d a n d e r b y

OPPS...THIS IS A TEMPORARY HOME FOR MY NEW BLOG, "SEEING LIGHT"

2010-07-20T21:29:00.002-04:00

Thanks for bearing with me, the content here is more or less the same as what my new blog will have but the form is way different. It will take a couple days to make the changeover. Thanks for visiting and I hope you come back...it's going to be fun! DD

Again the Light

2010-06-07T09:44:00.006-04:00

A neighbor asked me to photograph her two daughters with their new babies (two in one season!). We did with great results but the light in their back yard was so wonderful, I cajoled the whole crowd into getting in the act. They said they weren't 'dressed' for a portrait but when the light's right, I just can't help myself. Aren't they great looking?

It's the Light

2010-04-28T13:56:00.010-04:00

Why do you like certain photographs? Subject, emotional content, memories that are evoked...lots of things I suppose.

It's interesting to think why any picture interests you.

So back to the question, why a particular photo? Often, it's simply the light. The way the light makes it's own statement. The way it makes you see something differently than you did yesterday, when the light was different.

Below is one which is part of a series I've been doing called "unfamiliar light". The subjects are varied but common place. The light is always, well, unfamiliar. Strange. Beautiful.

This one was taken with my cell phone at Lake Waccamaw, North Carolina. I've always loved this tree. It sits right across the street from my sister-in-law's home. I've shot it several times over the years but one evening we arrived at dusk and it was a whole new scene.

I've been trying to train myself to look less at the objects around me and more at the light. Jeff Ascough (the amazing wedding shooter) says he walks into a room and looks for interesting light, sets up and waits for something interesting to happen in that light. He's won so many awards I think they may have to retire his number. I was shocked to hear him say that. But, it seems, sometimes you have to stop and think about just the light and, sometimes, it just wacks you over the head with it's beauty.

So, watch for the light.

Re-Touch

2010-04-16T17:28:00.002-04:00

I recently got a great question from a bride-to-be. She asked what touch up, or retouching or something of that nature meant. Why didn't I think of that? Anyway, here's my answer:

Touch up can be a variety of things but, for me, it is the practice of making good photos better.

Basically, I use software (Photoshop or a product called Lightroom) to make sure that the pictures are straight, cropped correctly, lighten or darken, color corrected (light is funny, inside lights are often very green or orange, that can be partially corrected) or many other things that a photographer can't always get perfect in the heat of the wedding.

That's particularly true for photojournalistic style photography where you are not directing people to the perfect light and position. Most of us (photographers) prefer to get it right "in the camera" but, sometimes some wonderful is happening and you just have to take the shot.

Beyond that type of retouching, there is another whole realm of 'beauty' retouching where the photographer can de-emphasize physical features (a blemish) or hide an ugly feature (stain on a dress) using the same tools.

Typically, the latter costs extra due to the time involved . . . I do it for a select number of photos that are important - like your portrait.

Here's some "before" and "afters" examples:

Anna & Noah - a quick snapshot that Council (aka Dad) requested - cropped tighter, lighten, straighten slightly & a tiny bit of 'smoothing'...

Emily & Skip - shot just as the ceremony started and I was being ushered to the back of the church ("no photography allowed!"). However, Emily looked so great, I had to grab a shot. It's cropped tighter and color balanced...see anything else? Well the boutineer on Brian's jacket just had to go....

Generally, these kinds of touch-ups are to be avoided but when the picture is more important than perfection, it's worth the effort.

I Want It RAW!

2010-04-08T11:17:00.003-04:00

Recently, I've heard of couples asking for their photographer's RAW files as part of wedding packages. If you know all about the RAW files 7 JPG files & TIFF files, etc…then now is a good time to tune out. If not, read on.

Most people don't know what a RAW file is. It isn't something you cook...well actually you do but more of that later. For the most part, most people put their wedding CD in a closet to be lost sometime in the future.

If you thinking of asking for these files be sure you know what you are asking for. So here's where I give you a bit of a definition:

RAW files are un-processed data from an image sensor of a digital camera. They are called RAW because they haven't been transformed by post processing software and can't be printed. For that matter, in many cases they can't even be viewed on most computers without special software. In order to do much useful with them, you need to cook them.

So why do couples ask for RAW files? I think that RAW files, often called DIGITAL NEGATIVES (they really aren't), sound like something really useful. Most of us have computers, so it seems perfectly logical to presume that with a computer and these files, you can do something useful. For the most part, you can but you probably shouldn't.

