# Wedding in the Future, need advice now....



## pecco22 (Feb 28, 2012)

Hello everyone,
 this is my first post to this forum. I have been asked to do a wedding for a friend that will not happen for about 1 year. I want to start getting some gear to do this. I want to get it asap so I can practice in the meantime. That being said, right now I only have $2,000 to spend. I am using a D5100 so the crop factor does play a part in my decision. Again I know the budget is low right now, but I am looking for the best bang for the buck and be able to do the job right. I would like to get a Nikon 50mm f1.8G AF-S. other than that I am not sure what way to go. I have researched many lenses and 17-55 f2.8 is great and so is the 70-200 f2.8 but the price on them is just making it to hard.  your help and thoughts would be great.


----------



## MLeeK (Feb 28, 2012)

You are going to need those two lenses to cover a wedding-and a speedlight at the very least. Sigma makes a great 70-200 f/2.8 as well as a 24-70 f/2.8. Tamron makes a great 17-50 f/2.8. Add to those a WHOLE lot of knowledge and a few prayers. 
$2000 budget:
Used Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 II EX DG APO Macro HSM AF 579-306 B&H $749.95
Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II VC LD AFB005NII700 B&H Photo $649.
Nikon SB-700 Speedlight Shoe Mount Flash 4808 B&H Photo Video $326.95
And a GOOD photography class with a mentor who does wedding photography.


----------



## 1holegrouper (Feb 28, 2012)

For starters I would get a Sto Fen diffuser- OK you could get a 'Fong Dong' if you must, good flash and an ETTL cord and a few good books to learn lighting. For equipment there is no ceiling to what could be spent. A Rolls Royce could be cheaper. (I'm imagining dual Hasselblads, Broncolor lighting equipment, an entourage of assitants,  etc lol) That may be nice but isn't really necessary. Find out if flash will be allowed inside before you spend any money. Weddings are very surprise-prone and tricky and you get only one chance for most shots. You will want backups of everything and should ask a local wedding photographer whose showcase gallery you admire if you can shadow/volunteer for a few weddings (this is the best way to practice). Maybe you can rent a 70-200mm? This will allow you to observe how they work with the people, save and deliver the photo data, plan the lighting, shooting, unexpected, etc... Also, try to get an assitant to help you. You can do this. Don't let anyone tell you that you can't. (there are so many people who get some equipment and think 'wala, I'm now a wedding photographer- this causes the real and budding pros out there to develop sort of a shotgun negative reaction to those that are asking to learn) Just realize that a good wedding shoot is much harder than most people realize. A great wedding shoot takes a lot of well guided experience. Equipment plays 'some' part but experience/know how trumps it every time. Have fun!


----------



## pecco22 (Feb 28, 2012)

I understand that experience is needed and thats why I am asking about all of this over a year in advance. I may even be able to come up with more than 2,000 but right now thats the budget. 

@MLeeK will Autofocus work on those lenses with a D5100?


----------



## CCericola (Feb 28, 2012)

Rent what you need


----------



## 1holegrouper (Feb 28, 2012)

pecco22 said:


> I understand that experience is needed and thats why I am asking about all of this over a year in advance. I may even be able to come up with more than 2,000 but right now thats the budget.



I totally agree. You have been given a gift. One year in advance is great! Also, you can do quite alot with $2,000


----------



## Robin Usagani (Feb 28, 2012)

Wedding and a new shooter is always a sensitive subject.  While 1 year is plenty of time to get ready, the odd is really against you. I have seen some good weeding shooters who learned in a short amount of time, and I have seen bad wedding shooters who have been shooting for a while.


----------



## pecco22 (Feb 28, 2012)

Schwettylens said:


> Wedding and a new shooter is always a sensitive subject.  While 1 year is plenty of time to get ready, the odd is really against you. I have seen some good weeding shooters who learned in a short amount of time, and I have seen bad wedding shooters who have been shooting for a while.



Thank you for your thoughts however it doesnt really help much. I understand I am relatively new. thats why I came here to ask questions and get advice. I know I am good enough to do this job right. I may even take it further and continue to do weddings. Again the help I am asking for is what can I get for  around $2,000 that will allow me to do the job.


