Photography, like all art, is subjective. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, etc, etc. And with Photoshop becoming such an integral part of the work process, it’s getting to the point where the old “rules” for good photography are being tossed out the window. I think that’s just fine, and I’ll tell you why.

Before I became the world-famous photographer that we all know and love, I was a Disc-Jockey. I worked in radio and nightclubs all over the country and was a firm believer in the “rules” that govern the trade (that’s right, there are rules). For example, when working a nightclub, you start with a song that has a low “beats per minute” count. Then, you mix into a song that’s a little faster, then another one faster still, until you eventually have reached a plateau and your dance floor is really dancing fast. Then, you drop back down to a slower song and start all over again. Your dancers wander over to the bar to get refreshed (cha-ching!).

At one point in my career I was hired to open a nightclub in Dallas and was having a meeting with the corporate DJ (yes, there is such a thing) and the other DJ who would be working the club with me. At one point during the meeting, the corporate guy made reference to the natural progression of the dance floor and the other jock said, “Why?”

At first I thought, “Oh my God, this guy doesn’t know how to spin.” I was wrong.   He knew all the rules, he just didn’t believe they were always necessary.   “Why can’t you jump all over the place with the music, as long as it works?” he asked. I thought he was nuts. That’s not the way it worked.

You can probably guess what happened next. We opened the club and I followed the rules while the other DJ went nuts, reacting to the crowd, trying new things, etc. It didn’t always work but when it did it was awesome … unlike any other club in town. Suddenly  I was forced to realize that whatever works is the right thing. Our nightclub soon got a reputation as a “party place” because you never knew what would happen next, you just knew it would be fun and fresh. I quickly began to toss out the rules I had lived by for so long.

Whenever I find myself critiquing a photograph I remember that experience. It’s important to know the rules because they will help you take better pictures, but they are only a starting point. From there you must find your own way and develop a style that is unique to you. If that means that you blow-out the highlights or crop outside the grid … so be it. If your photography sells and is liked by your clients, then it’s good. Even if it’s not well received, it’s still yours. This is one of the reasons that I never participate in group critique on a photography website. I can’t tell you how to make your picture better, only how to make it more like something I took, which isn’t necessarily better!

Take my favorite pet peeve: Selective color. I’m not a fan. I think it is overused and almost always done poorly. I frequently get the impression that the photographer has done it simply because they can and it adds one more “creative” image to the mix.   “Ohhh…. the picture is black and white but the flowers are in color!”   That’s fine where the flowers are the focus of the shot but I see it so many times where the flowers are just a tiny part (my personal favorite is the full formal wedding party picture with just the flowers in color). But here’s the thing:   I don’t make the rules. Just because I don’t like it doesn’t mean it’s “bad”… just that I don’t like it.   Every great artist has been told that they were wrong to paint the way they did.   “Selective Color” may be the next big thing for all I know.

My point to this whole rambling post is this:   Don’t always follow the rules. Don’t always believe that everyone else knows more about what’s “good” than you do (unless it’s me because I am the bomb).   And, be careful when you ask for advice because any critique you receive will be specific to that person’s personal style, not yours.

I get this sort of question all the time and it’s a tough one to answer. Most people don’t understand that good photography comes in levels (like Donkey Kong). Sure, it starts with a decent DSLR but then it moves up through many different levels of skill. The real question you have to ask yourself when you want to take better pictures is:   How much time am I willing to dedicate towards learning to take good photographs? Then I can help you choose your equipment.

The same question applies to wedding photography. Search the web and you will find prices from $500 – $5000 for a wedding photographer. How can that be? Well, it’s all about the levels and like Donkey Kong there are several different ladders you can choose to climb if you want to reach the big gorilla. So, with that in mind, let’s talk about the “Flash” ladder.   (I’m a wedding photographer in Tampa, FL)

Take a tour of wedding photography websites in your area and you might notice a trend:   Many of the sights feature outdoor weddings. In fact, judging by the websites, you might think that everybody gets married outdoors! They don’t. In fact, most don’t. The reason there are so many outdoor weddings featured on these websites is because they require little or no flash to shoot. Shooting a portrait of the bride outside is much easier than shooting in a church.

So, you want to be a “flash” photographer. Here’s the levels you will work through. (Where you stop is up to you.)

Level 1

Built in flash. This is the pure amateur level using the built in flash that comes on the camera. I always tell people, “If you are going to use the built-in flash, don’t even bother with a DSLR. Just buy a tiny point and shoot that will fit in your pocket.” The DSLR is a waste of money without a dedicated flash (except for outdoor work, etc).

Level 2

The dedicated flash. The person at this level has moved up to a dedicated flash (Speedlight) and thinks the world is their oyster. Look! I have a big flash on my camera! Their pictures are better and seldom have red-eye. Because the flash is more powerful, their pictures look better than the point-and-shoot people so they think they might just be qualified to shoot a wedding. They are wrong.

