A couple quick observations about the health care summit:
1) Enough with the anecdotes. Couldn't they from the very beginning just agree to do away with the stories. They are generally meaningless, most likely embellished, and waste time from getting down to the nitty gritty of making hard decisions.
2) Obama told them he hoped to wrap up by 4:15. They finished around 5:20. Lack of discipline, self-control and self-restraint on all of their parts, which is exactly the manner in which these people handle our money. That should be warning enough about how much to trust the numbers they casually throw out, and what they will ultimately do if given any control over health care.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Looking For a Photographer, Part 2
Adding to a post I made a couple days ago, I wanted to highlight a few things that may have not been clear before. In my opinion the first thing a couple needs to determine in selecting a photographer is what style of photography they are after for their wedding; or to put it another way, which photographer seems to capture a wedding in the style they like most? Seems to me that is the bottom line: do you like their images? Even better, do you love their images? Too often I get questions from prospective clients who want to know whether I use an assistant, or what kind of camera I use, or whatever. There isn't necessarily anything wrong with asking these kind of questions, but sometimes I think that these questions hold more weight to them than the quality of the photographer's work. If they really like the images, why should it matter to them how the images were captured? If they are just curious, and want clarity for the sake of clarity . . fine. But I would encourage you to not get caught up in the weeds. Don't get bogged down with the kind of details that ultimately may not matter. Do you like/love the photographer's images? Okay then. That part is settled. We don't really care about the details . . we just want images like these.
Okay, so now what? Well, at this point there are two other hurdles you need to address before you can/should make your decision. Hurdle #1: Price. Hurdle #2: Do we like this person? Hurdle #1 is pretty obvious. You might love their images, but the photographer you want is way over your budget, with no room to bargain. At that point you might be in the "I love how a Mercedes feels, but I just cannot afford it" position. Instead you have to find a photographer who has the same kind of style, maybe the same kind of talent, but just doesn't cost as much. I like the feel of my Honda. It's not a Mercedes or a Lexus, but it suits my style and my budget much better, and I do like it. The variance in pricing though between photographers may not be that dramatic. I know my prices for wedding photography cannot be that much higher than lower price photographers. So I often wonder why a prospective client would select a photographer who is maybe $500 less than me, especially if that photographer might not have the same quality I provide? Don't misunderstand me here. I am not saying that anyone charging less than me is not as good as me; just like I would not say that anyone charging more than me is better than I am. But in this market, I know there are some pretty mediocre photographers out there charging less just to get the work. If you are stuck in the details, you might see that they are bringing an assistant, giving you all day coverage, and giving you a book, and think to yourself: look how much more we get for the money compared to that other photographer. But more of what? Pictures that you are not happy with? More aggravation? Yes, price is important within the context of your budget. I would just caution you to not to opt for a long list of what's included or a slightly lower price, but then paying for it by giving up on quality or peace of mind.
Hurdle #2 is pretty simple: do you like the photographer? Do they make you feel comfortable? This may not seem like a big deal, but you don't want your photographer to be a source of frustration, either on your wedding day or as you take care of any follow up after the wedding. You want the photos and the photo taking to be fun. You want them to be more than just a chore that you have to get through. Liking your photographer helps make this happen. I know this is an intangible, something that is hard to define. But a good interview and just getting to know the photographer can help you figure this one out. Does the photographer have a grasp on what they are doing? Are they interested in me and what I want? Are they helping me figure things out, or are they just confusing me? You're not out to pick a best friend. This is, after all, essentially a business transaction. But you want to be confident with this person, knowing they will be professional and deliver what you want. Do that, and everything else will hopefully go smooth for you.
