It’s always a great feeling to end up on the right side of the weather gods.  The forecast called for rain, and the rain did come, but only after we finished doing the pictures - mostly at a Funeral Home.  Sounds strange until you see the grounds at the Funeral Home - absolutely stunning.  Meanwhile, the Bride and Groom, Krista and Dan, ended up being one of my nicest and funnest couples ever (not that I was surprised, considering I did their engagement pix too).  So, good times all around.  Here are some pix from last night (though it’s almost 3am now!!).  Enjoy.

Last night I had the pleasure of photographing Christina & Brent’s wedding.  Lovely people.  Great Venue.  Georgeous weather.  Fantastic band - Grooveyard.  And the traditional late-night ’sweet table’ was turned on its head with grilled cheese sandwiches and poutine - which went over very well with the guests.  Here are some teaser shots from the day:

There’s another ‘Old Mill’ and it’s in Ancaster - and Lindsay & Brain were married there last night.  The Ancaster Old Mill easily rivals it’s more well known counterpart for beautiful grounds.  And the service and food were first class.  The whole day was filled with emotion and honesty as two people who obviously love each other deeply came together in matrimony.  I was very glad to share in their joy.  Here are a few teaser pix from the day:

Jodi and David were married yesterday at the beautiful Palais Royale Ballroom, one of the nicest venues in the GTA.  Having had quite a lot of mediocre wedding food, the dinner was amongst the best I’ve ever had, which is nice after a day’s work.  The weather was hot but once the ceremony started it was quite manageable and the scene overlooking Lake Ontario was rather stunning.  Also, can’t forget to mention the sumptuous cookies and pastries that David made himself in concert with the Palais’ pastry chef.

Here are some pictures from the wedding:

For months now I have been pining over the Nikon D700, which in my previous post I called “(un)arguably the best Digital SLR ever made”.  My previous camera the Nikon D200 has been a wonderful camera for the last 3 years.  Paired with either my 50mm 1.4 lens or the 18-200mm VR, it has been a great combination for Wedding, Portrait & Event Photography.  But, it’s time to take things to the next level.  Having played around with my new D700 now for about a week I can tell you the difference is amazing.  My 50mm lens is insanely sharp with this camera - I never knew it could be this sharp.  Furthermore, while it is blasphemy of sorts to use the 18-200mm lens (which is a DX lens) with the FX D700, I and others have tried it out and this lens has never looked so good (though it is not a fast lens, when combined with the D700’s low-light capabilities this lens suddenly becomes that much more effective).  In fact, I did comparisons taking the same shots using the D200 and the D700 with the 18-200mm lens and the D700 shots are markedly superior, both in colour and sharpness.  While I’m tempted to keep using this lens, what with its great range which I have become so used to, I will be buying an FX lens to take its place (alas, not that there is an FX equivalent).

While everything is better with this camera, the main selling feature for me is its aforementioned incredible low-light performance.  It’s ridiculous how good the pictures look at 3200 ISO.  And paired up with the 50mm 1.4, flash will definitely only be required now and then.  The way I had to utilize flash with my previous set-up had been a source of irritation since most of the available ambient light was almost always overwhelmed by the flash.

No longer.  Can’t wait to do more shooting.  For those of you on the fence about the D700, if you can afford it, buy it!!

Last week I was hired by an American Company, Certiport, to photograph their annual Gala Event in Toronto (thank you to the organic side of Google).  I didn’t know what it was all about but at the very least it was a chance to try out my glorious new camera, the Nikon D700, (un)arguably the best digital SLR ever made (more on that in another post - suffice to say, it’s incredible).

It turned out to be a pretty cool event.  Certiport, in association with Microsoft and Adobe, creates software designed to bring standardized Digital Literacy to the world.  They have a global competition every year (80,000 young people participated this year) to encourage kids all over, including in many less developed nations, to become profficient at Microsoft Word and Excel.  The best of the best are flown every year to the Gala Event weekend (next year to be held in a swanky resort in Puerto Rico) where a final competition is held to find the fastest and most accurate kids.  Every kid received a medal but special attention was given to four winners from Hong Kong and Thailand.  So, that was pretty cool.

The next part of the evening was dedicated to honouring individuals from around the world who use Centiport’s software to introduce and spread Digital Literacy as far and wide as possible, especially with respect to lower income people who would normally not have access to computers.  The winner of the ‘Inspiration Award’ was a Libyan business man, Khaled El Hamedi, who, to date, has helped train and certify more than 30,000 public and private workers in his country.

