the meantime I came up with a quick solution.  I had my Tamrac 5374 backpack with me and simply clipped it to the base of the light stand with the tripod attachment strap, and tightened it down.  With extra gear inside, it was plenty heavy to hold the light stand in place when the breeze came through – and it helped keep everything together as we moved around.

So there you have it – a low key kind of evening, a few good photos made, and another trick added to the list.

As sessions go, this one was a mixed bag.  Which isn’t all that unusual.  I managed to grab a couple of excellent shots that I’m really happy with, but there were a lot of discards in the file too – which is why it’s best to do these informal practice sessions.  Better to hone your skills with a patient friend, instead of a paying client.

There are a lot of amazing portraits floating around the Internet, with entire Flickr groups dedicated to showing them off.  The techniques are hugely varied, but one that caught my eye was, for lack of a better term, an overexposed into-the-sun look.

I like the look.  It’s a little edgy, a little trendy, and with the right subjects it has a lot of energy.  The trick is recreating it.  Last night I had 3x Speedlites on my DIY stand, all set to HSS with a 1/4 CTO gel, firing through an umbrella kept as close to my model as possible.  I placed my model with her back to the sun and  shot right into it, leaving the BG slightly overexposed, while using the Speedlites light her.  The Speedlites became my key light, and the sun became the hair light.

When it worked, it worked really well.  I love this shot – her expression, the lighting, the way the dandelion fluff glows.  But unfortunately they didn’t all work this well.  For starters, I underestimated how difficult it would be shooting into the sun.  For starters, I’ve spent most of my photographic life going to great lengths to avoid just this situation.  To now purposely leave the sun unhidden, to invite lens flare, I had to overcome my instinct to manage the scene.

And then there’s the focus issues.  Turns out that lenses don’t really like focusing when shooting into the sun. It’s possible that it’s just my lenses, but my 50mm missed focus as often as it hit it, and the 70-210 was just as bad.  There was definitely some hunting going on, and with my model in near-constant motion, no way to lock the focus in one place.

What did I learn from this exercise?

1)  3x Speedlites aren’t required for this kind of shoot.  I don’t need to beat the sun down – I actually want the BG bright.  A single Speedlite should be capable of handling this without too much stress.  And it’ll be easier to manage and adjust 1 flash instead of 3.

2)  1/4 CTO isn’t enough.  I was wary of using a full cut of CTO, least I turn my model orange, so I was conservative.  Too conservative, as it turned out.  Next time, I’m going to try a 1/2 cut.

3)  Start earlier in the afternoon.  We began shooting at 7, and although sunset isn’t until 8ish now, the sun was behind the trees within 20 minutes, which made it difficult to get the look I wanted.  To maximize the into-the-sun technique, I should probably start an hour earlier.

(Photos shot with 7D + 50mm + 580EX Master –> 3x 420/430EX Slaves.  f/2, ISO 100.  A couple used the 17-35L or 70-210 lenses instead.)

And you should, too.  Take 10 minutes and watch the videos.  They’re quick, they’re funny, but most of all they’re packed with excellent information, and even a little inspiration.  The first video is a rundown on the lighting setup for the Springsteen photos; the next three are a sort of overview on Gregory himself.  He talks about how he got started, how he works with people, and how he shoots.

Honestly, if you can watch these and not come away with something, you should probably crawl back under whatever rock you came out of.  Personally, I’m a little blown away by how much I was able to extract from 10 minutes of clips.  (And if you’re looking for proof, my notes are below.)

I can only hope that Profoto makes this sort of interview a regular thing, because this is exactly the sort of thing that we all, as photographers at any level, need – more access into the heads of successful, icon pro photogs.  We can’t all become assistants to one, we’re just not that lucky – but as a next best thing, interviews like this are pretty damn good.

When you’re done watching the video, check out Gregory’s website – hover your cursor over the word “Portraits” when you get in for a drop-down list of galleries.  There’s some incredible work in there!

• Review of my new Canon 17-35mm L lens
• Easter Sunday: some photos with the not-quite-in-laws
• More bird/wildlife photos with the spring migration
• Large family portrait session (the one that was put off last month)
• At least one new model session
• A senior portrait session
• Some insights on the business end of photography

SUNRISE FROM THE FIELD AT SALT SPRINGS

Part of what Mike had to say concerned, of all things, gear (yes, that topic that I was trying to shy away from for a while).  Speaking as someone with a few more years of life experience than me, he recommended that if I was going to “go pro,” I should carefully invest in “pro gear.”

I put “pro gear” in quotes because it can be difficult to draw the distinction sometimes.  I personally believe that “pro gear” may often be the gear that a pro is using;  Canon’s 17-55mm IS lens isn’t part of the L-series, but it is widely regarded as being of L performance.  The 50mm f/1.8 certainly isn’t an L lens, but making amazing images in the right hands, is it not a “pro’s lens?”

Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II - Definitely a pro lens. Photo Credit: Canon USA

Here’s the thing: Canon L-series lenses are marketed with an element of snob appeal, which a certain demographic finds attractive.  But they’re also marketed that way (and have a matching price tag) because they represent an investment for the professional photographer.  An investment because they provide superior optical quality and performance; because they are more durable and resistant; and because they will hold their value for years if well cared for.

Being a bit of a cheapskate, I’ve resisted L lenses for years now, but here’s something that Mike said: “Second best doesn’t fly with your clients and customers.”

I suspect that I’m a bit more open to artistic license regarding this than Mike is; again, if you’re making killer images with your $90 nifty-fifty, then I’m not sure it’s a second-best lens.  But when you really get down to it, Mike is right; if you’re going to be a pro and charge the big bucks to make incredible photos, you need the best tools for the job.  Tools that will perform in any situation you encounter.  Tools that will survive constant use – and a little abuse.  That’s the investment you have to make.

Mike’s parting advice to me was this: with all that in mind, make a wish list of pro glass, and acquire it.  So here’s my wishlist:

Zoom Kit:

Tokina 10-17mm fisheye

Canon 17-35mm f/2.8 L

Canon 24-105mm f/4 L IS

Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS

Canon 1.4x Teleconverter

Prime Kit:

Canon 24mm f/1.4 L

Canon 50mm f/1.2 L

Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro

Canon TS-E 24mm L II

(Depending on the work I’m doing, I like to have an option between zoom and prime lenses  And hell, it’s called a wish list for a reason – I am doing a little daydreaming here. )

Yes, there are a few odd choices on here.  The Tokina fisheye, for instance.  But it’s the only zoom fisheye produced, and having had one before, I know that it is a first-class lens that fills a niche.  Likewise the 24-105mm f/4 amid all the f/2.8s; I tend to have shaky hands (too much coffee?), so I value IS over the extra stop.  As for the final one, the TS-E, that’s a lark – I’ve read about tilt-shift lenses and they sound like fun.

Personally, I think that Canon’s L-series lenses are getting outdated and are long overdue for an overhaul.  Yes, a few Mk II models have popped up in recent years, but the real workhorse lenses, especially among the zooms, are getting old.  Some updated optics, added/improved IS, maybe a whole new lens or two, and I believe that the whole series would become more attractive.

In the meantime, this gives me something to work towards.  Will I ever own all of these?  Probably not.  Looking at the list now, I don’t even want to add up the cost.  But it does give me something to work towards, a sort of long-range goal to go hand-in-hand with my 5 year plan.  And like the plan itself, I’m sure this wishlist will change with my particular needs.

Taking Mike’s advice to heart, I’d suggest that other aspiring photogs make their own wishlists.  Don’t do it for the sticker shock of the final price; don’t do it just to pick out fun new “toys.”  Do it to identify what tools you’ll need to shoot professionally.  If you can’t identify the tools, that probably means that you still need to figure out what your specialty is – or perhaps that you’re not really interested in being a full-time pro (there’s nothing wrong with staying semi-pro).

And if you can come up with a wishlist of your own, maybe it will help guide you along your track.

Thanks, Mike!

Photo Credit: Twin Lens Photography

What struck me was the huge difference in styles between them – a complete dichotomy.  I’d say that both are well done and each has some excellent images, but where the Napa Valley series is light and airy, Albuquerque goes in the complete opposite direction; dark and rich.

I think what fascinates me most is how radically the styles differ, even though the subject matter is so similar.  Both weddings make me ask “Why was it shot this way?  What drove the photographer to make that decision?”

Is it just a style choice?  Does the Napa photog work bright while the Albuquerque photog shoots dark?  Perhaps.  But it’s more interesting to jump beyond personal style to ponder the other factors.

Certainly the Napa Valley wedding lends itself to bright, airy photos – most of it is outdoors, in lovely afternoon light.  There’s a very warm, natural feel to the scene.  It looks relaxed.  Albuquerque, likewise, lends itself to punchy colors and darker, bolder tones; the brides maids are in bright dresses, the flowers and decor match, and the whole thing has more of a twilight/evening atmosphere.

Photo Credit: Twin Lens Photography

But could you switch the styles?  It’s easy to look at the photos and say that each lends itself to a style, since they’re shot that way in the first place!  I think it’s a lot harder to try and imagine reversing them and, in the end, I’m not entirely sure you could.

You might be able to pull off a brighter style with Albuquerque, wash out the colors and lessen the shadows, but the fact that it apparently took place later in the day is going to dictate some darkness.  And trying to brighten it up might not do justice to the bold color palette (although as shot, I personally think that the images look a little over-saturated).