Okay, so now what? Well, at this point there are two other hurdles you need to address before you can/should make your decision. Hurdle #1: Price. Hurdle #2: Do we like this person? Hurdle #1 is pretty obvious. You might love their images, but the photographer you want is way over your budget, with no room to bargain. At that point you might be in the "I love how a Mercedes feels, but I just cannot afford it" position. Instead you have to find a photographer who has the same kind of style, maybe the same kind of talent, but just doesn't cost as much. I like the feel of my Honda. It's not a Mercedes or a Lexus, but it suits my style and my budget much better, and I do like it. The variance in pricing though between photographers may not be that dramatic. I know my prices for wedding photography cannot be that much higher than lower price photographers. So I often wonder why a prospective client would select a photographer who is maybe $500 less than me, especially if that photographer might not have the same quality I provide? Don't misunderstand me here. I am not saying that anyone charging less than me is not as good as me; just like I would not say that anyone charging more than me is better than I am. But in this market, I know there are some pretty mediocre photographers out there charging less just to get the work. If you are stuck in the details, you might see that they are bringing an assistant, giving you all day coverage, and giving you a book, and think to yourself: look how much more we get for the money compared to that other photographer. But more of what? Pictures that you are not happy with? More aggravation? Yes, price is important within the context of your budget. I would just caution you to not to opt for a long list of what's included or a slightly lower price, but then paying for it by giving up on quality or peace of mind.
Hurdle #2 is pretty simple: do you like the photographer? Do they make you feel comfortable? This may not seem like a big deal, but you don't want your photographer to be a source of frustration, either on your wedding day or as you take care of any follow up after the wedding. You want the photos and the photo taking to be fun. You want them to be more than just a chore that you have to get through. Liking your photographer helps make this happen. I know this is an intangible, something that is hard to define. But a good interview and just getting to know the photographer can help you figure this one out. Does the photographer have a grasp on what they are doing? Are they interested in me and what I want? Are they helping me figure things out, or are they just confusing me? You're not out to pick a best friend. This is, after all, essentially a business transaction. But you want to be confident with this person, knowing they will be professional and deliver what you want. Do that, and everything else will hopefully go smooth for you.
.jpg)
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Questions To Ask When Looking For A Wedding Photographer
When it comes to advice on selecting a photographer for your wedding, it seems like most magazine and online articles present couples with a series of questions they should ask a photographer. No doubt this is important. There have been times however when I have received a list of questions from a prospective client and I could tell these questions came from one of these articles. That I guess is fine, but I often am left wondering if the couple actually have figured out for themselves what is important to them, apart from the questions. When they ask what kind of camera I use, is that information really going to play into their final decision? So my desire here is to offer some of my own recommendations for couples looking for a photographer for their wedding.
Researching a wedding photographer, I believe, is a circular exercise. The couple should first ask themselves what exactly are they looking for in/from a photographer. Once they can establish what is important to them they can then compose their list of questions for photographers. That list of questions should be short and to the point. Keep it simple. Once you go through the above process, it all comes back to you to access which photographer best fits your needs.
So how do you decide what is important to you? Well, here are a few questions to help get you going:
1. What style of photography are you after? Do you want exclusively all the typical wedding shots; or do you want a more artistic, free flow style? Or do you want a bit of both? While there are only so many ways to photograph a wedding, there is no question that the kind of photos you end up with rely almost entirely on a photographer's eye and style. You cannot hire someone who shoots in a traditional manner and expect them to shoot your wedding in a photojournalistic style. If you know you don't like the typical wedding shots, don't hire a wedding photographer with that style.
2. How important is the photographer's experience to you? We all have a friend from college who took nice photos while we were in college. How comfortable are you with having them do all of your wedding photos? This question probably gets to the heart of the matter in terms of how important photos of your wedding really are to you. Your college friend might do an okay job, but it might come at a cost: missed shots, many shots could have been a lot better, confusion. Will you in the end wish you would have spent the money to hire someone with experience? Of course experience in and of itself is not enough. We have all had teachers who taught for 20-30 years, and they were awful. They were either always that way, or as they got older they got stale and boring. Likewise I know teachers who have been teaching for 20-30 years and their students still love them. They know how to keep things fresh and up to date, and they still have a passion for their students and for what they do. That is what has set them apart. I also know teachers who have been teaching for 1-2 years, some are very good, some need to find another vocation. So experience is not the only factor. The quality of the work is much more important.