To expand, photography these days goes beyond taking the picture. Often, today's photography is a process where a good original image is transformed into a great image, something beautiful and moving. That post processing can be part and parcel of the 'photographer's eye', his/her artistic ability. When you purchase his/her photography talents, you are also paying for these after-the-shot skills. So ironically, someone asking for the RAW files can be asking the photographer NOT TO FINISH his/her artistic process. Sound like a bad idea?

There's a great debate going on in the photographic community about digital files, whether they should be released and under what circumstances. I'm unsure what the right answer on this is but I have observed that many of the most talented photographers - the gifted ones that we all admire and probably can't afford - do not give their files away. Not because they are trying to maintain snobbish exclusivity or are stingy. The reason, I suspect, is that they are so committed to the high quality of their final photograph - that amazing, stunning imagery - that they refuse to allow someone else alter it.

Many fine photographers don't just create a product, they create something they love. One does not let the things one loves be tampered with.

Fun with Jennie & Mike

2010-04-07T12:23:00.003-04:00

Jennie & Mike are getting married at the Castle In The Clouds on July 4th . . . the fireworks display will be awsome. We did some informal engagement shots on a cold day in downtown Portsmouth. They were great sports and it was a fun shoot. While we had talked about going to the beach or down by the wharfs - did I mention that it was way cold? - we decided to just shoot around town and concentrate on them, not the scenery. Mike's not a great fan of being photographed but - as you can see - he was terrific. Jennie, of course, was way easy to capture.

Serious Photography

2010-03-31T12:26:00.000-04:00

Sometimes, photography transcends it's original purpose and becomes high art . . .

The story behind the picture . . .

"Must Take" Pictures

2010-03-22T12:28:00.004-04:00

Just about everyone who writes to brides has a recommendation for the "must have" pictures. Except me . . . and Claire Lewis. Neither she nor I believe you will cherish the "must have" pictures on your list (or anyone else's).

Instead, Claire - who I've never met - recommends in her book - Exposed: Confession of a Wedding Photographer - that the ones you'll love are the informal ones showing people relaxing and having fun. I couldn't agree more and dread the times I've been handed a 'must have' list. The best shots happen unscripted. The worst are stagged weeks or months ahead.

Like me, Claire knows that someone will want some of those deer-in-the-headlights group shots but the ones that you'll keep forever are the ones that capture the essence of your special day.

Delightfully enough, those are the ones that good photographers like to take, too. So take my (& Claire's) advice: pick your photographer based on what you love in their work and turn them loose. Your job is to have a wonderful time. His/her job is to capture that wonder.

Must have? Sure. Posed? Not a chance.

Just Kidding . . .

2010-02-18T10:38:00.001-05:00

So why is it that when you shoot a wedding, the kids in attendance always get more than their fair share of attention? Well, besides the "cute" factor - an overwhelming advantage they have - there's the "genuine" factor. Very little artifice - all real.

These are random shots from a single wedding this winter.

Fromthe sleigh ride shots to the dance floor, it seemed like everywhere I turned
there was kid things happenings.

but I digress, back on the things that children seem to excel at - to start, light loves children. It caresses them in ways that super models would die for.

Also, they are everywhere and nobody cares...almost anything they do is OK with everyone

and they don't worry about what's the "right thing" to do of course

they pay attention to the important stuff

of course, sometimes when I'm not even trying to photograph them, they get involved....

but one of my favorite things is they don't like to stay up late.

It's all there . . . in black and white.

2010-02-09T18:17:00.004-05:00

Black and White

So why is it that so many of us adore black and white photographs. Color photographs carry much more information, they are way more popular, they are a newer technology (really, it took many years to go from b&w to color) and digital cameras, if you didn't know, actually shoot pure color.

OK, it's not that simple - the darn digial thingees shoot three channels of black and white and their little internal computers translate the image into color which, if you want b&w, you sort of de-interpret the color back to b&w. Oh gee, there I go again.

Back to the interesting stuff, it seems that many people think they prefer color but as many - your humble writer included - would rather have a b&w. Why is that?

Let's look at the color advantage first - two versions of the same picture. The bride's late in the evening night cap - they made it special for her - we all WOW when we saw it. Pretty obvious that the color one is way more appealing. Why is that?

Click each of the following pictures to see the color version....

In my mind, it's pretty simple, the picture is basically about color alone. Amazing color but that's about it. Easy, huh?

So try the next one.

