General photography related stuff thread

[WheresMyWhite]

SH, what a great answer!!!! Thank you.

Another question. What, in your opinion is the role of a stock photo site, say shutterstock, vs what sounds like a more "artsy" photo/print site like FFA?

I am not looking to get rich (I wish ) but a bit of extra $$ would be nice. For my photos taken at the Denver Botanic Garden I have good understanding of what I can and can't "sell" on a site like FFA. I'd have to re-read the email to see if a stock photo place is okay or if they would consider that marketing competition (which they pretty clearly appear to not want based on said emails ).

[SnowHorse]

If you want to actually get sales on FFA, study what sells there. To me, it seems like it's often landscape type pics, pop stars and the ilk, heavily edited (usually from someone else's original work which is a big no no as far as I'm concerned), and then something that you could call heavy duty professional art.

Cutesy, artsy things may sell sometimes, but not like the aforementioned images.

FFA has been bad about some people there thinking it's completely OK to take someone else's work, edit it and sell it as your own. Ummm, no!
I have even had my pics bought from stock (or stolen somehow?), and for sale on FFA by someone else - unedited! Once a guy entered my horse pic in a contest, I happened to enter the same one, and "look, there's my pic" -- and moments later I read the "artist's" name and it was some dude.
It took FFA two days to take those pics down - and ALL the pics this guy had for sale were from stock, and not his own.

So, you can sell art type pics on FFA, but you have to be either lucky, or have just the right kind of images.

I know someone who got a card contract through exposure at FFA.


Shutterstock - is strictly stock. Sure, even they have artsy images for sale, but they're always well executed, and stand to the test for quality. Shutterstock sells better than most sites, for most contributors. Of course you have an exception here and there, just to confirm the rule.

As for pics taken at a restricted place (like the Botanic Garden - always find out beforehand!) - typically, you should get a permission from them. Their flowers, so they have the right to decide who can profit commercially from the images taken of their property.


So, put your artsy stuff on FFA and cross your fingers, and the clean, stockworthy stuff on stocksites.

[WheresMyWhite]

I have already checked with the Denver Botanic Garden. They are most concerned about iconic images containing identifiable structures at the Garden such as their conservatory building or permanent art collections or other architectural features. General "flower" photos, they are fine with me selling and just giving credit to where they were taken.

I also know any art exhibits are "off limits" (such as Dale Chihuly, etc).

So if you had "generic" flowers, birds, landscapes... where would you put them to attempt to make a bit of $$??? A stock site or more artsy like FFA. I was interested in FFA but less so after reading your comments... the stock sites "scare" me as I am not convinced my photos are really good enough for stock (you've seen a few of my personal favorites here but I'm just not convinced they are stock).

Or is trying to make $$ from flowers and birds and landscapes just not worth pursuing??

What I did like with FFA is their wide selection of products but not happy with them after your comments about image theft...

[Jan & PJ]

Thanks for all the info SnowHorse. I have only sold things to friends on FFA and not much of that. I do have enough images on there that some of my art is showing up under searches. Usually on about page 14. Not sure how many people browse that far lol. Stock photography sounds interesting.

[SnowHorse]

All my generic flowers, birds, butterflies, landscapes (not many) go to stock first. If I think an image has some sort of artistic merits, I will also put it on FAA. I rarely do, however.

The thing is - we're all different and produce different work. I can't say YOUR flower won't sell great if mine didn't (I've sold exactly one flower pic on FAA - this one - http://fineartamerica.com/saleannouncem ... 017ff19f79 ) -- as you can see, it's not artsy, really, but it did please someone, in some way. It sells rarely as stock.

The purpose of stock is to sell a product or idea, or illustrate something. It doesn't have to be "the best pic in the world" as long as it works for one of those ends, and is easily incorporated into where ever the buyer needs it. The world needs images for almost everything. That bag of flower seeds you were just looking to buy? It has stock pic(s) on it.... http://s73.photobucket.com/user/spirito ... sort=3&o=3 and that gift card you needed for someone? It has a stock pic on it -- http://s73.photobucket.com/user/spirito ... sort=3&o=4
That book cover, that magazine pic, this calendar... they all have stock pics.

