It still isn’t the beach wedding I’ve been dreaming of covering, but it was still quite a beautiful occasion, and it was a joy to cover.

Enough of all the talk though - let’s get to the images.

Top left is little Mika - I still can’t quite decide if she looks like her dad or her mom, but I think you can decide for yourself as you see the rest of the images. Below that is her mom, the bride. Yes, she did her own make-up - I know that’s not very common here, but like I said, it’s not like most weddings here.

To the right is the groom waiting outside the room while his bride gets into her gown.  The bride and groom saw each other before the wedding?  I’ll say it again, it’s not like most weddings.

You want proof that the Jose and Tinette were in the same place?  This is it - that’s the couple walking down the same hallway you saw earlier.  Normally, you’d see just the bride, her face covered in a veil.  That wasn’t the case here - you’ve got the bride with no veil on her head, the groom at her arm, and the beginnings of a laugh on her face.

Fortunately, we still got a little bit of alone time with Tinette for her portraits.  As usual, my favorite shot from the set wasn’t a planned one.  In the image here, she suddenly struck a pose - and we ended up with a fantastic shot for the album.

Going again with the not-your-typical-wedding theme, the bride and the groom walked the aisle together.  Here, it looks like they’re asking each other if they’re ready for this.

The answer to the previous question, obviously, was yes.  That means I can share a couple of solemn and joyful moments with you.

Of course, the first kiss is a must-have.  Also here are some other portraits of the newlyweds.  Sly took the one on the upper right - I just provided the light.

Of course, the first kiss is a must-have.  Also here are some other portraits of the newlyweds.  Sly took the one on the upper right - I just provided the light.  These shots pale in comparison to the next image though - what is probably one of the cutest first kiss images I’ve ever gotten.

Come on… you have to admit it’s cute.

Ok, this next one isn’t quite as cute, but I really like it.  I wish I could say I took it, but Sly took this one too.  I was too busy packing gear so we could move on to the reception.

If I remember correctly, in every wedding I’ve covered, there has been a cute little kid that simply loved having his or her picture taken.  In this wedding, this little girl in the green dress played that role.

If I also remember correctly, I’ve never had the bride and groom take over the exit at their reception.  Jose and Tinette did just that - they stood by the door and made sure almost everybody had a picture with the couple before they left.  I say almost everybody because a few people had already left by the time Jose and Tinette blocked the exit.

Of course, while nobody was leaving, the couple took time to give each other some attention.

What are these last two images?  The one on the left is the last photo of one of those glasses - I accidentally smashed it moments after I took this image (yes, I smashed something again).  The groom then immediately informed me that out of over 200 guests, I was the only one who ended up breaking a glass.  Thank goodness I didn’t smash any glass on my lenses.  Anyway, breaking a glass at a wedding is supposed to be good luck, right?

What’s the story behind the image on the right?  Well, that’s just a shot of the boys at the wedding horsing around.  While the bride was getting dressed (remember the hallway shot from the first set of images above?), we had nothing better to do.  The dude with shaved head is Jose, the groom.  The ones in white are his brothers.  The guy in the suit is Pao - I’m not quite what exactly he did, but he definitely helped keep everything running smoothly that day.  The gun in blue is Christian (a.k.a. X) - he shot the video.  The other guys in black (but not in suits) are the two photographers - Sly is on the top right holding the flash that lit us up and I’m holding the camera.  Yes, I had to share that image.

That’s why I recently embarked on another wave of DIY projects.  My goal this time was to come up with lighting mods that not only worked well, but looked good - or at the very least didn’t look like 3rd-grade art projects

The images below are the results of this DIY spree.  You want instructions?  I’ve also posted several links below.  I didn’t follow them completely, but I definitely used them as guides for my own projects.

For Strobists, here’s some lighting info:
With the exception of the grids, everything was lit with an SB-800 on one side and a bounce card (i.e. a piece of white cardboard) on the other.  The grids were lit by the said SB-800 and the 430EX you see.

