The First Look on Wedding Day

If you read my past blog posts, or if you know me, you know that I am a big fan of the bride and groom seeing each other prior to the ceremony, primarily for the sake of photos. It just makes the whole day go a lot smoother, and my experience is that couples who choose to do it this way are really, really glad they did. But I realize that many people cannot break with the idea of first seeing each other while walking down the aisle (my experience is that most brides are looking either at guests or at me and not at their groom while walking down the aisle). I realize that this is their wedding and I can only offer advice, otherwise I have to go with what is given. But that does not mean I cannot at least plead my case, and here I do it once again.

This link is to some photos taken of grooms (not my photos) when they saw their bride for the first time on their wedding day. The photos were compiled for this article because of the emotion expressed by the grooms. If you study the photos closely, you will see that of the 24 grooms/brides represented, only 4-5 were taken during the actual ceremony and walking down the aisle. All the others were taken during what is commonly called "the first look", when the bride and groom have their moment of seeing each other privately before the wedding. This goes to one of the arguments that I have previously made: that I see more emotion coming from grooms during the "first look" then I do during the walking down the aisle moment; and this goes to another argument I have made: the "first look" actually ends up being a much more special time for a couple than walking down the aisle.

Again, I realize that this is not the case for everyone, and in the case of this article, there certainly was emotion in the 4-5 "walking down the aisle" weddings represented by the photos. I would just encourage couples to think it through, perhaps throw out your original conventional thinking and consider this: how would you plan this day if this was the very first wedding ever?

Binders Full of Women

Dems are doing their best to find something . . anything . . that they can pin on Romney in order to turn around Obama's slide in the polls. Big Bird didn't seem to help. Blaming the death of our U.S. ambassador in Libya on a YouTube video that no one ever saw didn't work. Boasting about an artificial drop in unemployment didn't help. Pretty much everything the dems have tried has not helped, and that now includes "binders full of women". That does not mean they are not trying though.

Here are a couple thoughts I have regarding "binders full of women":

1. During the debate, Romney said:

“And so we took a concerted effort to go out and find women who had backgrounds that could be qualified to become members of our cabinet. I went to a number of women’s groups and said, ‘Can you help us find folks?’ And they brought us whole binders full of women.”

Please note where the "binders full of women" came from:  women's groups. That's right, women put women into binders, not Romney. If these women's groups had instead put women into . . well, what else would they put these resumes into? So if women (and men) are having problems with "binders full of women", they should aim their fake anger at the women groups that put them there.

2. I can pretty much guarantee that before Romney asked for a list of women's resumes that ended up being given to him in binders, there were whole binders full of men given to Romney. That's right, binders full of men. Where is the outrage? This is obviously a sign of disrespect toward men. Think of it: binders full of men. Come on men, can't we come up with at least a little bit of of our own fake outrage over this?

Politics: Things I Don't Understand

1. Here is all you need to know about Mitt Romney and how much tax he pays: If I offered to give you an amount equal to how much Mitt Romney pays in taxes (roughly $2 million) or how much Barack Obama pays in taxes (roughly $162,000), which would you take? I'll give your 15 seconds to decide. What, you don't need 15 seconds? You'll take Romney's 2 million? Why? Yeah, it is substantially more than Obama's $162,000, but won't you feel guilty because Romney paid at a lower percentage rate? That doesn't matter to you, you just want the 2 million? Yeah, I don't understand either why people are making such a big deal about the percentage rate and not looking at the total amount of money being paid in taxes.

2. Why can't people honor the truth rather than spin a lie? When I watch a game and they show a controversial play in slow motion, and it is clear what the correct call should be, I'm okay with getting the call correct, regardless whether it benefits the team I favor or not. Sure, some calls are not clear cut, even on replay, which is why in most cases they rule with the call that was made in real time on the field. But I am more interested in preserving the integrity of the game and honoring the truth than I am with elevating my team. The same should also apply to politics. I can understand supporters wanting to spin bad results into something good, but people are too smart to fall for that. A bad debate isn't because of the altitude of Denver or because Obama is so concerned about protecting the office of the presidency not to fight back or because Romney lied. Obama just debated in the same manner that he has performed as president: detached, uninterested, lazy, arrogant.