And, no use to let stock scare or intimidate you - if you've been willing to learn the technical skills already for years, and have an eye for pics, you can probably hone it down to where stock is not intimidating in the least. Oh, and some of those sites I mentioned aren't scary anyways - but they don't sell much, either

During my time in stock I have seen some people come in with lots of talent/ eye, but lacking in technical skills. When those people realized that, they fixed it really fast, as now they knew WHAT to pay attention to to improve the technical quality of their pics another notch, and they're producing great images. One of them has a big card contract (not the same card person I mentioned earlier!) with a company, and her own line of cards. I was *thrilled* hearing that!

At the same time, I've seen people with NO eye and NO skills persist so long they finally figured what needed to be done to get approvable pics. Are their pics ever going be as good as the ones with the natural, good eye? No, they won't, but if they're smart they can still make saleable images if/ when they find a niche where eye doesn't count that much, but sheer "illustrational purpose" is plenty.

[WheresMyWhite]

SH, thank you so much for the insight. So much for me, at least, to think about.

It is really recommended to use your name when selling? I tend to be a private type person and don't really want my name out in the world...

Sounds like the decision is then FFA or shutterstock - so much to think about as well as get over the 'but how good is my work' where I like it but that does't mean it is as technically correct as it should be or that others will like it

[SnowHorse]

Some people think using their own name is better, some people don't. I don't really think it makes any difference.

My name is visible for copyright purposes on Shutterstock, and BS, but not on some other sites. I think it shows on Alamy, too.

You learn the technical side of things if you want to, when you learn first on what areas you need to improve. Improving technical skill is much easier than to "have the eye" naturally. If you have that, you're halfway there, at least.


When I first joined SS (my first stocksite), I only read their critique forum for two solid months, because I was worried I would not measure up. The forum has changed since, and while I believe it's still useful, it's not as "fluent" to use as it used to be. I really haven't visited it in for ever or so.

I also shot LOTS of pics during those two months, and went through EVERY single pic, checking the metadata, to see where I went wrong if the image was lacking in one or more ways.

Things I learned then were:

Shutter speed fast enough if handholding, at least 3X the size of your lens, that is, if you're shooting with a 50mm lens, then shutter speed at least three times that. Most people get motionblur in the image (not sharp!) because the camera moves ever so slightly when they take the pic.
If you're shooting on a tripod, make sure the VR is turned off, because it will mess you up otherwise. With tripod you can lower your shutter speed a lot - BUT your subject shouldn't move much, as you won't get sharp pics if it is - like flowers in a light breeze.

Low ISO. Don't bump it up unless you know what you're doing, you get lots of noise, and some stock sites won't take your pics if there is noise.

When you're editing / cleaning up your pics, ALWAYS check the whole image at 100%, full size. Sure, you can downsize them before submitting, as long as you're above the minimum required size.

[WheresMyWhite]

Whoo-hooo, thank you for the tips!!!

[Jan & PJ]

Great tips SnowHorse. Thank you so much for generously sharing all of this wonderful info!! I can't tell you how much is appreciated. I'm also stalking...er...following you on FAA. I have so much to learn. Got my first DSLR this time last year and I can tell my photography is improving but not quiet "there" yet (if ever). I'm planning on retiring in a couple of years and it would be so nice to get a small supplemental income from my photography. Thanks again!

[SnowHorse]

I forgot to say that I *always* shoot on fully manual settings. I don't leave anything up to the camera to decide, I want full control

That said - as long as you're getting good results it doesn't matter, it's more like a personal choice /opinion on how one wants to approach it.


Jan & PJ -- a stalker! Yay! LOL! I guess I better start making sure I don't put up any complete crap....haha!



