Home >> Learning
Comments on Wedding Photography Part
1
 A
recent thread (Jan, 2001) on the Nikon Mailing List discusses wedding
photography and how some pros require that no other photographer
be allowed to take photos while the pro is on the job. Various messages
were posted back and forth about the ethics and practicality of
such a tactic by a pro. The postings eventually led to how it has
become popular to place disposable cameras on each table so that
the guests can do snapshots for the wedding couples album. Some
were for such trends while others were opposed, gee what else is
new?
The discussion did make me reminisce
back some years ago when some good friends of mine decided to tie
the knot and invited me to the celebration. Not only was I a guest
but I was also an usher who escorted the other guests into the church.
I was not asked to be a photographer for that day and neither did
I volunteer as back then I was very new and green to the craft despite
the very capable equipment I owned at that point. I did bring my Nikon
kit because I wanted photos of my friends celebrating their union
for my own album. My friends had hired a pro for the wedding ceremony
in the church and then for some formals afterwards. The reception
was not covered except for the ubiquitous disposable camera left at
each table for the guests to use.
Watching the pro work was but a brief
introduction to the ways of the wedding photographer. A Hasselblad
medium format kit was used throughout the pro's coverage and from
what I know of Hasselblad, it was some pretty old kit as the lenses
were chrome finished instead of the black paint of more current Zeiss
lenses. A Metz handle mount flash was used but via the Metz's sideways
oriented flash bracket instead of an overhead bracket favored by many
other pros (myself included though I'm obviously no pro). Kodak pro
emulsions were used.
 I
was of course at the church early as an usher and I overheard one
of the church workers discussing the ground rules with the pro regarding
when he was allowed to take photos during the ceremony and when he
was not. Mainly he would have to put the camera down when the minister
was going through the most serious parts of the ceremony. Hearing
this I decided that I should not violate the church rules myself when
I would have a chance to take my own photos and I would also try to
stay out of the pro's way.
During the church ceremony, I did most
of my photography from my pew seat behind all the other guests. I
did venture out into the aisle a couple of times when the bride was
walking down the aisle and when the vows had been exchanged and the
newly wed couple turned to face the guests as man and wife.
During
the entire ceremony though, many guests snapped away with their point
and shoot cameras and of course violated all of the church rules as
when photos were allowed and when they were not. Also of course, none
of the guests would have known about the rules and the minister was
not a hard case either with regard to the rules.
The pro took his shots at the church
and then met us at the scenic Parliament buildings (in Victoria, the
provincial capital). The Parliament building is quite old and ornate
and very photogenic as are most historic buildings. Staircases and
pillars make for some wonderful settings and the pro did his thing
to set us all up for the formals. Since I was going to be a part of
some of the photos I did not have my Nikon kit ready and left it in
the car. The pro session was finished off and we headed back to the
hotel where the reception would be and also where I was staying for
the weekend. The reception would be a chance for me to take a few
candids and action shots for myself and share with my friends should
they desire the shots for their informal album.
It was a fine night and with distant
memories of some embarrassing drunk ups I've had at previous weddings
I keep the revelry in good balance between feeling good and being
an idiot. Besides I had several thousands of dollars worth of Nikon
kit in my hands most of the night so I didn't want to be some bumbling
drunk and risk dropping it. The other guests got into the swing of
things and used the disposable cameras as planned and my friends were
able to obtain quite a few shots of the night but more on that later.
I buzzed around here and there taking shots as I pleased and though
I didn't mean to look like some pro covering a wedding it seemed that
that was the impression I was giving off to some of the guests, like
the bride's mother. During a break in the evening when the master
of ceremony was mentioning some out of town guests the mother of the
bride spoke up and mentioned another group of relatives and requested
the "photographer" to please take some group shots of these honored
out of town guests.
 Ahem…I
could fill a slight tightening around my neck and a warm rosy feeling
on my cheeks as everyone realized she was talking about me. One slight
problem though as I had packed away the Nikon kit in the bag already
and was preparing to unwind with a beer or six as I had used up my
meager supply of color print film and only had slide film with me
in the hopes of being able to make it to downtown Victoria for some
scenic shots. And even then I didn't have that many rolls of slide
film either. I requested a minute to gather my kit from my hotel room
and then proceeded to shoot the rest of the night with slide film,
the super color saturated variety if you know what I mean. Not the
best thing for skin tones and often times a bit too generous in showing
off the prowess of Fuji's capabilities with the color red, as in red,
rosy inebriated faces.
