When Wedding Photographers Attack!

Last Friday some of my friends got married at the Hudson River Hyatt in Jersey City. Nice place, with a pier that faces lower mid-town manhattan. The place was packed with Brazilians and upstate New York people (leatherstocking? What do you call those people?). The location was excellent, the weather was beautiful, and a good time was expected to be had by all. I was particularly happy because, (as some of you may know) I am a bit of a photography junkie, and the Hyatt was rife with good possibilities of Bride and Groom shots with the Empire State building, etc. I showed up with my Lowepro full of lenses, my tripod, and my 20d, and set off to overeat, get drunk, and possibly take a few shots of a lovely bridesmaid, her husband to be, and a few of her incredibly hot Brazilian cousins.

Hiring a professional photographer is a great idea (normally). A lot of folks think that just anyone can take good photos, totally unaware of the fact that it takes a special godlike artistic vision (similar to mine) to shoot good images of two reasonably sane adults shoving pieces of cake into each others faces.

Seriously, Wedding Phototgraphy is hard work. I have done it precisely one time in my life, for a friends wedding in Mexico, and I will NEVER do it again. You have to make sure that you get photos of everyone. From Grandma to third cousins fifteen times removed. You have to be as invisible as possible, yet omnipresent throughout the day. You have to make sure that you get the right lighting; you have to sweat about whether or not there will be a technical malfunction with your equipment. You need an assistant. You are operating under the knoweldge that if something goes wrong (like you accidentally expose a roll of film, or your memory card is on the fritz) that you will undoubtedly be sued for "emotional pain and suffering" by Bridezilla. Nope, wedding photography is not for me, and I normally give mad props to those who do it- which is why I was there only to take a few shots for my own edification and pleasure.

But sometimes even wedding photographers include among their ranks hostile wankers. As I found out when I went to this shindig on friday. The fortunate couple had hired a pro wedding photographer, a lady working alone sporting an old Nikon and huge "sidecar" type flash for candids, as well as a hasselblad for the set shots of the ceremony.

I certainly didn't want to get in the pro photog's way, so I set up my tripod in the corner about 50 ft away, behind the pro, and used my 35-135, as well as my 300mm telephoto. Granted, my camera is indeed sweet, and this particular lens is certainly very pro-looking, and has nothing to do with any residual feelings of male inadequacy on my part, I swear.

I wasn't the only person taking photos, but I was the only one with anything other than a point and shoot, mind you, the people with the point and shoots practically crawled up on stage, whereas I stayed the "furthest out" at all times (further out than the person that they hired to shoot, so there was no possibility of me entering her frame).

Despite all this, The wedding photog pretty much freaked out.

Incident #1

while I am sitting there, set up, waiting for the show to start, the photog comes up and says rather icily, "so, you're the backup photographer, huh?"

I could tell she was getting territorial, so I said something self-deprecating about how I "just like to take pictures."

she noticed my massive lens (like all the girls do) and said "you can take the close ups, and I can stick with the wide angle lens."

I said "Ha ha, I wouldn't rely on any of my photos to turn out, ha ha."

She responded quite bitchily "I was joking." sort of a snarl, really. Then she made some sort of snide comment about film vs. digital. Keep in mind that I am exuding maximum Buddha nature at this point. I am totally chill and friendly. (I think that's Buddha nature.)

So I figured, maybe she thinks I am going to rush in and hog the shooting space during the whole deal, and she'll chill out after the ceremony is over. Or maybe I am imagining her hostility, and she's just sort of a Jersey City kind of person. So I do my thing, and she does her thing. Keep in mind that "my thing" involves hanging way out of everybody's line of sight, being totally unobtrusive, and shooting from a fixed position under my Bodhi Tree.

Incident # 2

After the knot is tied, and my man Skadave finds himself eternally linked to a chick whose hotness clearly blows away all of his high shcool friends (like me, he was probably more of an intellectual than a ladies man back in the day, and nothing says "comeuppance" like a hot latina wife) that we go up to the ballroom for the dinner, dancing, and the general post-wedding gig. I put my camera away for most of it, and remain at the table with my party, except when I am getting food or drinks. At some point I whip out the camera at my table and take a few shots of my friends. Strictly "holiday snap" kind of BS.

the Pro photog IMMEDIATELY rushes over and says, in the most condescending manner humanly possible, "have you managed to take anything good yet?" All of my friends, who didn't witness confrontation number one, look at her like she's suddenly sprouted an extra head. She then snaps all of our photos, so I put my camera away. After she leaves there is a general discussion that she's super aggro, so I am convinced it's not just my spin on the situation. The wedding photog is, in fact, a tool. Without an extremely sweet lens to make up for her lack of personality, as mine does.