Shooting outside where the light situation can change quickly (sun in and out of clouds) is always harder than in controlled light (if one has some sort of studio lights) - but once you get fluent with changing your settings according to the needs, it's not tricky any more.

Also, learn to shoot the light - in other words - go around your subject so the shadow is behind it and not visible / distracting.

Avoid shooting around high noon because it creates harsh light and hard shadows.

Use fill flash to your advantage, even outside in sunny conditions.

[SnowHorse]

Jan & PJ - you have a pic of the Rock Cafe on FAA... that's less than 10 miles from my house

[viscountessleftfield]

Picture-This-Photography-Charlotte-NC-Cleveland-OH-Wedding-Real-Estate-Photographer_0317.jpg (94.91 KiB) Viewed 25259 times

Picture-This-Photography-Charlotte-NC-Cleveland-OH-Wedding-Real-Estate-Photographer_0302.jpg (213.22 KiB) Viewed 25259 times

These are from an April wedding we photographed that I just blogged and delivered.

For more of their photos you can see the blog http://www.picturethisphotographync.com/blog/2016/5/4/britt-codys-spring-wedding-greer-city-park-greer-sc-cleveland-wedding-photographer - I'm still shooting weddings at this point but it is getting a little more difficult!

[Jan & PJ]

I forgot to say that I *always* shoot on fully manual settings. I don't leave anything up to the camera to decide, I want full control

That said - as long as you're getting good results it doesn't matter, it's more like a personal choice /opinion on how one wants to approach it.


Jan & PJ -- a stalker! Yay! LOL! I guess I better start making sure I don't put up any complete crap....haha!



Shooting outside where the light situation can change quickly (sun in and out of clouds) is always harder than in controlled light (if one has some sort of studio lights) - but once you get fluent with changing your settings according to the needs, it's not tricky any more.

Also, learn to shoot the light - in other words - go around your subject so the shadow is behind it and not visible / distracting.

Avoid shooting around high noon because it creates harsh light and hard shadows.

Use fill flash to your advantage, even outside in sunny conditions.

Ahhhh! More great tips! Intermittent clouds drive me crazy! I'm always changing my settings to adjust. Also "chasing" birds from shade to sunlight. I need to work more with fill flash although my current flash set up (in camera) is essentially worthless. Next investment will be a good flash.

Don't worry about what you put up on FAA. I've put up some not so fabulous work because I understand more volume helps with getting up on the search list. Seems to have helped. I love the Rock Cafe! So sad it burned down but they did an excellent job on the rebuild. I have lots of family up in that area (around Sand Springs). I went to school in Berryhill. Such a small world

[viscountessleftfield]

Ahhhh! More great tips! Intermittent clouds drive me crazy! I'm always changing my settings to adjust. Also "chasing" birds from shade to sunlight. I need to work more with fill flash although my current flash set up (in camera) is essentially worthless. Next investment will be a good flash.

Don't worry about what you put up on FAA. I've put up some not so fabulous work because I understand more volume helps with getting up on the search list. Seems to have helped. I love the Rock Cafe! So sad it burned down but they did an excellent job on the rebuild. I have lots of family up in that area (around Sand Springs). I went to school in Berryhill. Such a small world

I love my Meike flashes and my Yongnuo triggers get the job done. I hate Yongnuo flashes, they just aren't durable enough!

[Suzon]

If anyone doesn't get their emails and is interested, Topaz Labs is having a 40% off sale. I use a number of Topaz filters (though there's also a number of them I find useless). The code is SPRINGSUMMER2016

[Racetrackreject]

Picture-This-Photography-Charlotte-NC-Cleveland-OH-Wedding-Real-Estate-Photographer_0317.jpg

Picture-This-Photography-Charlotte-NC-Cleveland-OH-Wedding-Real-Estate-Photographer_0302.jpg

These are from an April wedding we photographed that I just blogged and delivered.