I’m really not sure that you could take a bright, pastel-based wedding like the Napa Valley example and darken it down.  Without those bold colors, it might just get muddy looking and lose that afternoon warmth.

All this speculation is just that: speculation.  Although I certainly hope it isn’t idle.  What I’m taking from this is questions, a specific curiosity that I want to explore.  I personally prefer the bright, airy feel of the Napa shots, and it’s a style that I want to continue to work with.  But I have to wonder – and I’m sure I’ll try this as soon as I get the chance – what would happen if in the midst of shooting one style I took just a minute to do a 180 and try the exact opposite.

Photography is unpredictable and the results might be surprising.  At the very least they’d be interesting.

The goal is to get in, setup, and be ready and waiting by the time they’re all there so we can get them into position, arranged by families within the group, and shoot the thing before anyone starts to burn out.  Then we can disperse them to relax and do smaller family shots, without the tension of keeping everybody “on deck.”

The last time they had a group shot done, they all wore black and white, shot against a white wall, and processed the prints as B&W.  It’s a look that they like, so we’re recreating it this time.  The background will be a large off-white wall in the house, which I’ll blast to white and adjust in post.

Lighting will be in the form of a pair of Speedlites with shoot-through umbrellas, high up on the stands and shooting across the group, one from each side, with some feathering.  To keep everyone sharp, I’m going to need a small f-stop, f/8 or f/11, although the properties of a wide-angle lens will help maintain DOF.  The trick is to light everyone nicely, without head shadows, so between the umbrellas and the aperture, I’ll need to push out a lot of light – I wouldn’t be surprised if the Speedlites fire at half or even full power.

I’ll be using the 7D and shooting RAW, but I’ll have the Picture Style set to monochrome; it won’t affect the RAW file at all, but the preview image is always a JPEG, and will display in B&W with that setting, which will let me get an idea how the final photo will look after conversion.  Since we’re working in a confined space I’ll be using the 17-40mm L.

In a perfect world I’d be able to get a third Speedlite in behind the group, to both kick up the white wall and add some separation between it and the group.  I doubt I’ll have enough room for that here, so what I may do instead is put it camera-center on the boom stand and crank it down from overhead as a fill/booster.

Anytime that you’re working in a fixed space with a large group, you end up with two primary variables.  The first is, of course, the people – if you’ve got a good crowd that’s having fun with the process, your life is easy.  Happy people make good photos, whereas a group of people who’d rather not be there will look that way.  The second variable is the room; even when they tell you it will be a fairly open space, you can count on having to move photos off the walls, furniture out of the way, and distracting knick-knacks from the mantle.  It’s Murphy’s Law that there will always be a sofa in the exact spot you need to place a lightstand, so the trick is to come prepared – Justin Clamps, booms, and when all else fails, Voice-Activated Lightstands (also known as assistants).

In theory, this should be a straight-forward gig.  Hopefully reality plays out that way!

What I mean by that is, you have to make sure that the job is going to be fair to both of you. I’m going to be optimistic and think that most professional photographers handle this pretty well. The problem is that there are now more camera owners than ever before trying to pass themselves off as photographers. The digital revolution has made it possible for anyone who likes taking snapshots to buy quality, semi-professional gear. But owning a wrench set doesn’t make you a mechanic, and owning a camera doesn’t make you a photographer.

There are a lot of good photographers out there, plying their trade, booking gigs. There are also a lot of hacks – rank amateurs who think that a big camera qualifies them to take on paid work. It does not. The camera does not make the photographer. Unfortunately, the client pool has already been influenced by these people, and they’re landing gigs.

So when a client comes to you and tells you that they want you to shoot their wedding, the first thing you need to do is decide if you’re capable of taking it on. Have you shot a wedding before? Been second shooter at a wedding? Ever even attended a wedding? This is someone’s wedding we’re talking about – one of the biggest days of their life, a day that will (hopefully!) only happen once. Basically, if you screw it up they’re not going to forgive you. It’s a big responsibility, and you need to know that you can handle it and meet their expectations. If you can’t, or have doubts, you should thank them for thinking of you and politely decline.

Speaking of expectations… Let’s go with the wedding theme; bride-to-be comes to you, asks you to shoot her wedding. You’re capable, have some experience, and are cool with it. So you say you’re interested. What you need to know right then is, what are her expectations?

Does she expect you to show up for just the service, or does she want you there from the time she gets out of bed until the last drunken guest leaves the reception? Does she expect to buy prints, get an album as part of the package, or end up with a DVD of images to print herself?