----------



## MLeeK (Feb 28, 2012)

Hmmmm... I don't know anyone in schenectady to hook you up with. I know a girl in Yonkers that would take you on for a wedding or two though! She shoots Canon though. 

Yes they'll auto focus. here's a list... or partial list of what will auto focus on your camera 
Flickr: Discussing Tips:Lenses that Autofocus with the D5100. in Nikon D5100


----------



## Robin Usagani (Feb 28, 2012)

It will help you proof me wrong.


----------



## MLeeK (Feb 28, 2012)

Schwetty is right. You need the negatives so you have some acid in your spine to prove them wrong. <br><br>I have a ton of resources depending on what you are working on. Where are you at in your knowledge to date? <br>Are you shooting in full manual? Do you FULLY understand the exposure triangle and how to use it to create exposure and to creatively control the image? <br>What lenses do you currently own? What other gear? <br>Are you shooting in raw or jpeg? Why? <br>What are you using for editing and post processing?


----------



## MLeeK (Feb 28, 2012)

WTF? I've had that happen a few times??? I have no clue what I do to make it happen! LOL!


----------



## Bossy (Feb 28, 2012)

pecco22 said:


> Thank you for your thoughts however it doesnt really help much. I understand I am relatively new. thats why I came here to ask questions and get advice. *I know I am good enough to do this job right.* I may even take it further and continue to do weddings. Again the help I am asking for is what can I get for  around $2,000 that will allow me to do the job.



I'd love to see your portfolio!


----------



## pecco22 (Feb 28, 2012)

ok to answer your questions.... Nikon D5100, kit lens 18-55, Tamron 70-300mm. I shoot mostly in Manual. I shot in RAW only. I have photoshop CS3, Lightroom 3.5 and also several of the NIK software. I believe I understand exposure very well. I dont mind hearing negatives because it doesnt make me want to prove them wrong. But when I am asking for thoughts on how to move forward in my plans, and only getting the "the odd is really against you." comment doesn't help me.  I know everyone doesnt succeed in this field but I would think encouragement would be a better fit here. Just my 2cents and I don't mean any disrespect either.


----------



## MLeeK (Feb 28, 2012)

The thing you have to understand is that we get everybody in the world here who has just bought a new camera from Best Buy and is now ready to shoot weddings professionally. And in our experience it RARELY-if ever-turns out well. It usually costs someone at the very least a friendship, if not thousands of dollars. 
Those of us who are shooting weddings are looking at this post and quaking in our shoes for you-or saying "OH, LORD... another one..." And usually the poster doesn't really want to receive the advice they NEED. 
We're being light as hell on you right now... What you NEED to do isn't even touched upon here yet. 

After we see these posts we often later see one from another new member saying "I photographed my friend's wedding and I need HELP!" 

So, you're going to have to deal with our outlook and telling you that this is NOT wise (we do have many years of experience) and the odds are NOT in your favor, or you are going to have to go elsewhere. Where they'll tell you the same thing... 

So, either suck it up and scramble in this year, or go to that somewhere else.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Feb 29, 2012)

Bestbuy photographers ftw


----------



## AtomFoto (Feb 29, 2012)

As MLeek said...Oh good Lord, not another one!  _*Too*_ _*many*_ "professional" pho-tog-waphers diluting the already saturated market with their Best Buy gear they got for Christmas from their husband/Mom/Boyfriend etc ad nauseum...and thus driving down industry standards, prices, and concurrently inflating customer expectations of pricing VS product received....

...wait, I'm sorry, what was the question again?

Adam
AtomFoto
http://www.atomfoto.com


----------



## tirediron (Feb 29, 2012)

AtomFoto said:


> ...and thus driving down industry standards, prices, and concurrently inflating customer expectations of pricing VS product received....


Better known as "capitolism" and "free-market economy".  There is another system, but I understand it's not as popular.  

BTW... welcome to the forum!


----------



## AtomFoto (Feb 29, 2012)

tirediron said:


> AtomFoto said:
> 
> 
> > ...and thus driving down industry standards, prices, and concurrently inflating customer expectations of pricing VS product received....
> ...