Thankfully I had enough to finish the requested
shots and snapped away at some memorable events such as the bouquet
toss, the garter toss, the cake cutting and of many of the women doing
the Macarena. Hmmm…I guess I just dated myself and the event with
that last comment. Yes, the wedding took place during that crazy time
when that Latin trend was being danced everywhere. I personally would
have preferred all the women dressed for and dancing the Lambada but
now I'm really dating myself here.
The wedding night came to an end and
I survived. I was happy enough with most of the photos I had taken
and I happily gave and my friends happily received a second set of
prints and the negatives. I made come contact sheets of the slides
and told them to pick and choose which ones they wanted, as I preferred
to keep the original slides for myself. Comments about the other pictures
taken, I was not particularly taken with the way the pro's shots came
out but back then that was due to my being use to the saturated colors
from consumer print films. The pro probably used Kodak VPS most of
the way through and the low contrast and flat colors didn't blow my
skirt up. Of course back then I wasn't aware that skin tones would
be of any concern to the pro and couple alike. Also, by the time we
got to Parliament Buildings the sun had ducked under some clouds and
we were near the useful end of the afternoon as far as daylight was
concerned.
Now flat light from an overcast day
is generally something most photographers like for portrait shoots,
as the light is soft from the sun's light being spread out like a
giant softbox by the clouds. But Kodak films, I have found do quite
horribly in overcast conditions and don't do much for portraits. Fuji
is a better choice for overcast conditions as even the new Kodak Portra
films still suffer from becoming muddy looking in such conditions.
The shots from the disposable cameras were, as one who is well versed
in the world of photographilia would expect, not particularly good
from a technical standpoint and almost all the shots were underexposed
but enough turned out a reasonable facsimile of the events that my
friends were happy. As the old adage goes, tis better to have a bad
photo then not to have anything at all. And here I was concerned about
how my shots were going to turn out with some ISO 50 films being used
but then nobody else had anything even capable of touching my SB26
from back then.
 For
the technically minded, I had a Nikon F90x with MB10 grip. The aforementioned SB26 flash directly mounted to
the F90x and 35-70mm f2.8D AF and 80-200mm f4.5-5.6D AF lenses used.
The combination worked faultlessly and commendably and all the shots
that were less then stellar were attributable to me and my penchant
for 45 degree bouncing of my flash all the time with the small built
in bounce card of the SB26. I've said it once, I'll say it again,
45 degree bouncing is great in most situations but DO NOT use with
people with red and ruddy complexions or with older and wrinkled subjects
as these attributes of the subject come out exceedingly well.
Another wedding for another friend
also in Victoria and some more experiences with professional wedding
photography. I was not at the ceremony, which was for family members
only as the couple held the event in their smallish backyard. The
reception was much larger and upscale at a better hotel (yours truly
was dressed in a tailor-made suit but still felt rather shabby among
the black tie and tuxedo crowd - one of my friends was dressed to
kill in full Scottish kilt and regalia). I brought my Nikon kit again
(a bit more upscale too then what I had at the previous wedding) for
my own photos and decked it out to the max with a flash bracket and
off-camera cord. In fact my rig was most certainly more up to date
and capable then the pro's kit but that should never be taken as an
advantage to basic skills and technique of the photographer himself
(or her).
I shot off a couple of rolls of film
(the good stuff this time around like Fuji NHG II 800) during the
reception and always mindful of not to be in the way of the main man,
the pro working the room. So, I shot mostly from my vantage point
of where I was seated instead of wandering around as if I was the
man. I think I was discreet and but frankly it would be hard to be
discreet with a F90x/MB10 on a Stroboframe lashed to a SB28 flash
and the pro noticed me quick enough and came by to say hi. Techno
curiosity as most photographers like to check out the next guy's kit
and I'm as guilty as the next guy.
He was an older but quite pleasant
fellow to talk to and he seemed to warm up to me (I think it was the
equipment). After he ran the course of his film and coverage we sat
down away from the crowd and had a nice chat about the business and
photography in general. From what he told me, I could gather that
he didn't do this full time as two dozen weddings a year would not
be enough to live on and he used his wedding business money for other
interests such as long term foster care children in third world countries.
To that end his equipment, as mentioned earlier, was not a full-blown
state of the art kit. He did own a Hasselblad and Metz flash for use
during the posed formal shots but he used an older Minolta autofocus
kit for the candids. On that particular night he bought a used Minolta
flash to use for the reception and broke one of the cardinal rules
of the trade, always, always know your equipment and test out thoroughly
before a job.
