I previously posted some reviews of wedding venues in and around Loudoun County (click here and here). As with those reviews, my primary focus has to do with photography. Every venue but one I have been to has done an excellent job serving their clients (for the one exception, click here), and they have treated me well. In other words, when it comes to service and attitude and comfort, my perception is that all of these places are great. We are fortunate in this area to have so many outstanding places for weddings. Maybe the competition is what makes them that much better. Your decision on which venue to choose is probably more based on things like availability, price, size, and whether the venue fits your personality. My intent with these reviews is to give you a view from one photographer's perspective. I'm not judging the quality of the chicken served at dinner, but rather the quality of photo opportunities.
1757 Country Club - This is a relatively new venue for weddings. Photographically there are some nice spots out by the pond and along the course visible to the clubhouse. I have not had a chance to scope out the rest of the course to see if there are even better prospects for photos . . my guess is that there are a few more. Around the clubhouse/reception hall there isn't much to work with. The driving range is right up by the building in the back, the front is mostly parking, and the building, while nice inside, is not that picturesque on the outside. My guess is that most people use 1757 for the reception only and not for the ceremony. That is probably a good thing. I would hope that the ceremony would take place either in a better venue for photos, or that you could build in some time to stop somewhere else close by for photos (Claude Moore Park, Sully Park, Dulles Office Park are all possibilities). The room and facilities inside are very nice. Click here for sample photos from Leesburg and 1757 Country Club.
River Creek Country Club - I've done several receptions at River Creek and wish I had more there. Inside there is plenty of space and it is a good room for photos. Outside you have the golf course, and more importantly, the riverfront park. The park works well for the bride and groom. Not sure I would recommend taking a large wedding party down there, but that kind of depends on the lighting and the time of day. I would prefer to do larger groups up by the clubhouse. I have a full wedding at River Creek in June 2012 and can review what that was like. To me the ideal situation is to have the ceremony somewhere in Leesburg so you can do photos in downtown Leesburg, then complement that with photos down by the river at River Creek. Here too, there is not a whole lot to work with in front of the clubhouse. The back is more versatile, although still not perfect for photos. That is why having another location to use prior to the reception I think would be ideal. Click here for some sample photos taken in Leesburg and at River Creek.
Stone Manor - This Middletown Maryland venue is probably the best set up property I have seen for weddings. The reception takes place under a tent, which might not appeal to everyone; but the tent is set up and landscaped to look almost like just another building (okay, you still know it is a tent, but it is nice). The focal point of the property is the large stone manor house. Very nice inside and out. Plus there are old barns, a small bridge, gravel roadways, and lots of greenery. I was impressed with this place. A bit spread out for my taste, but all in all, lots to work with for photos. From a non-photo perspective, this place is pretty remote, with Frederick being the closest big town. Not the most convenient place for Loudoun folks, but not all that bad either. Definitely worth a look. Click here for sample photos from Stone Manor.
Friday, September 30, 2011
Friday, September 23, 2011
The Republican Debate of September 22
So I only caught the last half or so of the Republican Debate on Fox (there were better things to do, like watch Community and Big Bang Theory), but I got enough of a glimpse to form a few thoughts:
Gary Johnson - Probably the only reason this guy is making the highlight reel is his dog joke regarding shovel ready jobs. I listened to Rush Limbaugh earlier that day, and Rush used the same joke (not sure if Rush "borrowed" it from someone else or what). Johnson admitted this morning that the joke came as a suggestion from a caller to a local New Mexico radio show. Who knows, maybe that caller got it from Rush. Regardless, the joke was not something Johnson came up with on the spot or even on his own, so why should he get credit or extra debate points for using it? At the very least he should have prefaced the joke by saying something like "it reminds me of a joke I heard . ."
Rick Perry - I really want to like Rick Perry, but for some reason I am still unusually suspicious of him. His debate performances have been awful, and they don't seem to be getting any better. Right now he reminds me of Fred Thompson four years ago: lots of hype coming in, but just cannot live up to it. Organizationally he is in much better shape than Thompson ever was, which might save him; but as someone who doesn't know all that much about the guy, I have not been impressed with him yet.
Mitt Romney - Romney is someone I do not want to like, but his preparation and up front skills are two things that appeal to me. With Romney, I am not convinced that he would come into office ready and willing to wipe away all the junk that Obama and his administration have managed to add to government in the past three years. He seems fickle. Either he is coming into his own over the years, learning from his past mistakes, or he is just wishy washy. Wishy washy equals moderate. Of course even just being a moderate would be a stark contrast to Obama, but I want someone with conservative convictions at their very core. Yes, Romney has some business experience in his background, something he is quick to bring up to contrast himself with those candidates (Perry in particular) who have spent their careers in politics; but as someone pointed out, Romney drifted back into his business career only because he lost a political campaign. If Romney had won all those times, he would have had a longer political career.