Thanks. Not a big fan of that other system either...

Oh ya mean "supply & demand"....duh. But cmon, admit it...there were never this many "pwo-fession-al" photographers in the film era. Advancing technology (both hardware and web) has made it easier than ever for any old schmo to try their hand at, what they soon realize is...kind of a hard job. But yes...the cream does rise.

Adam
AtomFoto
http://atomfoto.com


----------



## 12sndsgood (Feb 29, 2012)

add that in with the internet yoru not just seeing photographers from your neighborhood. your in contact with photographers all over the country. 10-15 years ago you'd hang out with one or two people and maybe a photography group or somesort. now you are on the interent, on photography forums blah, blah , blah, add that in with a bad econemy where people are out of work and looking for ways to support thereselves and there family. there are tons of reasons why there are so many photographers.    i see it as you have a couple of options. you can adapt and overcome or you can blame hack photographers for killing your business.  if people get tired of these posts, why bother opening them and reading and bothering to make a responce. either help the guy out, or move on to a post you enjoy.


----------



## MLeeK (Feb 29, 2012)

12sndsgood said:


> add that in with the internet yoru not just seeing photographers from your neighborhood. your in contact with photographers all over the country. 10-15 years ago you'd hang out with one or two people and maybe a photography group or somesort. now you are on the interent, on photography forums blah, blah , blah, add that in with a bad econemy where people are out of work and looking for ways to support thereselves and there family. there are tons of reasons why there are so many photographers.    i see it as you have a couple of options. you can adapt and overcome or you can blame hack photographers for killing your business.  if people get tired of these posts, why bother opening them and reading and bothering to make a responce. either help the guy out, or move on to a post you enjoy.


I am pretty confident I DID help in my responses. Yeah we get tired and our outlook isn't good and I said so. And will say so again. Doesn't mean I won't help, but it does mean that the OP has to understand why he/she is getting the flack too. If they don't want to deal with the skepticism they can choose to go elsewhere (as it seems they did) or they can get over it and grow. The skeptics aren't going to go away and they're going to be EVERYWHERE. Deal or ?


----------



## 12sndsgood (Feb 29, 2012)

my responce wasn't really intended for you MLeeK, your actually helpful and have helped me. its more intended for those that like to jump into a post, ***** and moan about the "new photographers" without bothering to help. its kinda almost become like a bandwagon thing because nobody wants to be seen as the new startup business.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 29, 2012)

12sndsgood said:


> my responce wasn't really intended for you MLeeK, your actually helpful and have helped me. its more intended for those that like to jump into a post, ***** and moan about the "new photographers" without bothering to help. its kinda almost become like a bandwagon thing because nobody wants to be seen as the new startup business.



I don't think we are in any way obligated to help those that are *"Pro's" (charging for work)* when they are onhere* asking simple beginner questions*! We see a lot of that... and I for one will continue NOT helping those *(After all... they are PROS!!!!.. why would they need help with something as simple as basic exposure, or basic focus?)*! The OP here isn't in that category "YET!"... unless he is charging for this wedding that is happening a year from now.


----------



## Patrice (Feb 29, 2012)

A few months back I started a thread about photographers asking advice for and upcoming first wedding shoot. Not all of those advice seekers are total noobies, they may have a decent foundation in knowledge and technique as well as business acumen, but it's their first wedding and they want some advice. As an example might be this OP who is simply asking what equipment is available on a $2000 budget.

So, for future reference, you folks asking advice about an upcoming first wedding shoot, if you simply change the wording from "upcoming wedding" to "upcoming friend's social gathering" you might avoid a lot of negative press. Just a thought.


----------



## MLeeK (Mar 1, 2012)

12sndsgood said:


> my responce wasn't really intended for you MLeeK, your actually helpful and have helped me. its more intended for those that like to jump into a post, ***** and moan about the "new photographers" without bothering to help. its kinda almost become like a bandwagon thing because nobody wants to be seen as the new startup business.