Now corporate events can be somewhat bland but the highlight of the night was keynote speaker, John Herrington, former NASA Astronaut.   Using his own fascinating life as an example, he spoke about the importance of challenge and inspiration in finding our calling.  He spoke eloquently and from the heart about his trials and tribulations and he showed a video of his experience on the Space Shuttle and his walk outside the Space Station.   Incidentally, Herrington is also of Chickasaw Indian descent, which he was very proud of.  Being the adventurer he is, when a medical condition prevented him from ever flying into space again, he embarked on a 4,000-mile bicycle ride from Cape Flattery, WA to Cape Canaveral, FL, beginning in mid-August 2008 designed to encourage student participation in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM). I was very happy to have heard him speak.

Here are some pix from the event:

Wedding Day timing considerations are arguably more crucial for the earlier part of the day which includes the ceremony and the pictures, so it’s easy to underestimate the importance of time management when it comes to the Wedding Reception.

The two most important factors in determining a workable and flowing Reception schedule are: (a) If there is a Receiving Line at the Reception - and, if so, how many guests there are; (b) the timing of the Speeches.

If there isn’t a Receiving Line, then you don’t have much to worry about.  Keep in mind that some couples have their Receiving Line immediately after the Wedding Ceremony (ie) outside the Church.  In this scenario, the amount of time allocated for the pictures, including, Family, Wedding Party and Couple Shots could become limited if the Receiving Line takes too long.  Then, depending on how much time there is, the Newlywed’s pictures may be rushed in order for them to make it to the Reception on time - and these are the last pictures you want to hurry through.

Back to the Reception.  5:30 is a typical starting time.  Guests begin showing up.  Cocktails and hors d’oeuvres are served.  Dinner is often served at 7:00.

Let’s say you decide to start the Receiving Line at 5:30.  How long will it take?  Well, that depends on how many guests you have.  An average wedding will have about 150 guests.  If you and/or your guests are talkative then it could easily take until 7:00.  On average, if you estimate 30 seconds per guest, then it will take 75 minutes.  If there are 250 guests or more, it could be a problem (ie) Dinner starts later, which could affect the quality of the food.

As a Wedding Photographer, it doesn’t matter to me at all if there is a Receiving Line or not, or how long it takes.  My job is to photograph whatever is happening.  What is undeniable, though, is how tiring the Receiving Line is for the Newlyweds - who have recently had their ceremony, and who, in most cases, have just arrived at the Reception Hall from doing their pictures.  Now, they are expected to stand and greet people for a long time, with permanent smiles throughout.  By the end of it, most Couples are drained.  At least dinner is usually not far off at this point.

In some traditions, not having the Receiving Line is not an option.  It is a must.  Certainly, for those in this situation, because it is just a natural and expected part of the day, having a Receiving Line may not be quite as unfavorable as it is portrayed.   However, if there is a choice, I often suggest to the Bride and Groom that they consider forgoing it.

What are the benefits of avoiding a Receiving Line?  (1) The Couple can relax for a short time, maybe 15 minutes, when they arrive at the Reception Hall.  After freshening up they can join their guests who are arriving and enjoying Cocktails and hors d’oeuvres - instead of having to spend the entire time standing in one spot; (2) Participating in the Cocktails with their guests will allow them to mingle in a more personal way than in the Receiving Line; (3) In lieu of the Receiving Line, the Newlyweds can also visit their guests at their tables between dinner courses.

The next part of the Reception which can really affect the flow of the evening concerns the Speeches.  I always ask Couples who are booking me how many and how long Speeches will be.  Invariably, most say there will be few and they won’t be long.  While that is sometimes the case, by the time the Wedding Day arrives there are frequently more Speeches than originally anticipated, and there is often one Speech, at least, that is surprisingly long.  Consider too that by Speech-time some or all of those speaking will have consumed a fair amount of alcohol (for some, to quell the nerves).

So, when is the best time to do the Speeches?  Well, if you are having a sit-down dinner that usually takes about 2 hours.  Speeches usually take anywhere from 30-60 minutes.  If you are planning on having the Speeches after dessert your guests will be sitting on their butts for up to 3 hours - possibly longer if dinner takes longer or the speeches take longer.  That’s a long time for people to be sitting and it sometimes serves to suck the life out of the party before it has even begun.  Having the Speeches interspersed throughout dinner works very nicely, culminating in the happy couple speaking when dessert is served.  That way, once dessert is finished the party is on.

