Not nearly what i was expecting. This is AUSTRALIA. They needed to be fucking knife fighting for it to be a thing.
On the other hand, the photog's combo of a pseudo-Affliction shirt and blown-out Leif Garrett hair did surprise and amuse me, so four stars.
(p.s. I believe the favored tag format would be "Australian people.")
Can we get a translation?
Also: -1 because not a single boomerang in sight.
something tells me that the priest put some last minute restrictions on what and where the photographer was allowed to do
nothing more charming than a priest shouting "Fuck you!" right before he performs a ceremony
I've worked for a church (wedding director), and some photogs can be utter dicks - having to nearly haul one off as it was orbiting the minister and couple a foot away from them during the vows, positioning themselves so that they're the only person who's going to get a shot of the kiss (meaning the couple has to pay for that shot) stuff like that. Most photogs have to be reigned in and don't like it; we set the rules, they break it, we get in the way of their shot to explain this and if they persist they're not allowed back. Some of them get quite pissy. Never had them get this bad though.
I've also worked as a wedding photographer, but I tried to be nice to the staff - I'd been on the other side and it wasn't fun. And to make this a totally unrelated lj, I've also been the organist for a wedding, though that was a freebie.
Request for slight Livejournal addendum: Don't most wedding photographers make ridiculous amounts of money with respect to the time, work, and skill required?
A lot of them can make mad money off minimal post-process combined with never giving you the digital files, meaning you pay for every picture - hence why it's in their best interest to make sure nobody in the audience gets an acceptable photo of the kiss and such, since you might just snag the RAW file from the weird uncle with $8000 in camera gear. Some would rather just give a minimally-adjusted image dump and be done with it, it depends.
Skill-wise, the skills needed vary - the sears portraits afterwards are studio lighting 101, the reception photos are basic flash photography and low expectations, as are the pre-wedding pics. The only tricky part tends to be the service proper - churches are often dimly lit, and when bright are often backlit (since those are typically the windows closest to the couple) and there are often tight restrictions on the photog. At the church I worked they were 1) anything goes during the processional 2) no flash after that until after the register had been signed 3) you had to be out of view (balcony or in the rear) and again anything goes after the register. Some dude with a slow lens or expecting flashes allowed is going to be in trouble. I'm guessing mediocre photogs can persist because they're not generally relying on repeat customers.
The other skills for wedding is the intangibles, mind you - dealing with incredibly stressed people, knowing when they don't want a photo taken, dealing with wrangling crowds who just want to party and getting them to stand still for photos, etc. I've done a bit of wedding stuff for friends who couldn't afford one, and though I do photos for money (so I'm a small step above "hey, ____ has a nice camera, he can do the wedding"), I'm not working to earn a living off of it - I'd rather work a 9-5 computer job and take interesting/fun things that might not pay super-well than having to do Sears Portraits and weddings to make ends meet.
Work-wise, it depends on what post-process they do - earning $800-$2000 a wedding becomes reasonable if they're actually retouching all the keepers, including the proofs that never get bought, and they're doing a good job. Hard to get multiple weddings a week, and it's hard to get one every weekend. Not to mention the right gear being expensive and stuff like flashes, backdrops, batteries, hard drives and other archival gear and to a lesser extent camera bodies have a limited number of uses before they need replacing. Again, value comes down to whether the person doing it is ripping you off or not.
no russell crowe?
|Magical Man from Happy-Land |
he was probably just drunk on fosters like all Australians are lolololol
Both were just so mad that they couldn't punch an aborigine that day, nor keep one from getting a job.
5 stars for the awsome dickish irony of the photographer saying "this is my fucking living" and acting like he owns the place to a priest in the church which he hosts services and is his second home.
I'm going to hell and you're going to heaven
| Register or login To Post a Comment|