Michelle Bachmann - I have always liked Bachmann. She seems sharp and accomplished. She is not a lightweight. It just does not seem possible that she would get the nomination. Whether that is because she is a woman or because she comes from the House or because she sometimes says something that make your head spin . . I don't know. She does not seem to have the straight talk populace appeal that Sarah Palin had as a vice presidential candidate, but I think Bachmann would actually make a better candidate as vice president than Palin, if given the chance.
Ron Paul - This guy will always be a fringe, cult-like candidate. He says some great things and then he says some really off the wall things. He, of all the candidates, would probably come into office with the biggest agenda shift. Questionable if he could get anyone else (particularly in Congress) on board with him though.
All the other candidates I thought did a good job actually. They all seemed informed, passionate, and in many respects qualified for the job. No one candidate has wowed me though, which means that they all have their faults. It's a good process for all of us to go through, trying to determine what criteria is ultimately the most important to us individually and as a country. Do we want someone who supposedly speaks well (look what that got us today), or do we want a policy wonk? Are we comfortable with someone who has some moderate stands on some issues, or do we want a hard core conservative? This is the time to makes these considerations in a thoughtful and deliberate manner. If we don't, we get Obama. That should motivate us all.
Gary Johnson - Probably the only reason this guy is making the highlight reel is his dog joke regarding shovel ready jobs. I listened to Rush Limbaugh earlier that day, and Rush used the same joke (not sure if Rush "borrowed" it from someone else or what). Johnson admitted this morning that the joke came as a suggestion from a caller to a local New Mexico radio show. Who knows, maybe that caller got it from Rush. Regardless, the joke was not something Johnson came up with on the spot or even on his own, so why should he get credit or extra debate points for using it? At the very least he should have prefaced the joke by saying something like "it reminds me of a joke I heard . ."
Rick Perry - I really want to like Rick Perry, but for some reason I am still unusually suspicious of him. His debate performances have been awful, and they don't seem to be getting any better. Right now he reminds me of Fred Thompson four years ago: lots of hype coming in, but just cannot live up to it. Organizationally he is in much better shape than Thompson ever was, which might save him; but as someone who doesn't know all that much about the guy, I have not been impressed with him yet.
Mitt Romney - Romney is someone I do not want to like, but his preparation and up front skills are two things that appeal to me. With Romney, I am not convinced that he would come into office ready and willing to wipe away all the junk that Obama and his administration have managed to add to government in the past three years. He seems fickle. Either he is coming into his own over the years, learning from his past mistakes, or he is just wishy washy. Wishy washy equals moderate. Of course even just being a moderate would be a stark contrast to Obama, but I want someone with conservative convictions at their very core. Yes, Romney has some business experience in his background, something he is quick to bring up to contrast himself with those candidates (Perry in particular) who have spent their careers in politics; but as someone pointed out, Romney drifted back into his business career only because he lost a political campaign. If Romney had won all those times, he would have had a longer political career.
Michelle Bachmann - I have always liked Bachmann. She seems sharp and accomplished. She is not a lightweight. It just does not seem possible that she would get the nomination. Whether that is because she is a woman or because she comes from the House or because she sometimes says something that make your head spin . . I don't know. She does not seem to have the straight talk populace appeal that Sarah Palin had as a vice presidential candidate, but I think Bachmann would actually make a better candidate as vice president than Palin, if given the chance.
Ron Paul - This guy will always be a fringe, cult-like candidate. He says some great things and then he says some really off the wall things. He, of all the candidates, would probably come into office with the biggest agenda shift. Questionable if he could get anyone else (particularly in Congress) on board with him though.
All the other candidates I thought did a good job actually. They all seemed informed, passionate, and in many respects qualified for the job. No one candidate has wowed me though, which means that they all have their faults. It's a good process for all of us to go through, trying to determine what criteria is ultimately the most important to us individually and as a country. Do we want someone who supposedly speaks well (look what that got us today), or do we want a policy wonk? Are we comfortable with someone who has some moderate stands on some issues, or do we want a hard core conservative? This is the time to makes these considerations in a thoughtful and deliberate manner. If we don't, we get Obama. That should motivate us all.
Michael & Crystal River Creek Country Club Wedding
Here are a few images from Michael & Crystal's September 17 wedding. Photos were taken in downtown Leesburg and at River Creek Country Club. Click on image to enlarge. Click here to see more images from this wedding.
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Full Moon Over Washington DC
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)