If Speeches start after dinner, depending on the crowd, it can result in the guests becoming restless and heading to the bathroom or outside for fresh air or cigarettes - which can be disruptive and even disappointing.  Furthermore, most Couples have their First Dance at the conclusion of the Speeches.  If the Speeches take place throughout dinner then as the guests are finishing dessert the Newlyweds can speak and then head straight to the dance floor and have their first dance.  In this case, most of the guests are still at their tables.  Alternatively, if the Speeches are given after dinner then by the time they finish and it’s time for the First Dance, you may have a half-empty room on your hands - which can take away from the circumstance.

Note that some Couples decide to do their First Dance when they are introduced at the beginning of dinner.  In this case, everyone is seated and all eyes are on them.  This option works well since there is a captive audience, though if there are windows in the room it is usually still light at about 7:00 and that may not be as dramatic or romantic as a First Dance in a dimly-lit room.

Take into consideration that by Reception time the Bride and Groom have been up since early morning.  A lot of energy has been expended.  Creating a Reception Schedule that flows nicely and isn’t burdensome can help put the right finishing touch on a day that you’ll want to remember as not only being special, but fun.

Maybe it was just too early in the morning for Billy Bob Thornton but what a hilarious and cringe-worthy appearance (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJWS6qyy7bw) on Q.  Needless to say, ego is a big part of being a performer, whether your’e an actor or a musician, but most are able to do a slightly better job of masking their delusions of grandeur than the Joaquin-like Billy Bob.  I’m not the biggest fan of Jian Ghomeshi, but I thought he did an admiral job of dealing with the supremely uncooperative BBT.  I felt badly for his bandmates as their efforts to plug their music were hijacked by a BBT whose ego overwhelmed any sense of irony, as he proceeded to bring more attention to the very thing he had wanted to avoid discussing - his acting career - which Jian had made a cursory and obligatory mention of in his intro.   Hopefully, their music stands on its own because it will be hard for new listeners to take them seriously.  Good job, Billy Bob.

Have you ever been to a church wedding and been taken aback by how visible and inappropriate the wedding photographer is - such as being in very close proximity to the bride and groom and taking pictures indiscriminately as if the end of the world is coming and he’s trying to get in as many shots as possible?

Alas, this kind of scenario has been repeated so often that many churches now have strict rules and limitations for wedding photography.  Why has this happened?  Because amateur photographers have proliferated in the wedding photography business and their lack of experience and awareness has ruined things for the rest of us professionals.

Limitations include: (1) no flash photography at all - which can be debilitating in a dark church; (2) photography only during the entrance, ring exchange and exit; (3) photography only from the back of the church or, worse, the balcony (arguably the worst case scenario, especially if it’s combined with no flash photography).

This is quite a serious matter because obviously the church pictures are important - and can be quite beautiful.  There are many wonderful Priests out there who realize that we all have a job to do and that when we work together as partners it’s a win-win situation:   The ceremony maintains its sanctity and the photographer gets the shots.  But then other Ministers have been tainted with their experiences with amateur photographers so, understandably, many of them paint us all with the same brush.

I always make sure to speak with the Officiant before the ceremony so I understand the rules.  Regardless of how I feel about them, this is his/her domain and I always respect that.  There’s no choice really.  Once, in my early days, I was told off by a Priest, mid-ceremony - not a pleasant experience for anyone - and that happened while I thought I was being cognizant of his rules.  Yikes.

My personal approach is to be as stealthy as possible.  Afterwards, I often hear from my couples that they didn’t even notice me in the church until the registry signing.  In my opinion, that is the ideal.  At the end of the day, most Officiants just want the wedding photographer to have some common sense - do what we need to do, without stepping on their toes.  In this case, as in other areas, common sense comes with experience - it’s not actually that ‘common’.

My advice to the Bride and Groom.  Make sure you take the wedding photography into account when selecting your place of worship.  Ask your Priest or Minister about any limitations.  If the pictures of the ceremony are important to you, don’t assume anything because you may be shocked on the wedding day to find out there are significant restrictions that may hamstring your photographer’s ability to effectively capture your ceremony.