I am totally confident when I say that NO ONE here has a problem with new startup businesses. New businesses are fantastic and we spend time helping them all of the time-when they have at least the basics of photography. HUGE difference between new, startup business photographer than someone without a clue of how to adequately use a camera.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Mar 1, 2012)

well maybe im wrong here but i never saw the op mention anything about being a pro or being paid. all i saw what that he agreed to shoot a friends wedding and he has a year to get where he needs to be. that to me is worlds diffrent then joe blow coming on and saying ive got a customer coming over in an hour and i need to learn about exposure. and yet this post still has remarks about" best buy photographers ftw" and " omg another pro photog" remark by another member. like i said. if your offering advice to me its not a big deal. but don't just come into a post to make a crappy remark about someone without even knowing the facts. thats all. 

don't get me wrong. i dont have anyting wrong with ripping into someone when they are charging and asking basic questions. but this doesnt appear to be one of those and it's annoying to see the whole battering in every post when the origonal poster never even mentioned getting paid.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Mar 1, 2012)

MLeeK said:


> 12sndsgood said:
> 
> 
> > my responce wasn't really intended for you MLeeK, your actually helpful and have helped me. its more intended for those that like to jump into a post, ***** and moan about the "new photographers" without bothering to help. its kinda almost become like a bandwagon thing because nobody wants to be seen as the new startup business.
> ...





careful when you use absolutes. i can imagine allot of people being upset if those business's were moving in next door to them lol.


again guys, my post wasn't intended for anyone who was helping. just meant for those who come in. make a snide comment about someone without knowing any info. to me, no diffrent then trolling.


----------



## cgipson1 (Mar 1, 2012)

12sndsgood said:


> well maybe im wrong here but i never saw the op mention anything about being a pro or being paid. all i saw what that he agreed to shoot a friends wedding and he has a year to get where he needs to be. that to me is worlds diffrent then joe blow coming on and saying ive got a customer coming over in an hour and i need to learn about exposure. and yet this post still has remarks about" best buy photographers ftw" and " omg another pro photog" remark by another member. like i said. if your offering advice to me its not a big deal. but don't just come into a post to make a crappy remark about someone without even knowing the facts. thats all.
> 
> don't get me wrong. i dont have anyting wrong with ripping into someone when they are charging and asking basic questions. but this doesnt appear to be one of those and it's annoying to see the whole battering in every post when the origonal poster never even mentioned getting paid.



I said nothing negative to this OP or about this OP! I would even help this OP, but there are others that have already said what was needed. My response was more to your comment about the "bandwagon thing".. which I consider totally unjustified!


----------



## 12sndsgood (Mar 1, 2012)

and like i had said to Mleek my origonal post was just for those that jump in, attack the poster without offering any advice and not even knowing if its just a guy trying to better his skills and help a friend, versus someone who bought a camera yesterday and opened shop today.


mainly for this comment. it was his second post on this site.

"As MLeek said...Oh good Lord, not another one!  _*Too*_ _*many*_ "professional" pho-tog-waphers diluting the already saturated market with their Best Buy gear they got for Christmas from their husband/Mom/Boyfriend etc ad nauseum...and thus driving down industry standards, prices, and concurrently inflating customer expectations of pricing VS product received...."


----------



## pecco22 (Mar 2, 2012)

I have not gone anywhere. I have just been busy.  I completely understand getting harsh criticism. My main issue with the posts within the thread are: I was new to the forum and without first finding out any details about me, gear or knowledge It was assumed I knew nothing. I do have a bit of knowledge and skills with photography. I did do some film work also. I came here hoping to fill in some blanks because yes I am a new to DSLR. I was hoping to get some helpful information, but we can see from this thread, that isnt the case. 

@MLeek, you have helped me greatly and I thank you for that. 

All this being said I have broad shoulders and will continue to grow and learn what I dont know. I will continue to be a part of this forum in hopes to learn from those who have "been there, done that".

To answer other questions: I do plan on making a buisiness of photography. However, now is not the time. I know I am not ready. It is in the future my plan and goal. Thats why I asked about gear on a budget. I want to keep my cost down as best I can until I know I have what it takes to do it right.

Thank you everyone for your thoughts, whether positive or negative, because I know I will get honest answers here!