How to get your own lighting mods:

speed strap / cinch strap
If you don’t want to build your own straps, you can get a LumiQuest® Cinch Strap or a HonlPhoto Speed Strap.  Since I don’t mount the straps on the edge of my flash - I need the room for my grids - I recommend the Lumiquest version.  The wider HonlPhoto straps give you a lot more space to attach your mods, but are so wide they have to go to the edge of the flash.

If, on the other hand, you want to make your own straps, check out the links below.  I pretty much combined ideas from both sets of tutorials.  On this note, I should make a disclaimer - I use a baller ID to keep the strap in place.  I place it around the flash, then wrap the strap around it, and the strap stays in place.  This rubber band (that’s what it is, essentially) also serves another purpose - it keeps my gel holder in place.

• DIY Photography Lighting - The DIY Speed Strap | DIYPhotography.net
• Strobist: Mount Your Mods with Speed Straps

grids
I already linked to some instructions in a previous post on DIY grids, but I’ll list them again here:

• Strobist: Free and So Easy: DIY Grid Spots for Your Flash
• Studio Lighting - Homemade Gridspot | DIYPhotography.net
• Lighting Mods: DIY: Black Straws Snoot Grid (Part 1)
• Lighting Mods: DIY: Black Straws Snoot Grid (Colored)

I pretty much used the black straw (colored) tutorial, with some differences.  One is that I added a little tab with some hook tape to latch it onto the speed strap on my flash.   The critical difference however, is that I didn’t use cardboard.  I’m pretty sure you can tell what material I used based on the images above, but all I’ll say about it is this - doesn’t it look so much better than cardboard or duct tape?

bounce card
My bounce card here is pretty much a stiff version of ABetterBounceCard.com with hook & loop tape.  As you can see, it’s white on one side (it’s a bounce card after all) and black on the other (so the people behind me don’t go blind).

You want to see the bounce card itself?  See two more (not so glamorous) images below. If you still want a tutorial after seeing this, leave a comment telling me so.  I think the images are pretty clear though.

gel holder
This one item stymied me for quite a while.  I didn’t particularly like David Hobby’s way of attaching gels.  For one thing, it left the gels prone to more wear and tear than necessary.  On top of that, the the Roscolux gels I had didn’t leave me with much room to attach some hook & loop tape.

The HonlPhoto Rosco Gel Kit didn’t look that much better either - without some modifications (i.e. adding hooks on the other side), there was no way of stacking gels or attaching bounce cards, gobos, and other wonderful lighting mods.

The LumiQuest FX, Gel Set with Holder looked interesting, but also looked too bulky.  I don’t think I could put my bounce card on with that gel holder on.  A DIY gel holder (plus a snoot and gobo too) by Thomas Schwenger caught my eye, but fell out of favor too - I thought the gel holder was a bit too flimsy.

I then saw this DIY gel holder over at DIYPhotography.net which almost, but didn’t quite fit the bill.  One line in the post caught my eye though:

This got me thinking on alternatives to gel holders and the thing that popped to mind was name tag pockets. Those are pretty cheap and once you place on over your flash, you can freely insert and remove colorful gels.

After a short trip to the local bookstore (or rather, a conversation with my girlfriend, who then took it upon herself to go to the bookstore - thanks, Bear!), a bit of thinking, a fair amount of cutting, and some experimentation, I ended up with the little contraption you see on the right.

It looks a bit like the acrylic gel holder mentioned over at DIYPhotography.net, but it’s significantly lighter, nowhere near as bulky, and basically smaller.  It slides in under my DIY speed / cinch strap (under the baller ID I mentioned), and it’s small enough not to interfere with most other mods, so it can stay on my flash practically all the time.  I only remove this when I put on my grids, which have their own gel holders built in.

So, are you ready to start work on your own lighting mods?

It’s a piece of a picture frame that ended up smashed into little pieces.  I placed it near the edge of a table while trying to stage an image I had in my head - it landed on the floor less than two minutes later.  Needless to say, I didn’t move any other breakables around that day.