3. The left seems to always be really concerned about the little guy . . the guy who doesn't make much money. The left dislikes big business and big money. Not all on the left, mostly those who do not have any money hate those who do have money. As a general rule though, the impression that is put out there is that liberals only like big money when it is something they can take and redistribute to those who do not have money. So why don't these people hate political campaigns with the same vigor. The Obama campaign for example pulled in $181 million just in the month of September. That is a lot of money raised and spent just to elect one person. Seems like a waste to me. Just think of how many teachers could be hired with that kind of money. I can understand conservatives embracing big money . . I don't understand why this kind of fund raising does not repulse a liberal.

4. There were fewer jobs created in September than in August, and there were fewer in August than there was in July. In January 2012 275,000 new jobs were added, followed by 259,000 in February, yet the unemployment rate stayed the same 8.3 between January and February. This was follow by months of very small job creation, ranging from 45,000 to 181,000, not enough to change the unemployment rate more than .2 percentage points. For context, 181,000 jobs were added in July 2012, and the unemployment rate went up .1 percentage point. I don't understand how we can add 114,000 new jobs in September and the rate goes down .3 percentage points. Actually I do understand: fewer people are looking for jobs and the government has dropped these people off these rolls. Basically the country is losing jobs, so you don't need as many people to fill those lost jobs. We're just choosing not to count millions of Americans, which artificially makes the unemployment rate go down. This kind of math is apparently something Obama is happy to embrace, which I don't understand (see point 2).

Eric & Carrie Wedding - Sept. 29, 2012

A few early picks from this past weekend's wedding with Eric and Carrie. It was a great wedding and a perfect day. Click on photos to enlarge.

Shooting In The Dark

This photo is by no means a great photo. It has its problems. I'm posting it here though because when you consider the conditions that it was taken, it is pretty impressive. It was dark. How dark? I was standing maybe 120 feet away, and while I could see the outline of the boat, I could not see the couple or anyone else on the boat. Those two big lights in the back were not all that bright. Between the darkness, distance and engine noise, the couple could not hear me or see me. To me it is pretty amazing that in near pitch darkness an image like this could be captured. Exposure details:  iso of 6400, f-stop of 2.8, 1/15 shutter speed hand held.

Climate Change and the Hockey Stick

I am a man made climate change skeptic. Climate changes, that is for certain; but I have deep doubts that man is the cause of anything that we are currently experiencing, just like I doubt that man had anything to do with the Ice Age or with the warming that took place some 1000 years ago. If you watched Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, you would know that much of it revolved around Michael Mann's hockey stick theory. That theory has since been debunked, which should make "green" people at least wonder if this "green" quest is nothing more than a financial boondoggle. For those with an open mind, here is a short videoclip to get you thinking.

Some Wedding Advice From A Photographer

Every once in awhile I like to offer my unsolicited wedding advice. Of course my interest here is from a photographic perspective. I'm not a wedding planner and I am not a bride, so my interests and priorities are not always in line with theirs. And that is fine. I realize I cannot have things happen the way I deem would be best, and that I have to defer to the wishes of my clients. It is their wedding after all, and I have no interest in imposing my will or wishes on them. But I have been to a lot of weddings over the years, which means I have some experience as a photographer that I believe can be helpful in making a person's wedding a better experience for them. With that in mind, I humbly offer here a few suggestions, again from one photographer's perspective. These are thoughts that I have carried with me for some time now. Here they are, in no particular order:

1. First dance/Father-Daughter dance/Mother-Son dance: There are basically two times for these dances to take place, before dinner or after dinner. It probably does not matter too much when you have it, but what I believe does matter is having the full attention of your guests for those dances. Oftentimes during these dances, I will look around the room. I am looking for emotionally engaged people, with a tear in their eye or a big smile as they watch the bride and her father dance together. These are great photos when they happen. What I often see though are people with their backs to the dance floor, or people off in the corner laughing, or people munching on their salad. And as I am taking photos of the couple dancing, I know that in the background there will be people with their back to the dance floor, or people off in the corner laughing, or people munching on their salad . . all unengaged with this special moment. I'm not sure what the secret is for fully engaging your guests, but my first guess is that it probably starts with your deejay. I would recommend talking with the deejay during your planning process to see what they recommend and what they can do to pull everyone's attention to the dance floor. Now I understand that for some couples, these dances might be important to them, but not so important that they need everyone's full attention. But again, from a photographic perspective, it sure makes for better photos when you have guests who are watching.

2. Ceremony and the Vows: This is very minor and probably difficult for a couple to do while in the moment, but oftentimes during the wedding ceremony, when the couple are facing each other, they tend to look too much at the officiant. The officiant is speaking, so it is understandable that they would look at him (her). When they are looking at the officiant however, they are not looking at each other; and their heads are turned away from the crowd and usually away from the camera. This again is minor because there are of course times when they are looking at each other; but I have done enough weddings where I was mumbling to myself "Please, look at each other" to know that it can be a problem, at least for photos. My advice, stay focused on each other.

3. Go ahead and see each other prior to the ceremony. I, sometimes too passionately, always introduce this concept to couples as an option. Sometimes for practical reasons it just makes better sense to do it this way, but I am convinced from experience that it just makes sense period. I have to be careful here because I am not dogmatic about it, and I don't want potential clients to believe I am dogmatic about this. Some photographers will only photograph a wedding if the couple agrees to do all their photos prior to the ceremony. I certainly have not gotten to that point yet, but I can understand why these photographers prefer the photo session this way.

To me there is no downside to doing all the photos before the ceremony, unless you have a huge amount of down time between the ceremony and the reception, or if the ceremony is real early in the morning. At least a third of the weddings I have done have been done this way, and in every case the couple was enthusiastically glad they did it that way. The first look becomes much more special to them, they get to spend some time talking with each other, all the stress and anxiety is immediately gone . . they can enjoy a relaxed photo session with few distractions, and when the ceremony is over there is not this fast pace, dizzying photo time away from their guests. I will get myself in trouble here, so please be clear that this is just my opinion: most times people don't want to see each other because it is not "traditional" and/or it is considered bad luck. I'm just not sure I can understand basing your wedding on a superstition; and what tradition? When I think tradition I think a church wedding, yet very few weddings I do take place in a church.

I tend to be a romantic, and to me, if done right, a first look can be much more romantic. I've seen more grooms in tears during a first look than I ever have when they see other the first time walking down the aisle. Everyone is different though, and I know that I cannot impose my own thoughts regarding this on anyone else. In the end the photos always seem to work out. The entire day however just seems to go significantly better for everyone when a couple goes ahead and sees each other prior to the ceremony. That at least is my experience.

4. Be on time. Kind of hard for a bride to control her time prior to the ceremony when she is dependent on hair stylists and make up artists and bridesmaids and wardrobe malfunctions. All I can say here is that it seems rare for a bride to be ready on time. I think what might be helpful is to have someone there who is keeping you on track with your timelines. Most wedding coordinators are dealing with the actual ceremony and reception and not with getting the bride ready on time for photos. I would recommend for any bride to have a go person who can do that for you. It needs to be someone who doesn't mind keeping an eye on the clock and is bossy enough to keep you on time. As a bride you have too many other distractions that you can easily lose track of your own time. Having someone there to help keep you on track might be a good thing.

Great Marriage Proposal

Costa Rica

I recently spent a week doing a corporate photo shoot in Costa Rica. We stayed at the Guanacaste J.W. Marriott. Here are a few images around the property, and a few off property.