3. What do we want to walk away with from our wedding in terms of the photography? Do we want/need an album from the photographer, or can we do that ourselves? Do we get full ownership of all the images and digital files? Can we print ourselves? Do we want the photographer to handle all of the printing? All of these questions get down to your own desire for control. Some people are well suited to handle all of their printing themselves, and they like the idea of having full control and ownership of all the images from their wedding. Other people either don't have the knowledge or the time to deal with any of that. They would rather have someone else handle the printing and ordering. Which are you?
4. How much can we afford? For many people this is the question they start with right from the beginning. It's an important question, and I would be the last person to tell a couple to blow their budget on any part of the wedding. But of course I am partial to the photography end, believing what most everyone tells me: "the photos are the one thing that will last". I keep hearing from my photography friends of couples who tried to talk them down in their pricing in order to fit their budget, but then the couple spent hundreds/thousands of dollars on items that most people would call frivolous. This question also really gets to the core of your priorities. On a limited budget there is always a give and take. Some things will be sacrificed in order for you to get what is truly important to you. So what are you willing to give up, and what is truly important to you?
When it comes to your final decision, I believe maybe 80% of your decision should come down to these two questions: 1) Are we comfortable and confident with this photographer . . with their style, their personality, with their ability to deliver what we want? 2) Does the quality of their work stand up? Do I like what I see? Price and costs are important, but secondary. It's hard to put a price for the comfort and confidence factors, but trust me, for most people these qualities prove to be invaluable. And in the end, if you don't have great images, what's the point?
As always, please let me know if you have any feedback or questions about all of this.
Researching a wedding photographer, I believe, is a circular exercise. The couple should first ask themselves what exactly are they looking for in/from a photographer. Once they can establish what is important to them they can then compose their list of questions for photographers. That list of questions should be short and to the point. Keep it simple. Once you go through the above process, it all comes back to you to access which photographer best fits your needs.
So how do you decide what is important to you? Well, here are a few questions to help get you going:
1. What style of photography are you after? Do you want exclusively all the typical wedding shots; or do you want a more artistic, free flow style? Or do you want a bit of both? While there are only so many ways to photograph a wedding, there is no question that the kind of photos you end up with rely almost entirely on a photographer's eye and style. You cannot hire someone who shoots in a traditional manner and expect them to shoot your wedding in a photojournalistic style. If you know you don't like the typical wedding shots, don't hire a wedding photographer with that style.
2. How important is the photographer's experience to you? We all have a friend from college who took nice photos while we were in college. How comfortable are you with having them do all of your wedding photos? This question probably gets to the heart of the matter in terms of how important photos of your wedding really are to you. Your college friend might do an okay job, but it might come at a cost: missed shots, many shots could have been a lot better, confusion. Will you in the end wish you would have spent the money to hire someone with experience? Of course experience in and of itself is not enough. We have all had teachers who taught for 20-30 years, and they were awful. They were either always that way, or as they got older they got stale and boring. Likewise I know teachers who have been teaching for 20-30 years and their students still love them. They know how to keep things fresh and up to date, and they still have a passion for their students and for what they do. That is what has set them apart. I also know teachers who have been teaching for 1-2 years, some are very good, some need to find another vocation. So experience is not the only factor. The quality of the work is much more important.
3. What do we want to walk away with from our wedding in terms of the photography? Do we want/need an album from the photographer, or can we do that ourselves? Do we get full ownership of all the images and digital files? Can we print ourselves? Do we want the photographer to handle all of the printing? All of these questions get down to your own desire for control. Some people are well suited to handle all of their printing themselves, and they like the idea of having full control and ownership of all the images from their wedding. Other people either don't have the knowledge or the time to deal with any of that. They would rather have someone else handle the printing and ordering. Which are you?
4. How much can we afford? For many people this is the question they start with right from the beginning. It's an important question, and I would be the last person to tell a couple to blow their budget on any part of the wedding. But of course I am partial to the photography end, believing what most everyone tells me: "the photos are the one thing that will last". I keep hearing from my photography friends of couples who tried to talk them down in their pricing in order to fit their budget, but then the couple spent hundreds/thousands of dollars on items that most people would call frivolous. This question also really gets to the core of your priorities. On a limited budget there is always a give and take. Some things will be sacrificed in order for you to get what is truly important to you. So what are you willing to give up, and what is truly important to you?