----------



## MLeeK (Mar 2, 2012)

12sndsgood said:


> MLeeK said:
> 
> 
> > 12sndsgood said:
> ...


I have no problem with my absolutes. I am pretty confident that those of us who are experienced would be just fine with a brand new startup right next door. There's a new one on every street corner every other day. They do a great job of putting themselves out of business and making me look even better with no help from me. And if they're going to stick around? I'll be glad to mentor and pass on information. Their customer is not my customer. My customer NEEDS me to get what I do. No one else does what I do the way I do it. Can't get that from the 4 other photographers in my little town of 1600 people. Of those 4? I network routinely with 2 of them and I am a sounding board every so often for the other two.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Mar 2, 2012)

wait your changing, first you said no one here, now your saying none who are experienced    i understsand what you mean though.  im not quite to the point yet of being that unique, that's my goal though.   im in a much larger area. there are over 1600 kids in the high school alone where im at. thinking we have 30-40 photographers in my area, so I have my work cut out for me thats for sure.


----------



## lamar (Mar 2, 2012)

Pecco, you can do it!  From one newbie to another, I know, because I've been there myself.  While I'm a newbie to this forum, I'm not a youngster age wise.  Many year ago, I faced the same situation as you, but in the film days.  I just jumped in there and it went well as I did weddings (and other things) as a part time business for 25 years or so.  I still do a few things like high school reunions, etc...but no weddings, they're too demanding mentally and physically now.  I did one wedding after going digital and that was a case where a young girl in our church needed a photographer for cheap (his dad was very ill, etc) and we did it for a wedding present, but I told her it was my first wedding using digital equipment and it came out pretty well.  I did 200- 300 weddings over the years with film.  I say all this just to let you know where I'm coming from.

To be ready in a year, decide on the equipment, buy it soon and practice...make sure you have the techniques down that you plan to use and practice with those at any type event that you can shoot...church functions, company parties, birthday parties, etc.  Volunteer to do them, so you get the practice doing things under pressure, because the pressure of getting a wedding right can be tremendous as others have pointed out.  If you can talk another wedding photographer into letting you go along with them, that's a real bonus!! To me the trickiest part of shooting a wedding (exposure and color balance wise) might be when combining flash with ambient/other light.  Also, you must use some flash technique/equipment to keep it from being a head on straight flash.  Get the flash up, use a diffuser, multiple flashes, etc.  it doesn't have to be really expensive or complicated, but study others flash techniques and their results and decide what you're going to do. Do you know how to balance daylight/flash exposures in case you shoot some outside?  Not just color balance, but the exposure itself.

Read, read, read...besides books, I'm sure there must be some online forums that specialize in wedding photography as well as magazines, etc.

There is a lot to deal with at weddings besides the equipment. BTW, you MUST have backups for everything.....at least two of everything....bodies do break, flashes quit working, batteries die, etc!  But the people problems can be killers...SOMEBODY will be late!  There will be pressure to hurry up with the pictures so they can get to the party, etc.  When are you going to shoot the pictures, before or after the wedding or both?  Does the bride want the groom to see her before the wedding? Do you and the bride want some traditional family group shots and wedding party shots or all "candids"? How do you align/pose groups and individuals?  Who is going to make sure the dresses are straight and the flowers held properly, etc...here's where an assistant can really be helpful.

In a way, digital is better than film days...at least you can get an idea of what you shot...exposure, sharpness, etc but on the other hand, when I was shooting film, I did my part as best I could and the professional labs I used did the part you now have to do on the computer.....color balance, exposure correction (yep, I missed a few and they saved me most of the time).  Of course they did all the printing and I delivered proofs, then had the enlargements printed of the bride's selections.  Are you going to deliver digital files right out of the camera or are you going to have prints made of her selections or a book or ??  Working on each digital file takes a good bit of time.

What does the bride expect from you?  Does she know you've never shot a wedding, if not, tell her!  If you're doing this for a present (no cost), that's great, but make sure she knows what you're giving her...files, prints, book, album, whatever. if you're charging something (you can get more work than you can stand if you work for free) give her a price that's considerably lower than the going rate.  That helps you get started and gives her something in return for the risk she's taking since you have no wedding experience.  We all have to do our first wedding sometime (if you're going to ever do them)!