Trip Out West and WPPI

I just returned from a two week trip out to California and Las Vegas. The California side of the trip was spent with cousins in San Diego and L.A., and my brother in San Luis Obispo. The Las Vegas side was spent at the Wedding and Portrait Photographers International (WPPI) trade show. This was probably my 5th WPPI and I still seem to walk away with some new info on products and the business. I also seem to walk away a bit conflicted as well. Some of the best wedding photographers in the world are at the show talking about their work. It can be a bit intimidating because I realize there is still a lot of room for my photography to grow. That should motivate me, and it does; but it also frustrates me because I don't want to put myself in a position of trying to copy or imitate other photographers. So I am conflicted.

If asked whether I had any guidance for new photographers, I would offer this standard but true advice: stay true to yourself. Understand your style and how you like to shoot and capture images, and build on that. Perfect it. Make it your signature. That is what I should be practicing myself, rather than trying to recreate a style mastered by someone else. So much of photography, like so much of everything else in our lives, relies on confidence. Just like a pro athlete's performance can suffer when they are lacking confidence, I know my own photography suffers when I am losing confidence in my abilities. So yeah, I do have plenty of room to grow and expand my photography, and I want to continue to learn and experiment. But I also want to stay true to my own style. I know what I like and I know what I don't like. There are photos taken by some of these "rock star" photographers that are absolutely beautiful, and there are images that I really dislike. These photographers seem to see something wonderful in these images. I see cheese, or a weird stance, or blown out highlights. So why would I want to try and imitate their work if I don't like it?

I guess for any artist there is this conflict. We respect the work of other artists, and perhaps secretly wish we had their level of talent. At the same time we believe in our own work, proud of it in fact. I think the most successful artists, and probably the most respected ones, are those who have perfected their own style, and stayed true to it. In the end, that is what I want of myself.

Church and State

Lately it seems that the concept of separation of church and state works great at keeping the church out of the state's business, but it does a lousy job of keeping the state out of the church's business.  In a climate of an all powerful state, where the state is intent on imposing its will on all aspects of our lives, diminishing the importance of religion in a person's life is job one. Oh, they won't say that. They're too smart to tell people what they are really up to. Just go ahead and formulate extreme policies, then back off a bit to make it look like you are willing to "accommodate" the people, and there you are: one step closer to state run religion, and one step back from personal freedom. How benevolent of you.

Anyhow, today there is a very good article related to this that I would like to recommend for your reading.

Many have argued that the left is fighting for freedom from religion.  No, there will always be religion.  Fundamental change was promised; change from God given rights to state granted rights are being delivered.  When the state eliminates God, the state becomes god.  And the state is a jealous god, especially when it takes guidance from a bookdedicated to Lucifer.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/our_father_who_art_in_washington.html#ixzz1mqpOQjTe

Grammy Awards

I hope you had a chance to watch the Grammy Awards Sunday night. I thought overall it was one of the better Grammy shows produced over the past several years. There seemed to be an underlying theme throughout the show: let's celebrate the voice, the instrument, and the song. That was the cry of the FooFighter's Dave Grohl in his acceptance speech. Too often musicians rely on electronic tricks to cover their imperfections, or their dancing ability or looks to cover up that they really cannot sing. It is refreshing when you have musicians and singers who rely purely on their voice and their talent, stripping away all the hype and lighting.

Highlights for me were Bruno Mars, Adele, Taylor Swift, Jennifer Hudson, the Beach Boys' medley, and the Civil Wars. Falling a bit flat I thought were Katy Perry, the Glen Campbell tribute, and the first Paul McCartney song. Everything else was entertaining, but nothing memorable. In absolute stark contrast to what was otherwise a quality lineup was Nikki Minaj. An absolute waste of 5 minutes (glad I dvr'd the show). Her presentation really was an unwelcome contrast to talent. Give me anytime one minute of Civil Wars with just two voices and a guitar over that Minaj mess. Five minutes of the Civil Wars would have been awesome.