When it comes to your final decision, I believe maybe 80% of your decision should come down to these two questions: 1) Are we comfortable and confident with this photographer . . with their style, their personality, with their ability to deliver what we want? 2) Does the quality of their work stand up? Do I like what I see? Price and costs are important, but secondary. It's hard to put a price for the comfort and confidence factors, but trust me, for most people these qualities prove to be invaluable. And in the end, if you don't have great images, what's the point?
As always, please let me know if you have any feedback or questions about all of this.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Global Warming
At the risk of sounding like a crazy guy, I just don't believe in man-made global warming. I do believe in climate change. Living in Virginia, where we can get two feet of snow in February and then six months later it can be over 100 degrees . . yeah, climate changes. But it is becoming clear that much of the foundation for the man-made global warming argument is starting to crumble; and if man is not responsible for global warming, then everything that is being pushed on us (carbon credits, cap and trade, moving away from oil, etc) by politicians, environmentalists, and the media is basically a scam. And it is a scam with billions of wasted dollars at stake.
For a quick review of how the global warming argument began and how it got distorted through the years, please read this article.
For a quick review of how the global warming argument began and how it got distorted through the years, please read this article.
.jpg)
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Loudoun County Wedding Venues
People often ask for my recommendations and opinions about various wedding venues in northern Virginia, more specifically in Loudoun County. At the risk of sounding like a wedding planner (which I am not), I usually try to limit my thoughts to those of a photographer. Most venues do a pretty good job with their catering and taking care of their guests. It really comes down to the style and size of the venue, and whether it fits your tastes and needs. But for me, I'm looking at it for the sake of the photos. Is it a good, fun location for capturing images, or is it ridiculously difficult? Is there a variety of places to take photos, or is it really limiting? My list below provides some of my own impressions of some of the venues I have been to over the years. Some I have shot numerous times; others only once. I should say here that my first impulse is to shoot outdoors in natural light, so most of my impressions have to do with the exterior possibilities. Except for the first one listed, there is no reason for the order they are listed.
* The Birkby House (Leesburg) This is my favorite location for shooting weddings. For such a small footprint in downtown Leesburg, the Birkby House has lots of variety: old brick, weathered wood, the Carriage House, and gardens to work with for images. Plus you have even more variety within a block or two of the venue. The grounds and house are kept in great shape. Guests can spread out, but they cannot wander off too far, so it is easy to pull together people for photos. It can be a little hairy shooting in front of the house due to cars flying by (in a 25 mph zone), but the backdrop of the house makes for nice photos. I really like Birkby; plus it is roughly a half mile from my home. Like anywhere, I would not want to shoot there every week; but I always look forward to weddings there.
* Whitehall (Bluemont) The first wedding I shot at Whitehall was 22 years ago. Since then they have added a very nice banquet hall to the original house, which really made Whitehall a much more desirable venue for a wedding. The grounds and the older house make a nice backdrop for a mansion look. Just about everything is white though, which limits some of the looks you can achieve, especially for a bride wearing white. But there are gravel/dirt drives and the tree hanging swing, and sometimes the old barn in the back (if cars are not in the way).
* Bluemont Vineyard (Bluemont) I shot the very first wedding at Bluemont Vineyard, back when it was officially under the name of Great Country Farm. The old stable area (the wedding site) can make for some nice images. The vineyard up above the stables adds more variety with some nice vista looks of the valley with vineyards in the foreground. From a photography perspective it can be a bit difficult shooting at Bluemont if it is really sunny out. There are no trees and very little shade. I feel like I've gotten some nice images there though. You just have to be patient and work with the lighting.
* Meadowkirk (Leesburg/Middleburg) This Presbyterian retreat center between Leesburg and Middleburg has lots of possibilities for weddings. I only have shot there once, and maybe it was because I had a beautiful bride who loved the camera, but I walked away from this venue really liking it. There are two main new buildings: a residential hall and a lodge/meeting area/dining hall. If you have a small wedding for mostly people out of the area, this could be a nice spot to consider. For photos there is the older original house and several outbuildings. Plus you have a number of old gravel drives. The grounds are not particularly manicured with gardens and flowers, but it is a pretty spot.