 Mr.
Murphy stepped in and reinforced that rule by ensuring that the flash
would work for a very short period of time and then quickly fail.
A bad circuit in the flash caused the flash to continue recycling
but not charging fully and not being able to output much light, something
that I suffered through myself with my SB28 during my brother-in-law's
wedding. This pro did at least adhere to the other cardinal rule of
always carrying backup equipment (something I did as well when the
SB28 clunked out). The Metz was pulled out and put into service as
an Auto flash. Despite some equipment problems and despite him using
older, less state of the art equipment then me, from what I could
gather of the quality of the pictures as told to me by my friends,
I might have equalled him in about 1 or 2 shots. This was a good wake
up call to me and made me really realize that you just can't be the
"man" with excellent equipment, you got to have the skills to back
up that equipment. One other thing to note for Hassy users, this pro
sold off his Bronica gear to buy into Hasselblad to see if there was
anything to the superiority of Zeiss glass. He said he wasn't sorry
to buy into Hasselblad and Zeiss but neither would he have lost anything
by staying with Bronica.
So what of these comments? I've been
a guest and photographer and I've also been a photographer and guest
meaning being the primo guy with the photos just because I got the
goods. Other photographers (I use the term loosely to mean the point
and shooters and maybe another guy with a good kit) are a fact of
life and it is wholly unrealistic for any pro to expect to be the
only guy allowed to take photos. I would not tolerate a person shooting
over my shoulder or right beside me but you must allow others to record
the events for themselves. And yes, I have set up shots and been ready
to take the shots I needed to have only have two or three guests snapping
away just before and right after I took mine. This is irritating sometimes
but the mouth is always corked because this is not my day but the
couple's and they always seem to want as many shots as people are
willing to take.
I wouldn't have the bad taste to shoot
beside the designated photographer but my other brother-in-law has
when he was asked to take photos during a wedding. He borrowed one
of my flash brackets and my SB27 and TTL cord for the night and as
he put it he was right behind the paid pro almost throughout the pro's
sessions. This pro did not mind at all which was very magnanimous
of him (I know this pro as he shot my own wedding photos and he's
damn good). The pro was not asked to shoot the reception, which was
the main reason why my brother-in-law was asked to take some photos
(a full day session with this pro would have been very expensive indeed).
 Cost
consciousness is a fact of life as well and many couples may feel
that they can get away without a pro or at least a competent friend
with a good kit by using the disposable cameras on each table. This
is a mistake. If the purpose is to just have a prop available for
the guests to become more involved with the festivities then fine
but the results of such props almost never turn out much in the way
of images worthy of an album - although everyone and their grandmother
will want to see them. There will be some couples who do have very
tight budgets and a full blown pro could be as much as the rest of
the combined wedding costs. These are the ones who will be best served
by kindly Uncle Bob who offers his skills (whatever they may be) and
reasonably well-equipped kit but and if they really can't afford the
cost of pro-grade Fuji or Kodak films then some fresh consumer quality
Superia or Royal Gold are better than nothing at all.
It does surprise me how some people
who don't need to, will buy consumer grade film and then process them
at Costco to save a few bucks per roll. A few bucks per roll (?!)
for one of your most cherished events in your life (?!) Geez, live
a little.
Some wedding photography memories of
mine:
- The designated photographer using
a point and shoot to take the shots of the couple going table to
table in a very dimly lit restaurant
- One of the designated photographers
using a top notch Nikon F3 and matching Nikon flash (mounted over
the rewind knob as required by the F3) but what appeared to be a
basic 50mm lens, requiring her to move back and back and even further
back from the couple at each table in order to get everyone in the
frame. I, of course, just pull out my 18-35mm nowadays but at the risk of making all the slim females at the edges
of the frame look like Jenny Craig candidates.
- Yours truly in panic stricken mode
as the SB28 flash fails at bro-in-law's wedding and having to make
do with the less powerful SB27 and yes, size and flash output power
does make a difference.
- Yours truly getting the once over
by a pro while shooting bro-in-law's wedding at a popular park for
weddings. We were shooting by the waterfall and this is perhaps
the most popular spot of all in QE Park and couples wait in line
for their session beside it. The next couple's photographer is looking
at me and I feel an intense desire to slug him with my tripod. Of
course, I decided not to sully my tripod and finished off the shots and moved on, less wise I'd be writing
this in the comfort of a 4x8 prison cell and trying to hide from
the amorous intentions of Bubba.