Fortunately, I ended up with more than a shattered picture frame.  Check out some of my favorite images (and maybe a short story about each) after the jump.

It seems like the men in the family didn’t really smile a whole lot, but when they did, you knew you would end up with a fantastic portrait. Take, for example, this jolly man above. To me it seemed like everytime he laughed or smiled, he looked a whole decade younger. I still have to smile when I see shots of him smiling like this.

On the other hand, this little boy didn’t want to smile for me.  I took the image above and showed it to him hoping for some reaction - I got a poker face.  Oh well - at least the rest of the family seems to love that shot.

As a photographer, catching a couple in “a moment” is, for lack of a better way of putting it, a cheap thrill.  In the images above, I caught Lolo and Lola (Filipino for Grandpa and Grandma) in one such moment.  I know she’s not fixing his tie (he’s not wearing one), so I guess he’s fixing his collar, or maybe brushing something off his cheek.  I don’t really know what she’s doing, but all I know is I almost missed this moment.

Of course, a little post-processing helps.  You see, I practically shot this from the hip - I ended up with a skewed (around 10 degrees, I think) and off-center image.  Thanks to the wonder of post-processing (and yes, you can do this in a darkroom), I got better symmetry, and best of all, you don’t have to tilt your head.  Also, you can check out the image in its original colors over on Flickr.

These are a few of my favorites from that day.  I hope you enjoyed them too.

I could go on and on about the video, but all my words won’t do it justice - you should just watch the damn thing. You might also want to vote for it on PhotographyVoter or other sites.

You Can’t Picture This by OpenCircuit (a.k.a. Rajesh Thind)

I guess that’s what happens when you don’t hide the fact that you’re using your camera.  Shocking? Sad? How would you describe it?

I just hate the fact that the photographers are seen with suspicion.

A few months later, the uncredited photographer, Anton Sheker, is featured as the same paper’s Picture Perfect Artist of the Week. He mentions this little problem to the team working on his feature - naively hoping they would get the paper to take notice, get in touch with him, and resolve the problem. Nothing happens.

A few more months pass, and he gets tired of waiting for the middlemen - in this case, the Picture Perfect team. Instead, he goes to his own blog and makes it known that his photos have been stolen. In the post, he shares the original images and the stories behind them. He “hope[s] this post can make a difference,” but instead, he gets a few updates from the paper (click here and scroll down to the updates) that lead nowhere.

More time passes, and he finally sues the paper for copyright infringement, but not before they “threatened to slap [him] with a criminal case if [he] continued [his] claim.”

All I can say is that it’s about time. I hope the courts make it clear that just because it’s posted online, it doesn’t mean it’s free to take.

trivia: According to PRWeb.com, this will be “the first time that camera EXIF data will be used as evidence in the Philippines.”

A few months ago, I parked my car several yards away (I only had my 85mm) and grabbed this image. After this, I kept saying I’d go back with a wider lens. Over three months later, I’ve yet to revisit the tractor.

I have, however, played around with the image - I’ve cropped it to a square and converted it into black and white. You can click on the thumbnail above to see a larger image on Flickr, or better yet, follow the jump.

What do you think? Also, can you guess what color the tractor really is?

Check out the original post to see the changes in the rules.

I’m not going to list them all here - you can check out the original post instead. All I’ll say here is that the most popular posts from the 9 bloggers cover a wide range of topics that include organizing and tagging photos, DIY lighting, macro and 3D photography, playing with basic photo software, working with more advanced tools, the birth of a blog, and even a post that highlights several other photography sites.

Before I end this post though, I invite you to participate in the next (and last) installment of Tibor’s Blog Statistics project. This time, the project focuses on where your visitors come from. The deadline for submissions is May 30, but you can see the rest of the details over at photonovice.net instead.

I’m still not particularly impressed with the prizes or excited about joining, but I have to at least concede that Caltex or Chevron isn’t out to take your photographs (and your rights over them) away from you.