Since my early twenties I have had issues with the so called “Free Market” Economy that we all participate in.  Why?  First, because there is nothing ‘free’ about it.  How can an economy in which every single major industry is heavily subsidized be considered ‘free’? Second, because any responsible economic system balances the needs of the people with corporate profits, unfettered and under-regulated markets always lead to corporate excess and abuse.  Always have, always will.  Third, the very raison d’etre of our economy - the idea that we can and should have continuous growth, without contraction - is faulty and absurd, flying in the face of every single other natural system at work in the universe.  Fourth, the economy is tied too closely to the stock market, so that even if the economy is generally healthy, if there isn’t the requisite growth, then the markets will drop.  Furthermore, in under-regulated markets, speculation becomes rampant and the whole market enterprise becomes a crap shoot in which us Average Joes are always the last to get the information (ie) gambling.  Sixth, an unbalanced economic system means growth and prosperity for the few, built on the backs of the poor.

So, it’s easy to see why it took me so long to find my way within a system that is profit-based instead of people-based.  My detractors might wonder if I am naïve, or an anarchist or a communist.  After all, one can complain about this system, but what’s the alternative?  Well, that’s an easy one.  It’s our system, just a much more human-centered version.  It has worked quite well for the Scandinavian countries (though they are not immune from the affects of this deepening global depression).  There is nothing wrong with money and profit, which often come from limitless human creatively and innovation.  But who ever said that a person or group’s brilliance entitles them to limitless economic benefit?  We have become hamstrung by an economic and social philosophy which too closely correlates success with financial gain.  The nuclear arms race of the 70s and 80s was replaced by the consumption and accumulation race of the 90s and the new millennium.  Now, we pay the price as our collective gluttony comes home to roost.  It is easy to blame the corporations and those who run the financial system.  But none of it would have been possible without the tacit approval and direct participation of all of us.

Meanwhile, this economic meltdown has come at a momentous time - following, some might argue, an ethical and societal meltdown - as the U.S. tries to leave behind an era of economic, political and social myopia that tapped into the most cynical aspects of the human experience.  Enter Barack Obama (of whom I have been a supporter).  On the surface, the perfect antidote at the perfect time.  Long have we waited for someone of his apparent caliber to assume the mantle of leadership.  Expectations are incalculable.  Not only do we want this messiah to save us from ourselves, we are going to hold him to an impossible standard.

The reality is that Obama may just be the first in a line of transformative figures that will hopefully help guide humanity to a more evolved state of being.  While some think/believe/hope he is ‘the one’ - and he is doing great work on the domestic side - his actions to date have shown him to be following a rather conservative approach when it comes to the economy and the two wars.  To many supporters’ dismay, he is expanding the campaign in Afghanistan, a place where no foreign occupier has ever succeeded.  The reasons for this are beyond the scope of this article, but it’s enough to say that a major oil pipeline is a major part of the equation.  As for Iraq, good luck Mr. President.

Where one can really see the limits within which Obama operates is in the economic domain, which, of course, trumps all others by a wide margin.  Here, Obama is beholden to the corporation known as America.  All decisions are made through the prism of assumed and continued American global economic hegemony - regardless of the obvious fact that that hegemony is rapidly becoming a remnant of the past.  The Fall of Rome - Redux - is upon us.

In this environment of gradual collapse lies a great opportunity for true change, as always espoused in election campaigns.  Having the backing of the people, a courageous Obama could implement sweeping changes to make the system more equitable and stable. Large scale change is what he campaigned, and won, on - and what had many people fearing for his life if we went too far (not because he’s African-American, which is significant, but because he would do too much boat-rocking to suit those who always benefit from the status quo).  Alas, with his selection of Timothy Geithner as Treasury Secretary, a stalwart of the policies that are now bringing the greatest economy in the history of humanity to its knees, change is relative indeed.  After all, this administration is overseeing the greatest corporate heist in history, apparently to save the system.  The question is, should the system, as we know it, be saved?  Haven’t its fatal flaws been exposed in no uncertain terms?  Isn’t it the perfect time for an overhaul, while those who wield the economic swords are vulnerable?  And what are the long-term consequences of not making these changes when we have the chance?  Total collapse?  Really, there are only so many warnings we can receive, and ignore, before the disease becomes terminal.

Now, it is early days.  During the election campaign we repeatedly witnessed Obama’s brilliance in eschewing short term expedience in favor of long-term goals.  This could certainly be the case here.  Maybe years down the road he will be confirmed as a Chess Grandmaster and we will marvel out how he managed to lead us in a new direction, even when it appeared to some that was succumbing to the old game.  Time will tell.  Our collective fingers are crossed.