- Yours truly in another panic stricken
mode when I stupidly decided to risk using the Metz's sideways oriented
flash bracket on a tripod even though I knew the mounting threads
were questionable. Mr. Murphy struck again and my whole Bronica
kit with 150mm lens and Metz flash attached came crashing off
of my tripod and onto the ground. What saved me from having a heart
attack right there? I was setting up on a very wet lawn that was
near-muddy in many places and this wet lawn cushioned the fall enough
so that there was not a speck of damage but much in the way of mud
splatters. Folks, this is why you have filters and lens hoods over
your expensive lenses as my front element was unscathed. When the
night was over I spent two hours cleaning my equipment and had to
soak my muddy filmback in water in order to get all the fine grit
out of it. As a result of this mishap I promptly ordered a Newton
flash bracket for use with my Bronica and Metz flash, a bitch
to handhold though.
Wedding
Photography Comments Part 2
A
Day in the Life of an Amateur Wedding Photographer
Reader's Comments and
Experiences - If you would like to add your comments or experiences
to this page, email me.
Edwin,
Did an internet search for amateur wedding photography and stumbled
upon your site. Some interesting and amusing stories about
wedding photography and I read them with great interest!
I had the pleasure [??] of shooting my cousin's wedding last November.
The cousin's wedding I photographed was our (my wife and me) wedding
present for them. It was a very interesting experience considering
my main interest is outdoor photography of architecture, cityscapes
and country or rural landscapes. Not necessarily something
I would sign on to do again, but at least I can say "been there;
done that." Had remarks from fellow amateurs proclaiming
me a fool, idiot, and a brave soul.
The grueling work to photograph a wedding cannot be completely appreciated
until it is performed as "The photographer." It
is definitely not for the "faint of heart" or "weak
of will." There should be a "brotherhood" for
those who have done it and survived to tell their tale afterward.
My "wedding day" was 10 hours long. It started two
hours before the ceremony and continued to the bitter end of closing
down the reception. That doesn't count the rehearsal and rehearsal
dinner the night before. Shot 9 rolls of film (three short
rolls) and made 296 photographs. They were split between 220
in an M645 for the formal portraits and 35mm for the "photojournalism."
You noted observing a pro using nothing but a standard lens and
the necessity for him to move closer or farther while composing
the images. Yes, it can be a PITA, but that's what I used;
an 80mm f/2.8 on the M645 and a 50mm f/1.2 on the 35mm OM body.
Both are manual focus, manual wind systems. The only exceptions
were three shots using a 35mm Shift for architecturals of the church
early in the morning, and a dozen during the ceremony using an 85mm
on a spare 35mm OM body from a tripod at the back of the church
(which wasn't that deep; a 135mm works better in most churches).
The standard lenses felt natural because I cut my teeth on making
a standard focal length work for everything for quite a few years.
Of even more benefit was the simplicity of using a single lens,
the very bright viewfinder an ultra-fast standard provides for very
fast and accurate focusing, and the natural perspective of the standard
lens. I think of focal length more for perspective control
than for framing an image's boundaries.
Glad to see I'm not alone in having taken on a wedding. I'm
certain there are others, but they don't share their experience
much. It was a unique and very challenging task . . . with
the biggest reward being some of the photographs that turned out
afterward. Thanks for sharing your stories about it.
-- John
Visit John Lind's Web
Site and check out his advice on wedding
photography.
The following two stories
are from Lanie Jones of Live Oak, Florida, who was kind enough to
allow me to share them here.
I had a wedding the other day.....a
woman in a long green formal dress came into the church. I whispered
to someone near me, "who is that?" and was told it was the GROOM'S
MOTHER. Ok. Fine. And then a handsome man in a tuxedo came in and
my informant told me it was the GROOM'S FATHER.
I like to get a shot of
the parents by themselves when they are all dressed up.... sometimes
they like to purchase it later. So I asked them to stand together
for a picture. They stood - woodenly - beside one another. I tried
to loosen them up..."hey, get together, " I said, "like you know
one another..." and they inched a little closer. I shot it. I shot
a close up too.
Then a woman in a red dress
(to the ground, full of sequins) came in and took his arm and they
walked to the side. I found my knowledgeable person and said, "who
is THAT?" and she said, "that's the BRIDE'S MOTHER." ok. After I
took all the pictures of the SIX (yes that is 6) tiny flower girls
and the crying two-year old ring bearer, and the girls with the
bride....I asked for the bride and her parents to stand up for me.
That same man got up and
took the bride's arm, the woman in the red dress took her other
arm and they smiled at me. I reached for the program.