For more of their photos you can see the blog http://www.picturethisphotographync.com/blog/2016/5/4/britt-codys-spring-wedding-greer-city-park-greer-sc-cleveland-wedding-photographer - I'm still shooting weddings at this point but it is getting a little more difficult!

Besides being lovely photos, can I just say how much I love the donut cake??? I would love to do one out plain donuts (no glaze stuff), but I would probably be the only one who would like it. lol

Thanks Suzon! Do you like Topaz's denoise software better than Nik's (which is now free)?

[WheresMyWhite]

Thanks Suzon! Do you like Topaz's denoise software better than Nik's (which is now free)?

I'd like to know this as well as I have the Nik collection (when one had to pay some for it and during the time it was a bundle).

I mostly use the Nik for the B&W effects which I do like much better than LR's B&W presets...



Oh, donut cake... I'd like to see it in Krispy Kreme's raspberry filled, thank you very much

And I'll say again, I totally respect all you wedding photographers. The "pressure" of producing just the right photos for such a significant event in many peoples' lives would totally overwhelm me

[SnowHorse]

Yeah, if someone doesn't have it yet, the Nik Collection is free now, at https://www.google.com/nikcollection/

I never used it (or any other similar applications besides PS) till they offered it for free, and it appears fairly nice. Of course one must never go overboard with filters, and I'm toning them all down if I use it for an image. Gives a nice tough, though!




Jan & PJ - I'm a transplant here, too, so I have no real personal history around here, LOL

If you're using the pop-up flash on your camera, even it can be helpful, however it limits you more than a better flash. I only used one like that for several years before I was ready to invest in a good flash.



RTR - I'd love a donut cake, too - and no glaze for me, either! I'd love one made of cake donuts, though

WMW -- ahhh, the raspberry filled - YES PLEASE!!!!


Yeah, I could not do what wedding photographers do, either - because there's no way I'd want to deal with people, and even less the bridezillas. Uh-uh, no thanks!

[viscountessleftfield]

I can't shoot a landscape or a horse to save my life. Or, a macro of a flower that's not part of a bride's bouquet! I just suck at them. But, weddings are my thing. I love the details and the rhythm and once you get used to them they're not that hard.

[WheresMyWhite]

I can't shoot a landscape or a horse to save my life. Or, a macro of a flower that's not part of a bride's bouquet! I just suck at them. But, weddings are my thing. I love the details and the rhythm and once you get used to them they're not that hard.

And that's why there are all of us

We surely do capture different subjects!

Hope Austin is being kind to you!

[Suzon]

I'm also one to offer kudos to the wedding photographers. I did a few early on and WILL NOT DO IT AGAIN. Tall glass of nope there. That's why I'll likely starve to death as a photographer.

What I can't shoot is wildlife. I suck at it. Totally suck. Birds are the absolute worst.

[Suzon]

Thanks Suzon! Do you like Topaz's denoise software better than Nik's (which is now free)?

I never use the Nik one. I like the Topaz one ok, but really I do most of my noise reduction Camera Raw at 16 bit. I sometimes have a couple different layers of noise reduction. Then I use Blend If or masks to put it only where I absolutely need it.

[viscountessleftfield]

Hope Austin is being kind to you!

I see our new doctor tomorrow, I hope I like them better than I did the ones in the Carolinas. I feel like I got run over by a truck lately, but this could be normal pregnancy crap. Maybe they'll send me home with some tylenol.

[WheresMyWhite]

VLF, ouch

Having never been in your state, I can't comment on how you are feeling other than my complete sympathies as you go through these last weeks. I hope you like the new Dr better (let us know) and hopefully something more than tylenol...

[viscountessleftfield]

VLF, ouch

Having never been in your state, I can't comment on how you are feeling other than my complete sympathies as you go through these last weeks. I hope you like the new Dr better (let us know) and hopefully something more than tylenol...

It's a running joke - that's pretty much all they give pregnant women for pain. Mom and I got in a car accident, she got all kinds of good stuff.

I got... tylenol.

