 |
kodak.com
presents
Denis Reggie
PhotoChat: Denis Reggie
May 15, 2001
|
Page 4 of 6
CuriousOne:
How many rolls of film would you use per wedding shoot?
Denis Reggie:
I admit it. I'm a heavy shooter. My assistant once estimated that I take about 120 photographs per working hour. So, a ten hour day often means some 1200 images. However, to simplify the task of viewing the images for my brides and grooms, I typically edit away forty to fifty percent of the photographs, showing them only my favorites. Most weddings for me involve both color and black and white. So my delivery of proofs is a mix of mediums, and print sizes - 5 x 5 from my medium format camera, and 3 x 5 from my 35mm camera.
Sydneygal:
On your website the caption says "Reflections of a quiet eye:" how could you define that into a meaning that we could all understand?
Denis Reggie:
I think that many people presume that wedding photographers direct much of their image making, verbal commands, "Look here," or "Stand there." My message on my website is that my attitude is to be the "silent observer," sensing, feeling, and finding moments without speaking. Without directing. Without controlling. Without controlling the situation. The images shown on my website, I believe, are consistent with that mission; hence, those words.
Amanda:
Can you explain what do the words "a good eye for natural candid wedding photography" mean to you?
Denis Reggie:
Gosh, we hear those words so often, I see that phrase or similar words on many websites and in other marketing materials. Perhaps the words, one might say, are a bit overused! I believe that the promise of the approach is for the photographer to be that quiet historian that we have been discussing. A person plugged in to the event without speaking, merely wandering about in search of great moments to document. It is what I would want at my own wedding, and surely my daughter's wedding; a sensitive soul, able to convey the spirit of the day with powerful images that we would treasure for a lifetime, and even beyond.
Cold Footed Groom:
I'm a part-time wedding photographer and need to watch every penny. I often choose film based on price. My rationale is that between the two big manufacturers, quality and performance are pretty equal. What do you think?
Denis Reggie:
This may sound like a contrived answer, but honestly, I have used Kodak products for my 25 years for good reason. I honestly believe that the color rendition is most natural with their products. I'm not interested in excessive color saturation that looks unnatural. I believe in realistic photography. As for black and white, I believe that the engineers in Rochester have been for many years on the cutting edge of grain technology, and development of high speed film for extreme low-light photography. I still can pick out albums taken with alternative films, that convey what I believe is an unbelievable amount of color. Admittedly, this is all personal preference. I choose Kodak products because I think they best fit my natural approach.
Pix Gal:
What do you rate the TMAX 3200 at and do you use it often? Also - thank you for your inspiration.
Denis Reggie:
You're welcome, and thanks for your nice question. I use a lot of TMZ 3200, mostly at 1600 speed. I have had good success at 3200 as well. But I would always suggest a knowledgeable processor to obtain best results. My black and white printer has been with me for over 20 years, and has become an excellent T-MAX developer and printer. I believe that there are different techniques in developing this film versus other films, like Tri-X. One of which is using a higher development temperature and, perhaps, more rigid agitation techniques. I believe that Kodak's website may offer suggestions for tech tips on achieving optimum results. This image is taken with T-MAX3200 rated at 3200. I love the look of that film!
Page 4 of 6
|