Naples Florida Pier at Sunset

I was recently down in Florida and revisited the Naples Pier for some sunset photos. The first night gave me some great cloud formations, adding some welcomed drama to the sunset. The next night I went back with a tripod, wanting to take some long time exposures. The clouds were pretty non-existent that night, so the sky was not as great. Shooting longer time exposures softens the water, giving it almost a painted look. I'm happy with both images, although they are quite different. This is the kind of image that works well with all kinds of digital filters and effects, each one giving the image a very different look. These two images were mostly just enhanced and corrected in Adobe Lightroom, with mostly just some changes done to the exposure and white balance, with some added dodging and burning. Click on image to enlarge.

Wittenberg University: My Alma Mater

I just wanted to give a shout out to my college, Wittenberg University in Springfield, Ohio. This past December I watched online the Wittenberg's women volleyball team defeat Christopher Newport University for the NCAA Division III National Championship. Wittenberg has long been a football/basketball school. Their football program was the first (and only) Division III school to reach 700 wins. The basketball program, celebrating its 100th season this year, has more wins than any other Division III school. Additionally the basketball program has not had a losing season over the past 50 years, as well as appearing in the Division III tournament more times than any other school. While I attended Wittenberg, both the football team and the basketball team won a Division III national championship. Overall, the football team holds five national titles while the basketball team holds two.

The Princeton Review named Wittenberg as number 18 on their list of most beautiful campus in America. It also came in at number 19 for top professors. More Wittenberg professors have been named top professor of the year in the state of Ohio than any other school in Ohio, including Ohio State.

I enjoyed my time at Wittenberg. Last November I went by the campus for a quick visit and was impressed with how well they have improved the facilities over the years. The school makes a good first impression. Not sure I could afford the cost of today's Wittenberg though, but that is probably true with most private schools today.

The Updegroves and Bethany Beach

Our family has been going to Bethany Beach, Delaware for pretty much my whole life. It is like my second home, wanting to be my first. Anyhow, I've been wanting to put together a photo book for the family, revolving largely around my brother Dave's family. This past Christmas was a good time to finally put it together. Here is a preview. Click on the large version for best viewing.

A Better Finder Rename

One of my pet peeves with digital photography is the random filenames people use for their photos. Most people seem to do one of two things with their digital files: 1. they leave the filename as is from their camera (ie, dsc001), or 2. they rename the file with something like "Doug&Joanne_front_of_house". I guess for some people this all makes sense, but for me it does not. I like organization; and for me, with hundreds of thousands of photos on various hard drives, I need organization. I want my file names to make sense to me. So what do I do?

When I download images from my camera(s), the very first thing I do is batch rename all of the images. Now, I usually shoot with two cameras. That means at least two cards with photos taken trading off cameras throughout the day. When I bring all the images from all the cards onto my computer hard drive, I want to be able to organize all the photos by the time they were taken, and then rename all the files in a manner that makes sense to me for that particular photo shoot. Most people do not use two cameras, but those who do, here is the important step you need to take before shooting: be sure to sync the time clock between both cameras. You want to get them at least within maybe 3-4 seconds of each other. It does not matter if you are using two different kinds of cameras. Of course if you are shooting with only one camera, the time stamp does not matter, although I would strongly encourage you to set your camera time clock to the accurate time.

With all your images out of the camera and now on your hard drive, you want to be able to batch rename the files into a file name that makes sense. I use a very powerful program called A Better Finder Rename. To me it is the most intuitive program out there, with loads of options for all of your files, not just photos. Have 2000 images you want to change the file name . . piece of cake. Want to put all your images into chronological order AND rename them . . that is the whole idea of this program. So for something like a wedding, I will take the first initials of the bride and groom, add an underscore, then start the numbering with 0001. This will change my camera file name of "dsc6382", which means nothing to me, and changes it to "AB_0534". Or, as way of another example, photos taken on family vacation are changes from "_dsc3861" to "beach2011_0103". Like I mentioned before, there are loads of options: add text to the beginning of the file name, remove a couple digits in the middle, etc.