Incident #3.

The ballroom has a balcony that overlooks the hudson and manhattan. The lady getting married askes if I can take a photo of her and my wife, as well as some other girls (they have a sort of grrl power pack they run around in, like dangerous and sexy wolves). It's 11 pm at this point, so I take a photo of them, with my flash.

The photog, who is apparently omnipresent (the one thing she's done right all evening), literally RUNS up and asks me, (snidely,as if I need to add it) if I got the skyline in the shot with the ladies.

Technical note for the non-camera oriented. Camera flashes only work within say (for a super powerful one) perhaps 40 feet or so. That means shooting it of from the 200th row at an ant-like MickJagger is meaningless.

As am using my flash, and the empire state building is something like 1/2 a mile away, I answer (getting a tad snarky for the first time) "I don't think so, New York State is a little out of my flash's range."

She says, "let me see if I can do better" and takes a few shots. BTW, her flash is apparently malfunctioning, so she has to ask the girls if it went off. Not only does she lack an enormous penis, sorry, lens, but the equipment she has isn’t even up to snuff. Her flash has been failing to go off all night, so I am interested to see how the low-light indoor shots of people dancing have turned out.

So, to all the wedding photographers that might be reading this out there. Don’t assume that just because someone has a nice camera means that they are trying to take, or even want, your job. Also, remember that the first duty of a wedding photographer is to contribute to the happiness and enjoyment of the wedding party and their guests. You can do this by making good photos, but also by behaving civilly during the wedding itself.

The "Sport of Kings"

A couple of weeks ago, I was hanging out down by Hamilton Park when I noticed some folks had appropriated the (admittedly) seedy tennis courts for an altogether different purpose- Cricket. It's usually played by Indian or Caribbean gentlemen, and is yet another example (see Rugby and Soccer) of a sport invented by the English, but played much better by just about everybody else.

So I did a bit of digging about the rules of cricket, in an attempt to make sense of what these guys were up to. After reviewing the field positions of a typical cricket team, I must ask- would you rather be an "outfield nancy" or a "deep fine cock?"

Such philosophical questions aside, I really would like someone English (or preferably Indian, as it's always better to get answers from an expert) to tell me if this chart is really accurate, or simply a strange plot to confuse the American side of the Anglo-American alliance. Additionally, I find the idea of someone earnestly explaining that "by Jove, the bowler threw sent it right down the crease to the queer off, but wouldn't you know it the silly mid off got in the way, sending it to the dogger instead!" to be an immensely humerous prospect- particularly if said in a Gujarati accent. Cricket was invented in english Public shools, and I defy anyone to take a look at it, read Tom Brown's school days, and then tell me with a stright face that Public schools are about anything other than institutionalized rogering and torturing of young boys. What kind of monstrous evil could invent a game as boring as baseball, but make the matches 5 days long!

I have had the opportunity to see cricket twice; once as a small boy when my family took me on a trip around the UK (daddy, what are those twenty seven men doing in that field, all wearing the same outfits?), and again when I found myself, through misadventure, upon the island of Antigua. Both times I managed to escape unscathed.

Antiguans are mad about cricket. As mad about it as the subcontinentals. When you think about it, it sort of makes sense that the Indians and Pakistanis would adopt cricket. Often the most cultivated of Indians tended to out-English even the English in their enthusiastic assumption of English high culture (well, apart from the buggery aspects of english culture). Think of Dr. Verswami in Orwell's Burmese Days. Though most Indians would today deny it, English culture has struck deep roots in certain levels of Indian society. Look how the English introduced Tea to India. I hear that its quite popular there these days.

This is not so much true in the carribean- they drink beer, rather than tea. And certiainly no Jamaican would be caught dead stick their pinkie out while drinking. Certainly, the carribeans have enthusiastically adopted the English language. A bit too enthusiastically, a few Oxford Dons mght say, but as they are convinced that anything other than the strictest BBC accent is howling barbarism (in the case of Glasgow, they are unfortunately correct) they are best ignored. It might be said that the carribeans took the best of English culture, that is to say, parliementarianism, general courtesy, and the language, and tossed out the bad bits, such as Morris dancing and English Hygenic practices. The one English vice they seemed to have maintained is cricket.

The day I was there the West Indian team was playing England, and trouncing them thoroughly. A number of wild pronouncements were made, involving words like "century" and "googly." Each individual word was, in fact, an English word, but when they were strung together they appeared to be nonsense. So I got back on the boat away from that lovely isle, no wiser in the ways of sport, but with a nice T-shirt.