“Take a great picture with a Caltex logo in it and win a great prize in this year’s Shooting Stars competition.” That’s what they said on the contest’s homepage. The great prize, based on the red text, is an Apple iPod Touch or a Nintendo Wii. It isn’t that great, but hey, I might as well give it a shot, right?

Wrong!

Before you take rush away from your computer and read a little further down. The main prize, it seems, is fame. As they put it: “Aside from being famous, the winners get a chance to win an Apple iPod Touch or a Nintendo Wii!” If you win, you’re not even assured of the prize that they’ve highlighted in bold red text.

Do a little more reading, and you’ll come across the contest Terms & Conditions and the FAQs.

From the T&C:

1. When a participant submits a photograph in response to this Contest (each a “Work”), he or she shall be deemed to have unconditionally consented to the terms and conditions set out herein.
2. As a condition of participation, the participant has to assign to Chevron all copyright in all Works submitted, and to waive all moral rights and similar rights in and to all such Works, by signing the attached Entry Form, failing which his Works will not be considered for participation.

Ok, so Caltex won’t claim to own your photo when you submit it. Instead, they’ll claim rights to use the winning entries. The first item in the T&C doesn’t change, but the second and third items set a significantly different tone.

1. When a participant submits a photograph in response to this Contest (each a “Work”), he or she shall be deemed to have unconditionally consented to the terms and conditions set out herein.
2. The participant will be required to grant to Chevron an exclusive perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free right and licence to use the Work that is selected as one of the winning entries in this Contest (the “Winning Entry”).
3. For the avoidance of doubt , Chevron shall have the exclusive right to:
   
   1. reproduce the Winning Entry in any manner or form and circulate such Winning Entry to any person in connection with the Contest, without compensation ; and
   2. use, copy, publish, print, transmit, and distribute the Winning Entry in any manner, whether for commercial or non-commercial purposes, as may be determined by Chevron without the prior consent of the photographers or owners of the Works and without any compensation whatsoever.

From the FAQs:

11. Do I retain full rights to my photograph?
No. Once submitted to us, we will have all rights to your photograph.

A look at the FAQs makes it clear that photographers who contribute retain full rights over their submissions - this is definitely a great improvement over the original rules. I’m still concerned about what “other advertising publicity materials” they intend to produce, but I won’t pick on that now.

11. Do I retain full rights to my photograph?
Yes, you do. However, if your photograph is selected as one of the 12 winning entries, we would request that you grant us the right to use the selected photograph for our Caltex calendar for 2008, Chevron’s e-greeting cards as well as any other advertising publicity materials in connection with Chevron’s business. Please see the Entry Form and the Terms and Conditions for further details.

Wow! You sign away your rights to your photos for the chance to be famous, and the chance to win an iPod Touch or a Wii. Still interested?

I didn’t think so.

It doesn’t end there though. If you look around the site, you won’t find a theme for the photos (except for the line that says “Care should be taken to create photographs that are positive and uplifting, and in line with The Chevron Way“). Instead, you’ll find some photo tips which includes this list of photo ideas:

• Caltex with Techron tanker on motorway shot from overpass
• Caltex staff on public transport coming to work
• Remote Caltex station in isolated countryside
• Caltex station set against a scenic background
• Pylon at night in mist from far away
• Lubes container in wastebasket/back of boot/garden shelf/bicycle basket
• Car decal on fancy car/motorbike
• Signboard reflected in puddle
• Caltex sticker on fridge door
• Caltex sticker on little kids bmx/go cart/skateboard
• Pedestrians with Star Mart shopping bags
• Caltex employee (off duty but in uniform) holding a door open for someone
• Kids reading SupaStrikas
• Kids drinking from Caltex/Coffee Plus/Star Mart branded paper cups
• Ferry passing Caltex oil platform
• Caltex logos (or sub brands) on unique vehicles like Jeepneys, tuk tuks
• Interesting people wearing Caltex merchandise
• Photos from Caltex community activities
• Scenes from Caltex sponsored events and employee events (e.g. family day)
• Toys made out of old Caltex product packaging (e.g. Havoline cans)

I don’t know about you, but it seems like they’ve already got a clear idea of what shots they want. Instead of hiring a professional photographer though, they’ve decided to exploit anybody naive enough to sign away their rights to their own photographs.