Back to the equipment for a minute...I think equipment is too often a hangup, but all the rest of the stuff is probably more important in the long run.  A good eye for a picture, timing, ability to deal with the people, being organized, being able to handle the post processing/printing, business sense, etc, etc.  Sure, you must have adequate and reliable equipment, but you don't have to have top of the line or the latest thing.  At a wedding you're going to need a wide angle lens, esp with the crop sensor and up through the "normal" and mid telephoto (100 - 135mm) range for sure!  How long a lens do you really need....I don't know for sure.  In my day not very much, but I don't know what all type shots are in vogue today...

Go over the whole plan with the bride WELL in advance of the wedding.....does she have special shots she really wants?  Can you do them? Go to the church or location of the wedding in advance.... AT LEAST attend the rehearsal.  Tell the wedding party and family where you expect them to be and when....let them know how important it is to be there and on time!  Make sure who all the bride wants in her pictures and make sure they get the word.  Nothing kills you time wise much worse than a wedding party member being late or you have the bride's family all lined up for a big group shot and someone says, oh we need Uncle Joe in this picture and he's over at the reception hall, etc!

Be prepared for uncomfortable situations....family groups with divorces/mixed family groupings or family issues that cause people to be uncomfortable, etc.  Say you call out for the groom's family to come up and then you realize his dad is divorced from his mom and he's remarried to a cute young thing about 20 years younger than his mom and they DON' T want to be in the same picture together (or the same state for that matter).

I'm getting numb from writing...to much thinking at my age...LOL!

Maybe I've given you some things to think about...though not all directly related to photography and equipment.  If you have questions, fire back and I'll see if I can answer.

Best of luck and preparation to you!!


----------



## pecco22 (Mar 14, 2012)

At the risk of upsetting anyone here, I have one more question. I know the D700 is the ideal body for weddings etc. Can the D5100 with good quality lenses be used for the wedding. Eventually I want to upgrade but right now I am trying to keep my costs down. I have the D5100, SB-700, and would rent the nikon 24-70 f2.8 and also the nikon 70-200 f2.8. Will this work or would there be more I would need. Or will this camera body not do the job well enough?


----------



## Trever1t (Mar 14, 2012)

It will do what it will do....but what if it has a malfunction? Weddings are one shot deals. Don't know if anyone has mentioned this already but you need to have a backup.


----------



## pecco22 (Mar 14, 2012)

yes I understand the need for a backup so in all likely hood I would rent or borrow from a friend, another body. but it would have to be the same body that I am used to. I cant see myself renting a different body and learning it on the fly.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Mar 14, 2012)

if you know what church the are having the wedding at. call the church, tell them who your shooting the wedding for and ask to come out for a half hour and get some pictures of the church, insides etc.  and try and go around the same time the wedding will be. this way you will have at least a good idea of wether your camera is going to be up to the task.


----------



## billydoo73 (Mar 18, 2012)

PREFACE: this always comes up.  don't be discouraged.  i shot my first 2 weddings ever with NO EXPERIENCE shooting weddings...i did fine and i have a nice business now shooting weddings on the side.  People seem to think you need years of experience to shoot a wedding.  you don't.  My first 2 weddings were scary, but fun and I loved it.  The clients loved it.  And, they were not friends.

BUT BUT BUT BUT...

That being said, you NEED TO KNOW YOUR CAMERA.  if you have a talent and eye for composition, you do not (i repeat) do not need experience to be a good wedding photographer.  But, you must have the technical skill to work your camera.  You need to know how to make changes in all sorts of light...and quickly.  You need to understand flash.  You need to take advantage of off-camera flash (my preference).  Also, you need to have a solid understanding of the day's flow and timing.  As long as you are good enough to get it done technically, you can do it.  if you are still in AUTO mode and/or you don't have the understanding of exposure manually.  Do not do it.  You can, but your client suffers.  If they know you are a complete rookie up front, then all the power to you and them.  Just be honest.