"Mother of the Bride" Sylvia
Williams.
"Father of the Bride" Hal
Williams.
"Mother of the Groom" Elizabeth
Williams.
"Father of the Groom" Hal
Williams.
I thought it was a misprint.
I shot the picture. I asked for her brothers and sisters to come
stand with her....and shot that. And then the spouses and children
of the siblings. Then I chased her away and did the boys with the
groom, the groom's brothers and sisters and then asked for his parents.
And that man got up again. With the lady in the GREEN dress this
time.
By now I was beginning to
feel that my brain had turned from "grey matter" to "grey oatmeal".
I smiled at the man and
said, "THIS is a picture of the GROOM's family" and he said, "yes,
I know. Cody is my son."
AARGH. This was NOT a Mormon
wedding....it was at an Advent Christian Church. I KNOW that brothers
and sisters do not marry in Florida. HOW could this man be father
to both bride and groom? It turns out that the bride's father died
when she was very small and he married her mother. He had divorced
the groom's mother and had more children with the bride's mother.
A few years ago the groom
had come for a visit with his father and met the bride.....and began
dating her. Since she had known no other father, she called Hal
Williams her father. Oh well....Meanwhile I was becoming DIZZY with
it all. I think it is old age. I used be able to cope with little
things like this without losing my cool.....
____________________
Back
twenty- some years ago Sooter in Winnipeg would process 35 mm film
right off the role for about 50 cents (yes, that is 50 American
cents) a picture, in 8 x 10 size! T heir other prices were equally
inexpensive. During one summer when I was camping at Bird's Hill
Park in Winnipeg I got a bug up my derriere that I would "record
all the blooming plants in an acre of land during the summer".
I must have shot 40 rolls of film from June to September, when we
left. I had yellow flowers, white flowers, pink flowers, etc. I
went to the library and looked them up and made long lists. I was
going to publish a book. No one told me that book publishers required
SLIDES at that time, and I was shooting negative film; but it kept
me busy while my husband was superintending the construction of
buildings. (He belongs to Union # 1 - Bricklayers and allied Trades
in Canada).
Anyway,
I found Sooter. I loved them. So when I returned to the States I
brought along a PILE of their mailers. And I used them frequently.
8 x 10 processing here - at that time - was probably $2.00 a picture
right from the roll. So for less than a quarter of that, I would
send the rolls to Sooter.
It was a real boon; I could
offer a prospective bride an entire album of 8 x 10 pictures for
less than most photographers would give them 4 x 5's. I would offer
70 8 x 10's in an album and parents albums in 8 x 10 size also.
Sooter, bless their heart, would make two or three copies at the
same price as the originals.....50 cents a picture!! This was 23
years ago, now.
Well,
one Christmas I did a BIG wedding for an only child. The church
was decorated in hundreds of red Poinsettias and candles. There
were FIVE separate SOLOISTS playing and singing. There were eight
bridesmaids, a Jr. bridesmaid, a couple of flower girls. A BIG wedding.
And they wanted a BIG album of 8 x 10s. I think it was going to
be 120 pictures in a lock leaf album so we could make it HUGE.
The
wedding went off without a hitch. All the equipment worked - each
and every time. I shot pictures and more pictures. I got all the
visitors and relatives and cute pictures of each single person that
was in the wedding party...... Each bridesmaid was getting her very
own little folio which consisted of two full length pictures of
the girl, a couple of close ups, the girl full length with the bride,
and a close up with the bride, and one of the entire wedding party.
These folios are really nice "bridal gifts" instead of
a bracelet that the girl will throw in the drawer and forget. I
sell a lot of them.
Ok. You get the picture.
LOTS of PICTURES. Everything was great. I was really happy. I wanted
this wedding to be special. And since I had sold each mother her
own 8 x 10 album (36 pictures, her choice) I asked Sooter to make
three copies of each frame. I thought about it and decided it would
be EASIER for me if the entire wedding arrived at the same time.
If I put each roll in its OWN LITTLE MAILER it would be spread over
a week......with the mail the way it is. So I put an address sticker
on each individual roll.....and I put each roll in its own mailer
with my return address....and I put all the 35 mm envelopes in a
bigger envelope with my return address. I put the same return mail
sticker on the four rolls of 120 (the wedding party, the parents,
the bride and groom, the cutting of the cake were done on 120),
put THEM in a bigger padded envelope and put return address on it
also. Then I put both envelopes in a small BOX so that all the film
would arrive at Winnipeg at the same time, and I put a note in it
to please mail all the eight by tens back at the same time and I
would gladly pay the difference. And I sat back, excitedly, to
wait.