Do Caltex and Chevron really think a contest like this is in line with The Chevron Way? I certainly hope not.

With the amended T&C, Caltex and Chevron don’t really look that poised to exploit naive photographers anymore. Like I mentioned, I’m still not particularly excited about winning a chance to win (yes, winning a chance to win) an iPod or a Wii, but I won’t exactly be trying to discourage other photographers from joining the contest.

update 2008.05.13: Based on something JiimyD wrote over at slightly out of focus, specifically this excerpt:

the funniest part is that one of the “suggested photos” is of a Uniformed CalTex employee standing in front of a Station holding the door open (off duty of course). They won’t even pick-up the tab for the employee’s time! They probably would heap any responsibility and liability on the photographer if anything happened to the employee too.

I remembered another item on the contest FAQs:

15. If I am intending to photograph people, especially strangers, do I need to ask for their prior permission especially since the photographs may be used for publication?
Yes. All permissions and image rights have to be negotiated directly by the photographer. It is advisable to obtain their prior approval and explain to them what you are doing and what the photographs are for as not run into any risks. Attached are samples of the type of releases. Chevron will not be responsible for any disputes.

Well Jimmy, it looks like they really are heaping responsibility and liability on the photographer.

Adorama reports that “New York City’s City Council is holding a hearing this morning on a proposed law that would require wedding photographers to be licensed and submit a $5,000 bond.” I don’t live in New York so this doesn’t affect me directly, but the proposal still scares me. If this bill passes, it could be the precedent for other cities, and even other countries to follow.

You can read the entire proposal here, but I’ve highlighted a few key points below.

§20-250.d. “Wedding photographer” shall mean any person, corporation, partnership, limited liability company, or any other entity engaged in business with the purpose of regularly selling, or offering for sale, the service of recording still images or video of marriage ceremonies and related events.

§20-251 License required. It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in the business of owning or operating a bridal shop or wedding photography without first having obtained a license in accordance with the provisions of this subchapter, and without first being in compliance with all other applicable law, rules and regulations.

§20-251.c. The annual fee for a license or renewal thereof shall be one hundred twenty-five dollars.

This part seems ok. The part I wonder about is how they define “regularly selling, or offering for sale” one’s services. If, for example, I primarily cover corporate events, but accept requests from friends and acquaintances to cover their weddings, do I fall under the description of a wedding photographer?

I’m not particularly concerned about this definition though. I’m no legal expert, but it seems to be fairly specific - if you cater primarily to those getting married, you’re a wedding photographer. Do correct me if I’m wrong though.

This next part, on the other hand, scares me.

§20-256 Bond Requirement. Each bridal shop and wedding photographer shall furnish a $5,000 bond to the department conditioned upon:

a. compliance with all laws, rules and regulations covering the conduct of bridal shops and wedding photographers;
b. payment to the City of New York of any fine, penalty or other obligation imposed by the department for non-compliance with any law(s), rule(s) or regulation(s) within 30 days of its imposition; and
c. payment of any final judgment against the bridal shop and wedding photographer. The bond shall be either a cash bond or a bond executed by a duly authorized surety company in a form acceptable to the commissioner.

Seriously? What’s up with the Big Apple? First require photographers to “obtain a city permit and $1 million in liability insurance,” and when that gets shot down (sorry, no link for now), they target wedding photographers.

I wonder how much it’ll cost to hire a wedding photographer in New York if this law passes.

On top of that, I wonder how this affects wedding photographers elsewhere.

Here’s another thought, what happens if you’re a hobbyist that wants to start a wedding photography business? Are you expected to raise $5,000 and then some even before your business gets off the ground?

Basically, the question that keeps coming to mind is this: why does New York give photographers such a hard time?

Ok, that’s enough ranting for now. I need to calm down.