GEAR:  This is what I use.  I consider this the BARE MINIMUM to properly shoot a wedding...and I carry light.  I am an "Available Light" shooter at heart.

My Gear | Chris Bilodeau

You need 2 bodies.  Period.  You need quality fast glass.  Period.  I like the D3 because it has 2 card slots.  Cards fail.  Expect it.  Don't cry if you go into it hoping it does not happen.

Anyway, I thought I would share.  I see so many people (non-wedding shooters) that bash Noobs.  So, I felt compelled to share.  You have to start some place.

...oh, and I know of Pros with 15+ years of experience that shoot weddings and the images are flat and boring.

Good luck!!!


----------



## 9ballprodigy (Mar 18, 2012)

billydoo73 said:
			
		

> PREFACE: this always comes up.  don't be discouraged.  i shot my first 2 weddings ever with NO EXPERIENCE shooting weddings...i did fine and i have a nice business now shooting weddings on the side.  People seem to think you need years of experience to shoot a wedding.  you don't.  My first 2 weddings were scary, but fun and I loved it.  The clients loved it.  And, they were not friends.
> 
> ...
> 
> ...



I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that this is a rare incidence. The part about shooting weddings with no experience and having it come out well...
If I were given this monumental task and I really couldnt tell my friend that I would not risk our friendship over this, I would do the following:

1) Read and research about wedding photography. Various poses, lighting and angles that are flattering as well as critical moments when you should be shooting like a mad man.
2)I would volunteer to do any kind of set up or second-shooter work for weddings.

Getting new equipement is nice, but I wouldn't splurge until you get a good idea about what you need. You'll find out by doing the steps above. But at the very least, you will need a fast portrait lens (for a crop sensor, the 50mm 1.8g is a good buy), and a speed light.  Rent if possible.


----------



## billydoo73 (Mar 18, 2012)

Rare?  Maybe.  i don't want to sound arrogant because I am no Henri Cartier Bresson, but I have an eye for composition.  I did say that you MUST know your camera and have an understanding of weddings.  That is true.  But, you will never be ready.  Seriously.  Until you do it alone, you always have it easy.  Maybe because I practice medicine as my "day job."  this field tends to throw you to the wolves and you sink to swim.  You have a BASIC understanding of what you studied, but you have to do it right the first time.  if you are used to this mentality, I guess it is comfortable in most walks of life.

that said, you can still do it with no experience.  I have seen it time and again with my professional colleagues.

Susan Stripling shot her first wedding alone with no backup camera...and with no formal training.  She has said this in interviews.  Now, look at her work.  She is up there as one of the best in the USA.  She began around 10 years ago.  Complete Noob.  It happens all the time.


----------



## cgipson1 (Mar 18, 2012)

billydoo73 said:


> Rare?  Maybe.  i don't want to sound arrogant because I am no Henri Cartier Bresson, but I have an eye for composition.  I did say that you MUST know your camera and have an understanding of weddings.  That is true.  But, you will never be ready.  Seriously.  Until you do it alone, you always have it easy.  Maybe because I practice medicine as my "day job."  this field tends to throw you to the wolves and you sink to swim.  You have a BASIC understanding of what you studied, but you have to do it right the first time.  if you are used to this mentality, I guess it is comfortable in most walks of life.
> 
> that said, you can still do it with no experience.  I have seen it time and again with my professional colleagues.
> 
> Susan Stripling shot her first wedding alone with no backup camera...and with no formal training.  She has said this in interviews.  Now, look at her work.  She is up there as one of the best in the USA.  She began around 10 years ago.  Complete Noob.  It happens all the time.



True! But you don't mention the thousands (tens of thousands??) of weddings that occur per year with an inexperienced (amateur) photographer.. and the shots look like CRAP. 

Surely you admit there are far more that turn out bad.. than turn out good? Mostly due to inadequate experience and knowledge and poor equipment choice?

Look at the shots of so many on Facebook.. that advertise they are wedding photographers! Most of them can't even get decent focus or exposures with ambient light! (God help them if they have to use flash!)