* Raspberry Plain (Leesburg) I would love to live at Raspberry Plain. It is a great location and a nice venue. I've done several weddings over the years here. The addition of the atrium hall really helped fill out this place. For photos there are several looks: the mansion look, some gardens, lots of greenery, and the atrium. Raspberry is big and spread out. Guests congregate all over the place, which can make finding people sometimes difficult. And their bathroom facilities are really limited. But it is an impressive venue with some good photo opportunities.
* Lightfoot (Leesburg) I guess Lightfoot is mostly just a reception site. I've never done a ceremony there, and I'm not sure they can handle an actual ceremony. The room is very nice. It can be tight, so I would recommend not to stretch its capacity to the limit. For photos you have downtown Leesburg, so if the ceremony is taking place in a ho-hum location, you have lots of photo possibilities surrounding Lightfoot.
* Algonkian Park (Sterling) Algonkian just recently added a much larger banquet hall to their meeting facility. For what it is, it is a really nice hall. From a photographic perspective, there isn't a whole lot to work with surrounding the facility. Lots of trees, but that is about it. The outside of the facility is not that picture worthy. The gazebo is okay, but again, not great. There are a few spots in the park down by the river that can work with paths and fields of wild flowers, but those are shots that depend greatly on the lighting. Algonkian works best if you can build in time to do additional photos either in downtown Leesburg or at nearby Claude Moore Park.
That's it for now. I'll try to update this list as other sites come to mind. This past year I shot a number of weddings outside the area, including at Pier 5 on the Baltimore Inner Harbor, at Westmoreland State Park along the Potomac, and at the Delfosse Vineyard south of Charlottesville. I enjoy the challenge of shooting at venues that are new to me; but I also enjoy revisiting the ones that I've been to oftentimes before. If you have any questions or comments, please let me know.
* The Birkby House (Leesburg) This is my favorite location for shooting weddings. For such a small footprint in downtown Leesburg, the Birkby House has lots of variety: old brick, weathered wood, the Carriage House, and gardens to work with for images. Plus you have even more variety within a block or two of the venue. The grounds and house are kept in great shape. Guests can spread out, but they cannot wander off too far, so it is easy to pull together people for photos. It can be a little hairy shooting in front of the house due to cars flying by (in a 25 mph zone), but the backdrop of the house makes for nice photos. I really like Birkby; plus it is roughly a half mile from my home. Like anywhere, I would not want to shoot there every week; but I always look forward to weddings there.
* Whitehall (Bluemont) The first wedding I shot at Whitehall was 22 years ago. Since then they have added a very nice banquet hall to the original house, which really made Whitehall a much more desirable venue for a wedding. The grounds and the older house make a nice backdrop for a mansion look. Just about everything is white though, which limits some of the looks you can achieve, especially for a bride wearing white. But there are gravel/dirt drives and the tree hanging swing, and sometimes the old barn in the back (if cars are not in the way).
* Bluemont Vineyard (Bluemont) I shot the very first wedding at Bluemont Vineyard, back when it was officially under the name of Great Country Farm. The old stable area (the wedding site) can make for some nice images. The vineyard up above the stables adds more variety with some nice vista looks of the valley with vineyards in the foreground. From a photography perspective it can be a bit difficult shooting at Bluemont if it is really sunny out. There are no trees and very little shade. I feel like I've gotten some nice images there though. You just have to be patient and work with the lighting.
* Meadowkirk (Leesburg/Middleburg) This Presbyterian retreat center between Leesburg and Middleburg has lots of possibilities for weddings. I only have shot there once, and maybe it was because I had a beautiful bride who loved the camera, but I walked away from this venue really liking it. There are two main new buildings: a residential hall and a lodge/meeting area/dining hall. If you have a small wedding for mostly people out of the area, this could be a nice spot to consider. For photos there is the older original house and several outbuildings. Plus you have a number of old gravel drives. The grounds are not particularly manicured with gardens and flowers, but it is a pretty spot.