Every doctor, other than the maternity doctors, in North Carolina were amazing to me. My maternity providers never listened and I had several hospital stays over their lack of listening skills (and my lack of advocating stronger for myself).

[WheresMyWhite]

I don't know if you laughed over the tylenol but I did (and yeah, with being pregnant, do need to be careful with some of the meds they could give you)

You are right, you need to advocate for yourself or have family members that can try on your behalf. It is hard as we tend to "assume" the health care staff knows what they are doing but one still needs to be actively aware of what is going on and keep asking and pushing.

I get the frustrations and sometimes lack of communication. A few years ago I was in the hospital for a few weeks. I remembered very little of it (better living through warp drive pharmacuticals) and decided to ask for my records. I learned what warp drive meds I was given along with other things that my two personal advocates (fiancé and best friend both with MPOA) were never told about Not a good feeling.

Hang in there and push (literally and figuratively ) when you don't get what's going on or don't think you are being listened to. Be the beyotch that no one really wants to be but sometimes needs to. And don't let them chalk your behavior up to "hormones".

And there is some funky grey bar when I post this, at least on my screen, that I have no idea where it is coming from...

[viscountessleftfield]

We photographed the tenth most popular house on realtor.com this week -

http://www.realtor.com/news/trends/150- ... ular-home/ - 25 Fox Ln, Worthington, OH was us! Pretty damn cool!

[WheresMyWhite]

Very nice and congrats. And, since I can't quite tell for sure (which can be a good thing ), do you do your RE photos in HDR??? I think yes but not 100% positive.

And nice house, a bit big for me and definitely out of my price range

[viscountessleftfield]

We do multiple exposures, but not in camera HDR. HDR can look grungy, and we go for a lighter, brighter look.

[texsuze]

Not a photographer in any sense, so this question/situation might seem a bit pedestrian.

A few weekends ago we hosted (for the second year in a row) a professional wildlife photographer here at our ranch. We put her up for the weekend in our guest quarters, since she was giving a photo workshop as part of the nature festival I'm involved with. She took some great (of course) photos of a fox in our yard, and last year got some photos of an endangered species we happen to have on another property.

Is a professional photographer "required" to recognize or give any credit to the fact that photos were taken on private property? We didn't have a problem with her taking photos--- the only time she didn't have iphone or $$$ camera in-hand was when she was showering Reading some of this thread, I'm just wondering about the ability to make money selling photos when taken on private property, albeit with landowner's permission. We've asked to use one or two of the photos she's taken on our place in order to create some nice greeting cards, and would certainly honor her copyright somewhere on the card. But she hasn't managed to forward the photos to us yet.
Your thoughts?

[Racetrackreject]

Not a photographer in any sense, so this question/situation might seem a bit pedestrian.

A few weekends ago we hosted (for the second year in a row) a professional wildlife photographer here at our ranch. We put her up for the weekend in our guest quarters, since she was giving a photo workshop as part of the nature festival I'm involved with. She took some great (of course) photos of a fox in our yard, and last year got some photos of an endangered species we happen to have on another property.

Is a professional photographer "required" to recognize or give any credit to the fact that photos were taken on private property? We didn't have a problem with her taking photos--- the only time she didn't have iphone or $$$ camera in-hand was when she was showering Reading some of this thread, I'm just wondering about the ability to make money selling photos when taken on private property, albeit with landowner's permission. We've asked to use one or two of the photos she's taken on our place in order to create some nice greeting cards, and would certainly honor her copyright somewhere on the card. But she hasn't managed to forward the photos to us yet.
Your thoughts?

From what I have witnessed, your luck in getting something to use is purely based on the kindness of the photographer. Many photographers offer photos to venues who regularly host them, at no cost, but there are others who will want you to pay for everything. I think if you polled a group of photogs, you would find it pretty evenly split on who provides photos and who does not.

If the photographer has permission to shoot photos on the property, for their use, then that's all they really need. Having said that though, it depends on what exactly is stated in the contract. Both items mentioned above are the sort of things that should be worked out beforehand and placed in the contract.