Level 3

The flash diffuser. After playing around with their Speedlight for a while, this person has decided that they want more coverage from their flash so they buy a flash diffuser. There  many to choose from  (Omni-Bounce, Lightsphere, etc). Now when they shoot a wedding they get a broad-based light that bounces everywhere. This is great because there are hardly any shadows at all. It’s also bad because there are hardly any shadows at all. (BTW, there are certainly times when a diffuser is the right tool for the job. Just not all the time)

Level 4

The bounce flash. This photographer has begun to notice that all of his diffused pictures look a little flat because there is no contrast between light and dark areas. So, he takes off the diffuser and starts to learn how to bounce his flash. This level is a big step up from the one below it. It’s easy to slap on the diffuser and fire away but  it takes a little more work to find a good surface to bounce off of and position yourself so that you can use it (plus adjust your flash power to get the desired effect). However, once you learn to bounce your flash it becomes addictive (like crystal meth  or “Baywatch”) and you suddenly find that you are incapable of using a diffuser (and forget ever pointing the flash straight ahead). Bounce flash photographers are frequently seen with a big bounce card attached to their flash although they would prefer to bounce off some big surface.

Level 5

Off-camera lighting. This is the final level and the one that requires the most time and money. Now you need a second flash, radio-remote triggers, tripods and the skill to use it all. This photographer will use off-camera flash for the formals and possibly at the reception (a second flash at a reception will give you lots of options for use as a main, fill or kicker).

So, if you are going to be a wedding photographer who uses flash, you need to decide what level you want to attain. I started at the bottom and worked my way up rung-by-rung… each time convinced that I would stop at the next level. The good news is: the higher the level, the more you can charge.

So, let’s talk about the almighty zoom lens.

Everyone loves the zoom lens. It’s long and sexy and makes you look like you are a PRO, baby!   “Look at my lens! I must know what I’m doing!”   The “photo-journalistic” photographers love the big zoom because it enables them to sit in the back and take pictures without being noticed; because if someone see’s them, the magical veil will be lifted and the unicorn will die (or something like that). The truth is that everyone is a photo-journalistic photographer now. I have yet to meet a single photographer who claims to only show up, take posed pictures, and leave.

But I digress. I was talking about the big zoom…

You need the big zoom. You may not need it right away but eventually you will get that gig where it’s “no flash, no approaching the altar…. in fact, if you could just stay in the parking lot we’d be very happy.” When that happens, you need the 70-200mm, f2.8, IS, monster. On the plus side, this lens can be used everyday for portraits as it is an awesome lens. Check out any website that sells this lens and read the reviews. You can almost see the reviewers drooling as they write about their love for it. Get it, use it, love it.

Personally, I could (and have) shot entire weddings without ever mounting a zoom lens.

What’s that you say? No zoom lens!? Have you gone insane!?

You see, here’s where I differ from many photo-journalistic photographers: I like to be close to the action.

That’s why I use an 18-50mm lens most of the time. (Crop-body camera so it’s actually 29-75  times the square root of “pi” or something.)   Here’s why:

1.   I can zoom with my feet. Except for the church (and sometimes there, too), I am usually in a tight space. Even in a big reception hall there are tables and chairs and people dancing, etc. I can’t always back up to get a good shot but I can almost always walk closer. Also, the closer I am to my subject, the less chance that someone will block my shot.

2.   Flash management. Well, not always–because there’s something to be said for being back far enough to easily bounce flash off a wall–but, in most receptions I am moving around so much that it’s more likely  I am bouncing off the ceiling with a little bounce forward. And that is easier to control if you are not too far back from the subjects.

3.   I get better pictures from people who know I’m there most of the time. Yea, yea… I know: We’re supposed to be observers. Well, guess what: A lot of people like pictures where they are looking at the camera. Shocking but true. At my last wedding I had a guest come up and ask me, “Do you always have so much fun at weddings?”   I don’t blend in. I’m a big guy and I’m going to be noticed no matter what, so I   use it to my advantage. I joke around, I blow kisses, I get involved. And I need a wide-angle lens to do that.   The picture below is a perfect example of what I mean. If I had been off the dance floor with a telephoto lens, the best man would not have walked up to me and I would not have got this shot:

I LOVE this shot!   He’s leering, he’s got the garter, he’s about to go in for the kill. He was right on top of me when  I took it. He knew I was there and he played to the camera.

Here comes the disclaimer:   This won’t work for everyone. First, you have to be handsome and charming like me (do I really have to point out that I’m joking?). Sometimes you just have to lay back and rock the big zoom. But given a choice, I would rather be in-and-out of the action with the wide angle. It’s really a judgment call based on the style of wedding and mood of the guests. If it’s a big party, I mix it up. If it’s a somber affair  I disappear into the background.   Plus, as a wedding photographer in Tampa I shoot my share of beach weddings and outdoor stuff plays to the zoom lens better.

So, don’t be afraid to use that wide-angle lens and get involved   little. You might be surprised at the results.