----------



## Vtec44 (Mar 18, 2012)

I know my cameras very well, have 4 lenses at a f2.8 or faster, 2 camera bodies, multiple Nikon speed lights, can shoot full manual flash and manual exposure, and I consider myself slightly above average when it comes to lighting.  With that said, I was a 2nd shooter for a wedding this past weekend.  I brought more gear and experience than the primary photographer.  He missed the grand entrance, the cake cutting, the bouquet toss, and the first dance.  I setup my main camera for high speed burst and flash in anticipation for those things so I got them all, in multiple angles, and saved him big time.  Other than hell I'm doing something wrong with advertising my services lol , there are way too many weddings out there done by inexperienced photographers.  The good thing is that I don't do this full time, but I feel for those that are because the market is saturated with many people with nice cameras (including myself hahahah).


----------



## billydoo73 (Mar 18, 2012)

Vtec44, wow!  he missed the first dance?  was he drunk???  LOL

...sounds like you are more on the level of a primary shooter!


----------



## billydoo73 (Mar 18, 2012)

cgipson1,  i guess i am "out of the loop."  i just don't look at a lot of other people's work.  i know there are people out there that buy a DSLR at Best Buy and think they can shoot a wedding.  SCARY!  i am probably not including them because they are a joke.  they also usually shoot 1 wedding and then realize they have no right.  i consider myself pretty good and I still doubt myself a lot.  i constantly study and practice despite the fact that i know how to work a camera.  i am talking more about people that KNOW how to shoot, but after years, still are afraid to try a wedding.  "usually" they would do just fine.


----------



## Vtec44 (Mar 18, 2012)

billydoo73 said:


> Vtec44, wow!  he missed the first dance?  was he drunk???  LOL
> 
> ...sounds like you are more on the level of a primary shooter!



In his defense, his wireless triggers were very flaky (Aperture brand) and didn't fire consistently and always at the worse time.  He had only 1 flash so it was either off camera or on camera.  

As far as being the primary shooter, I think it is more fun to be a 2nd shooter.  You get to enjoy the photography aspect of things more, at least for me.


----------



## pecco22 (Mar 27, 2012)

I thought I'd stop back in and update this.

I now own a D700, SB-700, 50mm f1.8g, 24-70mm f2.8, Sigma 70-200mm f2.8, 105mm f2.8 and have a friend that will be giving some second shooter work. So everything is moving forward. Just gonna continue to learn and practice.  




Just an example of one of my photos.  I know its not a wedding.....


----------



## pecco22 (Aug 1, 2012)

I wanted to stop back in and let you all know that I took the advice from this forum and continued to practice. I have had many small jobs that have turned out very well. I have even picked up a job as a second shooter and have built my skills up a ton just from working with him.  Thank you all for your thoughts, concerns and opinions on my question.  I will be doing a wedding on my own very soon and am very capable of doing the job now.


----------



## pecco22 (Aug 13, 2012)

Would love to hear your thoughts on these photos.  This is my 3rd wedding as a second shooter. I think I am getting good results.


----------



## CCericola (Aug 13, 2012)

Also, if you have the money go to creativelive.com and order the Joe Buissink wedding seminar and the Zack and Jody wedding seminar. You don't have  to do things exactly like they do but it will help you with your flat lighting. Good luck.


----------



## tirediron (Aug 13, 2012)

Thanks for the update!  Your wedding set looks like some good, solid second-shooter work.  #s 4, 5, and 6 would have benefitted from a reflector to bring some more light onto the subject's faces, or better yet an off-camera strobe which would have allowed you to reduce your background exposure and avoid the blown/nearly blown highlights.  I also think greater use of the portrait aspect would have been good, but, overall, not bad!


----------



## pecco22 (Aug 14, 2012)

tirediron said:


> Thanks for the update!  Your wedding set looks like some good, solid second-shooter work.  #s 4, 5, and 6 would have benefitted from a reflector to bring some more light onto the subject's faces, or better yet an off-camera strobe which would have allowed you to reduce your background exposure and avoid the blown/nearly blown highlights.  I also think greater use of the portrait aspect would have been good, but, overall, not bad!



thanks for your thoughts.  The trouble I have is that I am the second shooter. I don't really get to tell him how to shoot or what to use.


----------