Then of course the biggie – how much is she looking to spend? When I meet a potential clients, I ask a series of questions about how the wedding is setup, what the schedule is like, how much coverage they want, and how they want the images. Based on their answers, I determine which of my packages fits best, and that’s the quote I give. If there isn’t a package that’s quite right, I try to work out a custom quote. (Clients, if you’re talking with your photographer and he’s agreeing to everything you ask for, nodding yes like a bobblehead doll, without asking any questions, that’s not a good thing. He needs to know at least general details to figure out if he can handle the job, and calculate a quote.)

But let’s say you give a quote, say 6 hours of coverage for $1000, plus prints (I’m making up numbers here) and the bride-to-be comes back and says that’s too high, she was expecting to get all of that for $300. What then? For that amount of coverage, $300 is very low. The problem is, we both know that there are plenty of amateurs (hacks & otherwise) out there who would take it. So you’re left asking if you sell yourself out and take it, since it’s $300 more than you have now, or if you counter/turn the job down.

Personally, I would counter such a low offer. Something along the lines of, “If money is tight, we could see about adjusting the coverage and print/disk options to find a price that works for you.” The bride-to-be may work with you, or she may drop you right there and go find someone willing to do it for her price. (In which case, wish her the best of luck, and move on.)

If you’re in this position as a client, however, you should be asking yourself if you really want to hire someone who is agreeing to do a job for 70% less than their asking price? The old saying holds: you generally get what you pay for. Why is he willing to work that cheap? Because he’s bored? Not likely. So what it really comes down to is, are you willing to risk your wedding photos to save a few dollars?

How about the bride-to-be who tells you that the ceremony takes place in a church lit by candlelight, at night, no flashes allowed. You’re shooting with an f/4 telephoto lens and know that you’re going to need ISO 3,000,000 (which looks like crap). Your gear/skills simply can’t handle this. Do you rent/buy new gear, knowing that you can handle it then? Do you explain to the client that the conditions are very bad for photography, and that the photos may not be the best, & maybe offer to give them a break, or re-create the ceremony photos afterwards, when you can use a flash? Or do you just go for it and hope they don’t know the difference? (Hint: A&B are good, C indicates that you’re a hack.)

If your client is operating in a venue that is simply going to be impossible to work in, you need to say so. It’s her photos on the line, and your reputation. You don’t want to send her substandard photos. She didn’t pay for substandard. She’ll be upset, and she’ll be sure to mention it to other brides-to-be who ask about you as a photographer, and there goes your future business. (On the other hand, you’ll have some clients who, after explaining the situation to them, are insistent upon hiring you. In which case get everybody to sign a document stating that they understand the situation, and then do your best to make it work out.)

I’ll end with one more scenario – the dreaded Client-from-Hell (known to wedding photogs as Bridezilla). This is the client who, from the moment you start, is making demands. This is the client who thinks they know something about photography because their cousin’s boyfriend owns a camera. They want to tell you how to do your job in ways that either go completely against your style/procedures, or even defy the laws of physics.

Don’t waste your energy on these people. That sounds harsh, but it’s true – a Client-from-Hell will suck the life out of you, and then they’ll complain about the results, nitpicking endlessly. And usually they’ll be unhappy about something that they demanded in the first place. It will not be a good business relationship, and the client won’t have anything nice to say about you afterwards. Better to politely decline from the start – you’re not the right person for them, very sorry, best of luck elsewhere. Smile, close the door behind them, and breath a sigh of relief for dodging that bullet.

From the client side, there are Photographers-from-Hell out there, too. If you go to meet with the guy and he tells you how your wedding is going to proceed, demands that you follow his timeline, and pretty much makes it clear that he’s going to hold you hostage, run away. Fast. You need to understand that a good photographer will need to be somewhat forceful – he may need to reposition people, raise his voice to make everyone hear him as he directs them to their places in the formals, etc. He may even need to tell an interloping guest to stop shooting over his shoulder and interfering with the gig – this is all common stuff. But if he wants to march in like a mob boss and tell you how you’re going to run your own wedding, find someone else.

At the end of this very long post, the point is this: not every client is a good match for every photographer. And as a photographer, if you are going to do paid work, you need to make sure that when you accept the client’s money, you are going to be able to deliver your best work to them at the end of the gig. If you can’t handle the conditions of the shoot, or cannot stand your client’s personality (or are just a hack who thinks he’s good enough to “try out” this wedding thing), then it is better for everyone if you don’t take the job. It will save you the frustration and agony of appearing inept, it will save the client from bad results, and it will preserve whatever reputation you may have established.

As a client, hopefully this will help you get some idea of how the other side works. You should interview prospective photographers. You should look at their work and read their websites and contact them with questions. I’ve pointed out some warning signs to look for; take notice of them.