So what's your impression? Is the color one better? Or does the black & white one work just as well? Well, pretty much although it's not dramatic. Obviously, it depends on the picture, here's another.

Now that one's a set up. The color one has a completely different focus than the black and white one. That's because of the dramatic flower colors. But are the flowers the point of that picture? Nope, it's her dress and the traditional complexity of getting it just right.

Here's another, more subtle one.

So a couple shots won't give you the complete "picture" but they do demonstrate a principal. Color photographs are about the color in the photograph. B&W photographs are pared down, less distractions and have a more focused image about what the picture means, emotionally, informationally and aesthetically. Can a great color picture do that? Of course, it's just harder.

Now don't get me wrong, I have photographs (mine and others') that are color and that I love. However, typically, the main reason I love them is their color. The black & white ones that I love, and there are lots of them, I love because of their emotional content, whether driven by their graphic forms or embedded stories. I'm not always sure why I react this way, but, like many of you, I just do.

Obviously, I haven't fully worked this all out myself, this love I have for the quieter more emotional look of black and white. We'll talk again on this subject.

How Many Pictures Do You Take?

2010-01-04T10:31:00.005-05:00

How many pictures do I take? How many do you want? I know that I'm not supposed to answer a question with a question but it's a question I get asked all the time. That's probably because it can be measured, like my fee or how many hours I stay at a wedding. Easy questions. Trouble is, it's tough to answer. So before I answer it, let's think about the question:

How about ten pictures? Not enough? How about 3,000? Ever look at 3,000 pictures? If you wanted to look at 3000 photographs at say, 30 seconds a picture, that's about twenty five hours of viewing. Probably too many, huh?

Now we're getting somewhere, we have limits. We know it's more than ten and less than 3,000.

More to think about: most photojournalist style wedding photographers will pull the trigger between 800 and 2000 times during a full day's wedding. The average is probably around 1200 to 1500. Multiply that average by the number of photographers. Sort of takes your breath away.

Now if these photographers care about your experience with their pictures - many do - they'll edit out the technically bad ones (focus, exposure, etc.), the visually bad ones (closed eyes, bad expressions and unwanted gestures) and the just plan boring ones.

That's the easy part, of course, but it gets the number to something more manageable. Many, like me, typically run all the remaining shots through an additional process. It's the process of creating a story from the photographs.

This story of a day needs to include the big moments and the little ones. The events, the environment and the things that make it special. Many times you need simple declarative pictures to connect big events so the final story makes sense. For me, that usually means I end up with 300 or 400 photographs in the final "story", sometimes more, rarely less. That's still a couple hours of viewing time - about what a good movie would take - your movie. I usually recommend they be viewed with a glass of wine. Works every time.

Still a little nervous about how many you should have? I once sent 1500 photographs to a family. The mother, an architectural client of mine with a dry sense of humor, has never let me forget what a pain it was to view them all.

Think about it, one of the things you pay for is the photographer's ability to recognize good shots and to cull the less meaningful ones. It's called his/her "eye". With my own work, you are also paying for my ability to create your day's story from photographs. As they say, less is often more.

Jeff Ascough, the master of available light and a regular on the 'world's best' lists, has a really good set of observations about this predisposition of couples (and photographers) to want more rather than less. He believes the right range is 150 to 180 shots. The key, he says, is quality. Ascough, by the way, says he's working to reduce the number of shots he takes.

Of course, what he takes is glorious. Which is my goal, too, irrespective of the shot count.

So, how many photographs do you want?

New Wedding Website in NYC - Studio1Weddings

2009-12-11T16:02:00.001-05:00

Wonderful principal photographer! OK, OK, full disclosure here, she is also known as my #1 daughter, Erin Derby. Highly recommended for those of you near NYC.

www.studio1weddings.com

On Understanding Wedding Photography Styles

2009-12-11T14:44:00.009-05:00

(full disclosure - this was an article of mine that was originally published in WeddingPhotoUSA but it seemed to fit here, too)

Finding your photographer is like going through a visual/verbal maze. There are more labels than you can shake a stick at, as my dad used to say. One problem is that there is a belief that photographers' styles fall crisply into neat groupings, like traditional, photojournalistic, fashion, etc. Deb Carpenito of WeddingPhotoUSA has several nice articles two of the most ubiquitous, traditional and photojournalistic. I've added two more recently minted ones - Fine Art and Fashion - to put together a bit of a vocabulary lesson to help you through the maze.
THE LABEL GAME

Traditional or classic - these photographers come to your wedding with a fairly specific set of "must have" shots (bride with veil, bride and groom with ring, bride with dad, etc.). They are very practiced at taking those shots. Their skill can vary enormously - from hackneyed to terrific. It's a mistaken belief that these photographers are staid or old fashion. The fact is, some of the most stunning photographs have come from this "traditional" camp. Look at the work of Jerry Ghionis, he takes all the standard shots…but wow, are they ever glorious.