On my way to Cairo I developed a plan to photograph and document the zekr; a form of ritual performed by Sufis, a sect of Islam frequently considered as too liberal and too progressive by the more orthodox theological authorities in Egypt and the Islamic world. It was a tall order since I was after the authentic zekr, not some version diluted or prettified for the tourists and tour groups. It was therefore by pure luck that I discovered someone with strong connections to one of the Sufi tariqahs or sub-sects, and who promised me full access to a number of these rituals. The devotions of many Sufis center on the zekr, a ceremony at which music, body movements, and chants induce a state of ecstatic trance in the disciples.

The first ceremony was scheduled for late afternoon in an area of Old Cairo that I had only heard of. A somewhat rough neighborhood originally known for drug dealers, it seldom extended a welcome mat to outsiders (and certainly never to foreigners), but it seemed to have recently cleaned up its act. Riding a battered local taxi masterfully but maniacally driven over innumerable potholes by Abdel Fattah (or Kojak, as he prefers to be known) and accompanied by Badawi and Haj Zakaria who are connected to the Sufis, I arrive near the area where the performance is scheduled, carrying a small Domke bag with my Canon 5D Mark II and a 28-70mm f2.8, a 17-40mm f4.0 and my new Marantz PMD 620 audio recorder.

The area is dilapidated, with small buildings having seen better days a hundred years ago. Electrical connections and telephone wires are limply stretched from one building to the other, quite possibly illegally, reminding me of nests of pasta. Men seated at small coffee shops, sipping tea or coffee and sucking on water pipes, stare at me quizzically. They don’t seem to notice they’re sitting on wobbly chairs, precariously perched on ground strewn with litter and worse. All that matters is the soccer game playing on the grimy television sets. Seeing that my guides are walking briskly ahead of me, I choose -wisely, I think, not to ask permission to photograph the coffeehouse patrons. It’s a pity, since a number of these coffee houses are owned and managed by women. Women tougher and physically stronger than many men who boast a vocabulary that would put many a hardened criminal to shame. These women are called “awalem” and are best avoided if one is in not the best of moods.

The performance is to take place near the mosque of Sayyidah Fatimah Al Nabawiyya, a great grand-daughter of the Prophet Muhammad who is said to have been instrumental in bringing Islam to Egypt. My efforts to photograph inside the mosque are thwarted by the guardians who claim that photography is prohibited. I suppose they were made nervous by the sight of my large camera and lenses, since they don’t bat an eyelid when devotees use their camera phones to snap pictures of the saint’s mausoleum. Just as we make our way out of the mosque, I hear the sudden screech of an amplifier, signaling that the musicians are ready to start. The enterprising coffee shop owners provide chairs, anticipating a brisk business supplying tea and water-pipes to spectators and participants. There are a number of them already there. One of them is an elderly feisty looking woman who’s dragging on the mouthpiece of her water-pipe, and who laughs raucously when I start photographing her. Another woman taps me on the shoulder and asks me not to photograph her. Later, she changes her mind and literally begs me to do so since she’s sitting with a man who is not her husband. Another Muslim stereotype bites the dust!

The musicians have started their performance, led by a chain-smoking “muallem“, or teacher. The singer clears his voice and sings the repetitive songs that laud the Prophet Muhammad, his descendants and the various Sufi saints, including the founder of the sect, Sayed Al Badawi. The music is rhythmic, played with well-rehearsed ease by the musical troupe. Only a lute, tambourines, a flute and an Egyptian drum are used. So far, it’s a sedate performance, no different from a small neighborhood party in any big city in the United States.

Slowly, people emerge from the neighboring small hovels and gather around the musicians. A demented man starts to sway to the music, while the elderly matrons clap and cheer him on. Suddenly, seemingly out of nowhere, a heavyset woman starts to dance to the music. Wearing the obligatory scarf (and even gloves!), she swings left and right with no apparent rhythm. I’m slack-jawed because I never expected to see a seemingly conservative and religious woman dancing in front of an audience in Egypt. Sufis indeed have a different approach to Islam, and engaging in such ceremonies, which include singing, instrumental music, dance, incense, ecstasy, and trance, is part of their belief system. The woman, who laughed so raucously when I photographed her, has now weaned herself from her hubbly-bubbly water-pipe and is taking tentative steps to the beat of the music. She slowly, but surely, gets herself all worked up, and enters a trance-like appearance with glazed eyes and foams at the mouth. On seeing this, the other woman eases her gently to her seat, where she is eventually reunited with her water pipe.

The leader of the music band is now in charge, as the singer takes a break. Only the leader can recite the “madh“ or the paying of homage to Sufi saints, and can honor those in the audience who donate money. One of my companions must have given him money because I hear my name called along various deceased saints. Apart from the half-hearted trances, it’s not what I originally hoped for, but I enjoyed the authenticity of my surroundings and of the performance. It is what it is, and what it will always be.

The performance has ended for now, and will resume after the final prayers later at night. I’m thrilled to have witnessed and photographed an authentic Egyptian Sufi ceremony, but disappointed that the audience wasn’t large and participatory. I realize that the televised soccer match that evening was to Egyptians the equivalent of what the Super Bowl is to Americans. Soccer trumps religion, even in the Arab world.