So the answer to both is yes, no, and maybe, depending. Sorry that's not more helplful.

[Suzon]

Not a photographer in any sense, so this question/situation might seem a bit pedestrian.

A few weekends ago we hosted (for the second year in a row) a professional wildlife photographer here at our ranch. We put her up for the weekend in our guest quarters, since she was giving a photo workshop as part of the nature festival I'm involved with. She took some great (of course) photos of a fox in our yard, and last year got some photos of an endangered species we happen to have on another property.

Is a professional photographer "required" to recognize or give any credit to the fact that photos were taken on private property? We didn't have a problem with her taking photos--- the only time she didn't have iphone or $$$ camera in-hand was when she was showering Reading some of this thread, I'm just wondering about the ability to make money selling photos when taken on private property, albeit with landowner's permission. We've asked to use one or two of the photos she's taken on our place in order to create some nice greeting cards, and would certainly honor her copyright somewhere on the card. But she hasn't managed to forward the photos to us yet.
Your thoughts?

It's a weird thing...who owns what. Basically, you don't own the wildlife, so you have no claim to it; however, you do own the land she was standing on, so she might need a property release to use the photos for certain things (like selling the photo for use in advertising a product), especially if any of the property in the photographs was easily recognizable and not easily photographed from a public road.

[WheresMyWhite]

No kidding on weird

I take and potentially sell a photo I took at the Denver Botanic Garden.

If it is a flower, I'm good to sell on, say, FineArtAmerica, but please mention where I took it.
If it is a photo of some architecture that would be iconic to the Garden, then no, I can't sell it.
If it is a photo of a piece of Chihuly glass (of which I have thousands of), then I would need his permission and that won't be happening any time soon

[texsuze]

Thanks, I had a feeling this might be a gray area. The wildlife photographer was paid for conducting the workshop during this year's nature festival. One of the endangered species photos she took on our property last year was featured prominently on the rack card created to advertise this year's festival; I don't know for sure if she "donated" the photo, but I believe she did. And yes, I know that wildlife in this state, technically, belongs to all citizens of the state. I believe she'd make the fox photos available to us if we ask again. There were no buildings or identifying features in any of the photos.

She is extremely busy doing workshops and consulting about wildlife photo tourism with landowners throughout the state, so things might have slipped her mind. Our relationship with her is actually more friendship at this point than professional, too. Thanks for the feedback.

[WheresMyWhite]

And maybe next time she shoots on your property, have a short discussion with her to clear this up so everything is understood

[viscountessleftfield]

It's a weird thing...who owns what. Basically, you don't own the wildlife, so you have no claim to it; however, you do own the land she was standing on, so she might need a property release to use the photos for certain things (like selling the photo for use in advertising a product), especially if any of the property in the photographs was easily recognizable and not easily photographed from a public road.

This. Reputable printing and commercial licensing companies should ask for a property release. I have them for my non public locations.

[viscountessleftfield]

If it is a photo of a piece of Chihuly glass (of which I have thousands of), then I would need his permission and that won't be happening any time soon

I have an amazing photo of Chihuly glass from the Franklin Conservatory mom grabbed at a wedding. It is insanely beautiful! I use it as my background on everything. We had a wedding there for an Egyptian couple and there was a middle eastern prince in attendance, so I can't share photos of anything except details due to his security issues.

[WheresMyWhite]

I have heard of stories of people who have posted Chihuly photos on places like FAA and he's gotten the photos taken down (they are, after all his artwork ).

I've also talked to a professional whose told me the challenges of getting official blessing to use an image with Chihuly glasswork in it...

I love Chihuly's work and have gotten some, IMO, amazing photos of it Sounds like he doesn't like artsy representation of his work, only images that reflect the entire sculpture.

How are you and Austin doing?

[viscountessleftfield]

:)

I have heard of stories of people who have posted Chihuly photos on places like FAA and he's gotten the photos taken down (they are, after all his artwork ).