Photojournalistic or Documentary - a hot label for people who shoot more loosely and purport to document wedding events as they happen. There is a fallacy that this approach is unstructured and therefore unpredictable. While these photographers are more opportunistic - reacting to what they see - they almost always take preplanned shots like group portraits, too. Even the amazingly talented British photographer Jeff Ancough, the master of available light and the unscripted shot does straight up portraits.

Fashion or Couture - an even hotter and newer label, these are the photographers who emulate the latest magazine styles of photography. Highly stylized and often verging on spectacular, they use techniques and attitudes, sometimes very edgy, that were born in American & European advertising studios. The luscious work of Ethiopian born Australian photographer Yervant typifies this high style magazine spreads but in real weddings.

Fine Art - another recently minted descriptor for more impressionistic and artful styles of work. This approach emphasizes getting a beautiful photograph more than recording attendees or capturing a day. These affects are often achieved after the fact by seriously "post processing" (i.e. manipulated in a computer or darkroom) shots. The resultant can be toned, black & white, dreamy photographs, whatever but they can be something you can envision hanging on a gallery wall. In fact, while great photographers can produce "Fine Art" with any of the above approaches, there are some who seem specifically focused on that result. Joe Buissink, LA's photographer to the stars, regularly turns out such artful work . . . with the help of his master printer.

THE BOTTOM LINE?

Most photographers, myself included, have a range of styles that blend across the various visual continuums. The good news is that what you see is what you get. You should be able to judge the style you like from the look you see. Don't chase labels, trust your eyes.

The Details

2009-12-11T12:58:00.010-05:00

When I was in college, my room mate (the architect) had a matra - "God lives in the details". It means, to architects at lease, that if you didn't worry about the small stuff - the big stuff would fail. Your wedding photos can be the same. The small things give the day's story texture and fragrance. Like those those little olfactory hits that remind you of something. Happens to me all the time . . . in a crowd, the smell of something long ago . . . sending my mind time traveling. Probably why I love taking those detail photographs. They do the same thing for you.

Sometimes they are things you went to a lot of trouble to create like Catrin & Tim's wonderful books and placards on each table of their reception (above).

Sometimes, it's hor devours.

The kiddush cup waiting for the ceremony.

The night's spent confetti.

One thing I know, these little things bring back memories that you will have long forgotten. I'm often told that the photographs captured things that the bride & groom never saw. That's very nice. But sometimes, these little gems capture the essence of an event, the whole emotional scene, the story in a photograph.

The bride's shoes, signed by all the bridesmaids. Wow.

Personal Wedding Websites

2009-12-11T12:07:00.006-05:00

One of my couples, the irrepressible Heidi & Brian - had a friend build a website just for them. I was surprised and privileged to discover they used some of the engagement shots we took on a 'shopping' trip to Portsmouth, NH. I was even more delighted to note that they &/or their web designer went out of their way to give me credit. Gee, makes me feel like celebrity. Pretty typical of Heidi & Brian.

One of the most distinctive things about their site ~~besides my photography~~ is that they got their own URL . . . brianandheidi.com.

This business of a personal wedding website is very cool for me. Several of my couples for next year have them. Seems like they could be very handy. I haven't done that many of them myself but then, you can get them free on the big wedding sites like theKnot. I can, of course, provide them for a fee, including getting a URL and all the techie stuff. They can be very custom while the Knot type are standard templates so you can't beat the price.

Here's Kurt and Michelle's. They used the Knot's process and I think it was fairly easy. Michelle's write-up on their wedding party is especially through and sweet.

(FYI - I didn't take this picture)

And another one - truth in story telling here - this my step-son and his wonderful fiance, M.K.,

along with Olie, the wonder dog.

OK . . . I did take this one.

If you are using a template based wedding website, consider having your wedding photographer combine an 'engagement' session with other kinds of shots (your venue, your family, etc.) to capture more of what writers call the "back story" of your marriage-to-be. Could make for a really elegant way to share the love, as they say.