Three
weeks went by. The bride's mother was beginning to call and ask
me how the wedding was doing. I told her that THREE sets of 8 x
10's at the busiest time of the year would take more time than simply
3 x 5 "proofs". I called Sooter in Winnipeg.
"Lanie?" my customer
service rep said, "we do not HAVE a wedding for you that we
are supposed to make three sets of 8 x 10's ....we have two weddings
from you, but not that one."
I took a slow, deep, calming
breath. I called my post office. They told me that from here mail
went to Jacksonville and from there to Atlanta. I called Jacksonville.
They told me they didn't have any loose film like I was describing.
I called Atlanta. THEY have DOZENS of post offices. I got the main
one. I talked to a man who told me that they had 60,000 rolls of
film a year that "broke out of the mailing envelopes"
and IF they had return addresses on them, they were returned to
the sender. If not, they were burned. I cried, "but how could
they get OUT of the envelopes?" and he said, "mail is
squeezed and the weight often causes the cartridge to make a tear
in the envelope which is not as strong as we think it is."
I asked him to please check on my rolls as they all DID have a return
address sticker on them. He told me that sometimes a
bag would fall off a truck and it would be lying on the side of
the road miles and miles from where it was to go. (Now, Edwin, I
ask you! Was this man a SADIST or not??? What a stupid ass! No one
should EVER be told something like that.)
I
called Sooter and told them to let me know the minute the film arrived.
I called my post office again. I called Jacksonville. I was crying
and incoherent. 10 rolls of 35 mm, 4 rolls of 120. An entire wedding.
An expensive wedding that could not be "reposed" even
if I wanted to rent the tuxedos, have another cake made, and fly
the bridesmaids back.....
I
began walking the floor all night. I prayed. I also swore I would
NEVER again do another wedding. I asked Ted if we could MOVE OUT
OF TOWN and find another place to live.
Another week went by. I
went through the litany of calling all the post offices from here
to Buffalo New York. Was a mail bag missing? Was anyone ELSE looking
for mail that went to Canada? I called Winnipeg.
Canadians
are much smarter than Americans. We have ALWAYS said that......the
salespeople in Canada are more helpful and informed than their counterparts
in the States. Canadians, as a rule, are more willing to take time
to help. They are less stressed and rushed. Or they were back 23
years ago. Ted and I love Canada....it is our "adopted homeland"
and we miss it. We used to go every summer.
Anyway, I was still crying
(literally) when the postmaster in Winnipeg got to me. "Now,
calm down" he said soothingly, "and lets find out what
we can do...."
I
hiccoughed a few times and told him about the wedding. I told him
that I had been sending film to Sooter for the better part of the
year and it always went right through and came right back. I told
him that "THIS TIME I even packed it better. I packed it all
into a small box so that it would arrive at the same time."
He said, "and you had the declaration label made out correctly?"
????????????????
Declaration
label? WHAT WAS THAT?
There is some kind of agreement
between Canada and the US that those heavy paper mailers would go
directly through customs.....but any OTHER type of article had to
have a green "declaration of contents "label on it to
get through customs. My post office had never mentioned it. I knew
nothing about it. And NO, I DIDN'T HAVE ONE ON THE BOX.
He
said, "hang on." and he called over to customs. My box
was sitting on the shelf, waiting for someone from Sooter to come
and claim it. They had called the lab, but the lab didn't have anyone
they could send to the post office after a package.....so they ignored
it.
I
hiccoughed a few more times.... gasped, cried again.... and called
SOOTER. I told them to get a taxi over there to get that film and
get it done and back to me FAST. It was now a month since the wedding
and I was STILL "stalling" the bride and her mother.
I think that was the last
film I have mailed out. I am even scared to use a lab that sends
a truck around to pick up film (what if it falls out of the truck
and doesn't get to the lab). I try to keep it in a lab that processes
it and it never leaves the premises.
Sooter
did a fine job, by the way.....everyone was happy and I had enough
pictures left over to make myself a nice "sample book".
Now, of course, I charge
a LOT more as I have to process the film in 3 x 5 size and let them
choose their enlargements and send the negatives in for re-printing
and they cost $4.50 a frame!!!! Some difference, eh? But for four
weeks I was a wreck!!! I really forswore ever taking pictures for
money again. It took awhile for me to become sanguine again........
If a photographer NEVER
has an experience like this - it is too soon!!!
|