I've also talked to a professional whose told me the challenges of getting official blessing to use an image with Chihuly glasswork in it...

I love Chihuly's work and have gotten some, IMO, amazing photos of it

How are you and Austin doing?

The only place I've posted it is Instagram, and so far it hasn't been pulled! https://www.instagram.com/p/BEP4QgbRiTW ... tographync - I think this links to it!

We're surviving! I'll be 35 weeks on Tuesday and he can come anytime. We always thought he'd be late June - early July, but I'm starting to show some signs of him arriving sooner. Of course, with babies, there's no telling and it could still be six weeks until he arrives.

[WheresMyWhite]

Right, Chihuly or someone on his staff would have to see it but I know he is pretty insistent when he finds them (and Instagram is probably safer as you aren't selling them vs finding them on, say, FAA). Lovely picture although I find I much prefer his larger "outdoor" sculptures over his smaller "indoor" ones. I've seen some indoor that I liked, but overall, have loved his outdoor work. Maybe one day I'll cull some of my favorites and post them on something like Flickr.

For the moment (until it closes for the summer), I volunteer at the membership kiosk at the Desert Botanical Garden which is just outside admissions and right across from the 3 green "thistles" (I don't remember their actual name) which were a "gift" from Garden donors and are now on permanent display.

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=ht ... mrc&uact=8

For your sake, hope Austin does come a bit early and easily. Glad to hear you are past the time where it is a bit safer for him to arrive.

Keep us posted!

Yes, please, he isn't born until we get at least one photo!

[Racetrackreject]

June 16th is a good day to be born. Just saying.

[viscountessleftfield]

June 16th is a good day to be born. Just saying.

That's actually the date hubby says he's coming on. I'm praying for a Monday. I like May 30th, I have a full two weeks off then and it would be the perfect time.

But, unless things go sideways or I go 42weeks, we'll let him choose his arrival date.

[viscountessleftfield]

http://gph.is/1sg3vog

Here's a little GIF from yesterday. The winds were insane and this dress isn't light.

[Suzon]

http://gph.is/1sg3vog

Here's a little GIF from yesterday. The winds were insane and this dress isn't light.

That's great though. Love it.

[viscountessleftfield]

That's great though. Love it.

I sent it to my bride, I hope she likes it!

[WheresMyWhite]

OMG... makes you appreciate all who are part of the wedding party... doesn't look like the minister/pastor was having much fun either

[viscountessleftfield]

OMG... makes you appreciate all who are part of the wedding party... doesn't look like the minister/pastor was having much fun either

It was in the mid 40's, sustained winds 20 - 25mph, gusts to 40mph, windchills in the low 30's/high 20's. The girls were in strapless dresses, I don't know how they did it!

Amazing venue, but dear god was it cold for May!

[Suzon]

I FINALLY got away from my desk long enough to point a lens at a horse other than mine! This is Exploding Pony's new pony. This is the only one I've processed so far. I have a bunch of others tagged. You can click on the image to see it larger.

[Racetrackreject]

I FINALLY got away from my desk long enough to point a lens at a horse other than mine! This is Exploding Pony's new pony. This is the only one I've processed so far. I have a bunch of others tagged. You can click on the image to see it larger.

OOOhhh, pretty. I love the mood of it!

Once I get my real work started, I will have to come back and post some of my Bassett Hound in full run series. The ears! The jowls! It's awesome. lol

[WheresMyWhite]

Suzon, I love this photo. As RTR said, love the mood. I love how the road and the trees so nicely frame the horse and rider...

I know that most of the time, photography is a setup but sometimes there is a big of the "magic" of being in the right place at the right time to give a bit of an extra kick to the photo.

VLF, ouch... those weather conditions could, at least for me, ruin the nicest venue... I can see your lovely bride recalling in all its glory that cold, windy day ever time she looks at the photos. I am sure there was at least one set of goosebumps out there! Including yours!