On Portraits

2009-12-10T16:14:00.006-05:00

There are posed portraits and there candid portraits. The latter are not something most people think of when you say "portraits". Those are done without the apparent knowledge of the subject. The former, posed portraits, are clearly with the participation or what is sometimes called the 'camera awareness' of the participants.

Not many people take the latter...they are, frankly, harder to see - fleeting as they are - and harder to capture.

Posed portraits can be fun or serious but there always seems to be a direct connection with the poser. They are, for the most part, what the subject wants you to see - what they project, not who they are. Not everyone projects well. On the other hand, like the charming bride and her father below, when they do, it makes for a nice shot.

On the other hand, when a photographer captures a candid moment, a look, a gesture, it can be magic. These can be an unintended revealing of something more personal, more intimate in a person or between people. No amount of posing will create the subtle body language that speaks with such emotion...well almost no amount of posing, there are some masters of posing that can recreate candid moments, given enough time.

In any case, the picture above was taken in a graveyard, just outside the church, just before the bride and her father went in and down the aisle. The time for chatting was over and their gesture were a very personal communication between two people.

The difference is subtle but something is going on in the second shot that wasn't happening in the first. Both were taken just before the ceremony. One will be a favorite of the both of them for a long time. Guess which one?

Oh yes, it's not just couples. The photograph below was taken when another photographer had been posing the bride for close to an hour. Bless her heart, the bride had held up wonderfully. While the other photographer was directing the groom to do something, I forget what, the bride became lost in her thoughts, lifted her bouquet and this quiet moment happened.

I don't think you plan these kinds of photographs, it takes trust and a certain attitude on the part of the photographer. Maybe we should talk about that in the future. . . DD

Capturing The "Back-Story"

2009-12-10T15:13:00.003-05:00

I shot a wedding a couple years ago, sent the pictures to the parents then waited and waited and waited. Nothing. No phone calls, no emails, no nothing. I was heart broken. These were friends of mine. It was their youngest's wedding and I had been sort of a second shooter (there were three other photographers there). I thought my shots were really good.

I couldn't stand it, I called them. The father got on the phone and said: Yes they'd gotten the pictures. Yes they were going to call me. But, he said, every time he picked up one of the pictures and started to call, he started crying.

This is the picture. He loves it. I love it. Everybody loves it.

Why? Because to him, and probably many of the rest of us, that's not a picture of a bride. It's not a soon-to-be Mrs. Somebody or a twenty-something having a glass of champagne.

That's his little girl . . . barefoot, just the way he will always remember her.

That's the day I realized that I was going to be a wedding photographer. It's about the story that pictures can capture.

Why a Blog?

2009-12-10T14:22:00.004-05:00

It's all the rage. OK, maybe I'm not an "all the rage" kind of guy. And it's not likely what I publish will be my latest wedding. It also won't be what kind of dress someone wore or how delicious the cake was - I don't eat my clients' cakes, seems impolite. Seems like there are other venues for that.

What I'll reach for with this blog is a kind of thinking out loud about capturing imagery, weddings in particular but not necessarily all. I will also explore why certain imagery is special and some are not. My hope is that, perhaps, you will become more comfortable with thinking about the imagery you want from photographers, particularly wedding photographers.

Oh yes, this is not about technical stuff - there are people out there far better at the techie things than I. If I learn something interesting from harvesting those blogs and websites, I'll give you links to them. I'm going to work at the art/imagery/organizing side of these human rituals - the aesthetic challenges photography gives us.

I'll use lots of examples mostly because it gives me something to talk and think about. My own pictures primarily but others', too. That way, those of us who are ~~ADA~~ visually oriented will enjoy the ride.

Since it's the visual that brings you and I here, let's celebrate it.

DD

My Name is Dan Derby

2009-12-10T14:15:00.007-05:00

I'm a wedding photographer for the most part although I regularly sneak down to the studio and take product pictures (can't help myself, I was a product designer for . . . ever).

About me:

I am a designer by training and for a number of years did just that.
With degrees in design from NC State and Stanford University (an MFA), I was a visiting lecturer at Stanford for nearly a decade.
Over time, I found myself doing more managing than designing so I eventually began the journey back to the arts.
Encouraged by a designer wife, Jane G. Derby - a professional photographer daughter (NYC), Erin Derby - and cinematography student (SVA), Dan Derby III - it seemed like I was rejoing a family business.
In addition to photography, I write stories on a variety of subjects for a variety of clients.
However, my wedding work is one of the purest forms of story. . . and it's fun.