If you just have 3 or 4 files to rename, it is probably easier to do this manually; but if you have thousands or even hundreds to change, get A Better Finder Rename. There are other programs out there, some free, but this program is perfect at what it does. You can download a trial version that limits how many files you can batch rename, but it will give you a great experience with how well this program works.

Batman Meets Lion King

This is an impressive bit of editing. Take the audio from the new Batman movie (Dark Night Rises) trailer and superimpose it over clips from The Lion King, and this is what you get:

Time To Not Get Serious About Climate Change

If I was interested in being politically and socially correct, I would blindly rally behind the global warming cause, joining those who blame humans for any change of weather. I would call for government to outlaw oil and coal, and to invest billions of dollars in alternative energy sources such as solar and wind, which admittedly are much more expensive and much less effective. I really would not care that going "green" would bankrupt our country, send millions of people to the unemployment line, and raise costs for every product out there. That is a small cost for me to feel good about saving the planet, and possibly prevent the earth's temperature from raising .3 degrees over the next hundred years.

I am willing to say it: I do not believe in man made climate change. I cannot say I am skeptical about climate change itself. That would be like saying I am skeptical of air. Air exists, regardless of what I choose to believe. The same holds for climate change. The earth we live on has been changing for thousands of years. Ice ages come and go. In between those ice ages are warming periods. If the earth is capable of shifting into a definitive period of time called an "ice age", it is also capable of shifting into less definitive periods of time when the earth temperature drifts up or down by fractions of a degree. This happened before man burned carbon for energy, it will most likely happen when man relies on some other energy source. Is it possible that the real deniers are those who just don't accept this?

Those who are climate change devotees will say that those who do not buy into man made climate change are anti-science. That could not be further from the truth. We are actually anti-bad science, and there seems to be plenty of bad science out there masquerading as "truth" when it comes to climate change. Likewise there is a lot of bad policy being implemented out there, all based on bad science. Today I recommend two articles that should help you understand why I have not jumped on this green bandwagon. Please take the time to read both articles in their entirety.

F. Fred Singer, professor emeritus at UVA, writes of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) project:


What the BEST result shows is that surface thermometers from the land area of the globe (about 29% of the earth's surface) show a warming trend.  But this is not global warming.  And BEST director Professor Rich Muller explicitly disclaims that his trend results indicate a human cause.

He also correctly points out that many of the weather stations used are badly distributed, mostly in the U.S. and western Europe, and possibly subject to local heating effects, such as urban heat islands.  He cautions that a third of his monitoring stations show a cooling, not a warming.  And that 70% of the U.S. stations are poorly situated and don't satisfy the requirements of the U.S. Weather Service.  It is likely that stations elsewhere have similar problems.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/fake_fake_fake_fake.html#ixzz1iJI6w7Oz

And Clarice Feldman writes about the impact of biofuel farming in Africa:

The collapse of the London-based company Sun Biofuels, which grew jatropha in the district of Kasarawe for biodiesel, has left hundreds of villagers landless, jobless and in despair. In Mhaga village alone, a quarter of the land was acquired by the company  in 2008, with a promise of financial compensation, 700 jobs, water wells and improved schools, health clinics and roads. But the villages have not been paid for the land, and their neighbors in Mtamba tell the same story of broken promises and unpaid  compensation. Tabu Koba is one of 9 in this village who received no payment for their land.We are very angry.' He says.'My children have left school and have nowhere to farm.'

'The situation in Kisarawe is heartbreaking, but the real tragedy is that it's not unique, comments Josie Cohen of Action Aid. 'Communities across Africa are losing their land as a result of the massive biofuel targets set by [the UK] government.' Legalbrief Environmental

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/two_silly_notions_biofuel_mandates_as_carbon_neutral_and_rhino_horn_medicine.html#ixzz1iJQb9snM