of course if you want to print a wall sized poster then you might need the raw to iron out the graining/noise and sharpening but for wedding pics those would be overkill :D
but then again ... it's like having 3gb ram on their smartphones
Hands up who goes and looks at their wedding photos!
We looked at ours off and on maybe a week or so after the wedding, but I've not looked at them in the past 13 years to be honest.
I think having a professional do the big group photo is great, but all the other fluff photos ? Not so interesting.
We got far more interesting photos by just having a pile of disposable point n click cameras for people to grab outside the church and then a camera was left on each table at the reception, then after the event we asked everyone who came along to send us anything they thought was good from their own cameras. Built up a nice album from that lot ... which has since been scanned and consigned to the depths of a packing box somewhere.
DNG is RAW packaged up with metadata that described how to read the raw format. Every cameras RAW format is different.
joker97: of course if you want to print a wall sized poster then you might need the raw to iron out the graining/noise and sharpening but for wedding pics those would be overkill :D
but then again ... it's like having 3gb ram on their smartphones
Jpeg would be fine for that. A lot of the noise reduction is done in Photoshop or custom programs not the RAW converter. However with modern cameras NR is basically unnecessary unless you're a pixel peeper. I have a 50" print done with a 5D mk 1, ISO800, no NR, looks awesome.
Mark: I think having a professional do the big group photo is great, but all the other fluff photos ? Not so interesting.
Problem is in peak season most good professionals will have a minimum package. This is how people make their living, and there are 20 days a year that you can really work, not counting post processing. This is another reason wedding photographer isn't a big money maker.
Mark: Hands up who goes and looks at their wedding photos!
We looked at ours off and on maybe a week or so after the wedding, but I've not looked at them in the past 13 years to be honest.
I think having a professional do the big group photo is great, but all the other fluff photos ? Not so interesting.
We got far more interesting photos by just having a pile of disposable point n click cameras for people to grab outside the church and then a camera was left on each table at the reception, then after the event we asked everyone who came along to send us anything they thought was good from their own cameras. Built up a nice album from that lot ... which has since been scanned and consigned to the depths of a packing box somewhere.
it is possibly the best you and your wife (together) could look in your lifetime, so it's important. esp when you or she is 70 and alone. but I guess when you're 70 you won't be pixel peeping nor critically analysing
Mark: I think having a professional do the big group photo is great, but all the other fluff photos ? Not so interesting.
Problem is in peak season most good professionals will have a minimum package. This is how people make their living, and there are 20 days a year that you can really work, not counting post processing. This is another reason wedding photographer isn't a big money maker.
*THIS*. Often a wedding photography can not give a discount (especially if they're good, and thus in demand) as if you shoot yours cheaper, they're missing out on a day when they could've done it at their normal rates for somebody else.
if you are offered a discount or find anything cheap - well you better get the raw to edit yourself and hope you are lucky enough that they took the right shots! otherwise you have wasted every cent ...
Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly
to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.
Trusted
