Just to add another angle to this subject - a lot of people will use no filters at all. Blending two exposures has the exact same effect as grad-ND, is a lot more versatile and a whole lot cheaper

plus you aren't putting yet another layer of glass in front of your expensive lens.

of course, simple ND filters for slowing your shutter speed down can't be recreated, but if it's just balancing the sky with the ground you're after, it's somthing to think about.

Phew glad I saw this in time - I'll be thirty on friday , giving me just enough time to sneak into category 1 - whoo hoo!

I've seen this argument surface a few time in various places. People fuming because they can't make a living from photography anymore. People who think that their photos are worth what THEY deem them to be worth, and it's everyone elses fault for devaluing them. Wedding photographers who believe themselves to be in some sort of sacred industry that is being worn away by unscrupulous (sp?) individuals selling cheap images, or doing it for free.

Things have changed and what was once a high earning industy isn't the same anymore. The sooner people realise this and stop whinging the better for them. If there are people selling images cheaper than the next..well..why not? it's market forces, if it can be cheaper then it generally will. People won't stop bringing digital cameras to weddings just because we don't want to put the photographer out of buisness.

At the end of the day if someone prefers to pay nothing for an image they took, over paying sometimes very high prices for an image someone else took then who's problem is it? Not the customer that's for sure.

That not quite the same Lemmy - if someone steal your image you still actually have it. Not the same with the camera analogy but I see your point.

I actually, however, agree with Tim. For the vast majority of us photography theft is just not a problem. Firstly, there are so many images out there the chances of a photo-robber stealing yours is low. Secondly, if somebody stole my images the forst thing I would ask myself is (apart from "why the hell would they want that?!?!?" :shock would be, well what would I have done with it? if it becomes a modern day Ansel Adams classic, then of course it wouldn't be hard to prove it's mine, get the royalties and catch up the posts on this forum from the carribean. But that won't happen, I think.

If you're selling images as a living then it's a different story and you should protect you images as you see fit. but isn't posting low-res images enough? who wants to blow up a crappy low-res copy of you image? probably the same sort of person who wouldn't mind a picture with a watermark on it. and at the end of the day if they want that then they can have it.

Incidentally I do have a chuckle when I see photos of er..."average" standard with a great big watermark splashed across it. you can almost picture the owner sleeping beside his PC with a shot gun in his hand, as if he's expecting the greatest photo-heist in history to be just round the corner, and tomorrows papers to read "Daves sunset photo from the weekend stolen - reward £1m"

I did the photograhy for my sisters wedding - never again! The photos came out great, better than I expected and everyone was happy with them, but it was a lot of preparation and afterwards the editing took me ages. A lot of that is down to my editing skills though

I am sending my sister the jpegs so she can sort out the album/photobook herself - I've just started life as a junior doctor so you can imagine I haven't exactly got time for this now! If you're not too bothered about copyrighting somebodies photos for yourself (which some people seem to be) then this might be an option. Less work for you and less cost for them...

You'll see a lot of doomsayers (especially on another well known forum) who say if you've never shot a wedding before don't do it and tell them to hire a pro, but I reckon if you know what you're doing with a camera (which you obviously do from your portfolio), you're clear with them what is possible and what's not then go for it.

depending on how well you know the couple I'd consider getting something in writing though. sounds excessive but I do think that sometime people look at professional wedding photographers portfolio and think "X has got a good camera, I'm sure he could do photos like that". Luckily I haven't had any comments about my photos along the lines of "you must have a really great camera" yet

Nick

Here are the photos by the way link

I think you need more options in your poll - for instance I would have rented a lens for my sisters recent wedding, but that would have been the only time I would and I can't see myself needing to again. SO I vote "I would rent a lens" but very rarely. I actually looked at renting a lens but there's very little out there.

Congratulations! you must be really pleased - not only with the prize but with the photo itself!

well done,

Nick

Sold

Here are some pictures - no comments about my product photography skills please

[IMG]http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y19/nhearle/_NIC6922.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y19/nhearle/_NIC6925.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y19/nhearle/_NIC6928.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y19/nhearle/_NIC6929.jpg[/IMG]

oh, I'll post pics as soon as I get a minute