* Raspberry Plain (Leesburg) I would love to live at Raspberry Plain. It is a great location and a nice venue. I've done several weddings over the years here. The addition of the atrium hall really helped fill out this place. For photos there are several looks: the mansion look, some gardens, lots of greenery, and the atrium. Raspberry is big and spread out. Guests congregate all over the place, which can make finding people sometimes difficult. And their bathroom facilities are really limited. But it is an impressive venue with some good photo opportunities.
* Lightfoot (Leesburg) I guess Lightfoot is mostly just a reception site. I've never done a ceremony there, and I'm not sure they can handle an actual ceremony. The room is very nice. It can be tight, so I would recommend not to stretch its capacity to the limit. For photos you have downtown Leesburg, so if the ceremony is taking place in a ho-hum location, you have lots of photo possibilities surrounding Lightfoot.
* Algonkian Park (Sterling) Algonkian just recently added a much larger banquet hall to their meeting facility. For what it is, it is a really nice hall. From a photographic perspective, there isn't a whole lot to work with surrounding the facility. Lots of trees, but that is about it. The outside of the facility is not that picture worthy. The gazebo is okay, but again, not great. There are a few spots in the park down by the river that can work with paths and fields of wild flowers, but those are shots that depend greatly on the lighting. Algonkian works best if you can build in time to do additional photos either in downtown Leesburg or at nearby Claude Moore Park.
That's it for now. I'll try to update this list as other sites come to mind. This past year I shot a number of weddings outside the area, including at Pier 5 on the Baltimore Inner Harbor, at Westmoreland State Park along the Potomac, and at the Delfosse Vineyard south of Charlottesville. I enjoy the challenge of shooting at venues that are new to me; but I also enjoy revisiting the ones that I've been to oftentimes before. If you have any questions or comments, please let me know.
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Is There A Better Word Than "Terrorists"
For several years now I have wondered if we are doing ourselves a disservice using the word "terrorist" when describing terrorists. This isn't about calling terrorism for what it is, as opposed to calling it a "manmade disaster", which is what the current administration wishes to call it. Nor should we call it or treat it as something criminal. Terrorism is war, or at least a tactic used during war. We are at war with these people . . these terrorists. The rules of war are very different than the rules of the courtroom. I, for one, want us to treat these people as our enemies in war; not as someone who is entitled to protections under our Constitution.
My concern about the word "terrorist" is whether that is a word of honor for the terrorists. They might call themselves a "jihadist" rather than a terrorist, but the word "terrorist" might as well be "ninja warrior" or "bandit" in their world. It can be a word of endearment and romance, again in their world, not ours. So when we as Americans use the word "terrorist", in our minds we are referring to the scum of the earth, someone who has no regard for life. In the terrorist's world though, maybe the word "terrorist" is not an insult. Indeed, it might even be the opposite.
I've been looking, unsuccessfully, for a word that satisfies our need to call terrorists what they are, while at the same time adequately insulting and shaming the terrorist. It needs to be a word that the terrorist would never want to be called among his own people. I've heard it said that in prison there are two types of criminals even hard core criminals find disgusting: those who rape or kill kids, and those who are snitches for law enforcement. Those kind of criminals live in fear while in prison. This same kind of dishonor needs to be applied to terrorists. We on the outside already dishonor them. It's among their own people that they need to feel this dishonor them as well.
My concern about the word "terrorist" is whether that is a word of honor for the terrorists. They might call themselves a "jihadist" rather than a terrorist, but the word "terrorist" might as well be "ninja warrior" or "bandit" in their world. It can be a word of endearment and romance, again in their world, not ours. So when we as Americans use the word "terrorist", in our minds we are referring to the scum of the earth, someone who has no regard for life. In the terrorist's world though, maybe the word "terrorist" is not an insult. Indeed, it might even be the opposite.
I've been looking, unsuccessfully, for a word that satisfies our need to call terrorists what they are, while at the same time adequately insulting and shaming the terrorist. It needs to be a word that the terrorist would never want to be called among his own people. I've heard it said that in prison there are two types of criminals even hard core criminals find disgusting: those who rape or kill kids, and those who are snitches for law enforcement. Those kind of criminals live in fear while in prison. This same kind of dishonor needs to be applied to terrorists. We on the outside already dishonor them. It's among their own people that they need to feel this dishonor them as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)