Starbucks! It has served me well for many years now :)

I tend to act like one of the guests when it comes to photographing the reception. If people are dancing in a circle, I join the circle and shoot from there. If they're dancing as couples, tightly packed on the dance floor, I'll jump right in the middle and shoot right up next to people. If they're dancing as couples but more spaced out and isolated, then I'll keep a little bit of distance. Basically I try to mimic the personal space being given by the guests (my assistant who is holding the flash generally does the same thing).

As for backlighting, yes, I typically have a flash on a stand somewhere in the back as a kicker.

Around 600-800 from the wedding (plus a Favorites gallery with ~250 edited shots), ~100 from the bridals, ~120 from the engagements, ~120 from a day after session, ~60 from a boudoir session.. Obviously most clients don't get ALL of that, but those are my averages from each type of session.

I typically wear black ballet flats at the ceremony and then switch to black TOMS at the reception. If it's a very very high end wedding where heels are required, I have a pair of black kitten heels, but I can only make it a couple of hours in those without wanting to kill myself, so I try to avoid them wherever possible

Very very very rarely, if the photo is a little soft, I will sharpen important features on the face just a touch. If I run a heavy noise removal on an image (which tends to soften and blur everything), I'll often erase it over the eyes and mouth, which basically has the same relative effect as sharpening them. However if you're talking about what a lot of portrait photographers do, which is to brighten and whiten and sharpen eyes on closeups, no, I don't do that. I learned the hard way that it's REALLY easy to overdo that stuff without realizing it!

I didn't switch, I still shoot both Av and Manual a lot (typically Av when the light is changing, Manual when the light is consistent)

Yes, my contract includes a model release that allows me to use the images in any way (except for boudoir sessions, where I license images individually)

I would really have to see exactly what you submitted to give you feedback or advice on why they weren't picked up. The number one thing that blogs are looking for is great details and decor. If the wedding was boring or typical or cookie-cutter, there's very little chance of it getting picked up (except for the blogs that focus on photography, such as Moment Junkie, but those tend to be read more by photographers than by brides or coordinators). If you're finding that the weddings you shoot don't have a lot of cool details, set up a styled shoot with a coordinator and more than likely you will be able to get that published (plus you'll get the added benefit of building a rapport with a coordinator).

Jerry Ghionis and Bambi Cantrell did a great workshop tour that was extremely helpful to me. I've got a Fershop coming up that I am really excited about. I've attended a lot of workshops from "rockstars" and I must admit that I almost always regret going and don't get my money's worth. Actually some of the best workshops I attended were by local photographers who weren't hugely popular in the photography world but are VERY successful in their own markets.

One thing you have to decide is what you want to get out of it. Do you want to learn how to shoot better? Do you want to learn how to pose better? Do you want to improve your post-processing? Do you want to improve your sales and business skills?

There are definitely workshops that touch on all of these things, but they typically suck ("jack of all trades, master of none"). The best experience you will get is a workshop specifically focusing on the thing you most want to improve.

I think every photographer handles this differently, although I suspect most photographers don't have a death plan for their business. If you have a lot of employees (and most photographers who retain the digitals and live off print sales typically do have lots of employees) then it's not such a big deal, because you've got people left behind who know your process and can take care of any loose ends, but if you work by yourself (like I do) then it becomes incredibly important to have a good death plan.

Personally I include the digitals in all of my packages, so with the exception of a few recent weddings, almost all of my clients have their own digital files and a release to print them, so if I died they would be OK, and my husband knows my workflow and my colleagues enough to be able to take care of my remaining clients or find some of my friends who could do that for me.

Evaluative

I used to, but even with the expensive ones I got a lot of ghosting so I stopped. Someone once said to me "Why would you spend $1500 on a lens and then put a $40 filter on top of it?" and that really struck a chord with me. If I'm going to a beach or somewhere with a lot of sand, I will definitely put one on to protect the lens while I'm shooting, but in general my lenses are bare.

I have a formula I usually stick to for group shots. First I will line them all up in a row and do that shot (if it's a small group, I'll then have them all lean in close to the middle and do another shot of that). Then I do the "look at each other and laugh" shot. Then I'll bring the most important person(s) forward and do a shot focusing on them, with the group in the background. Then I'll do the "flying V" (where they form a V with the most important people closest to me) and take a shot of that. Then I'll do a scattered shot, where they're all scattered into different places. Then I'll do a walking shot. Then I'll do another line shot but with each person in a unique pose, interacting with the people beside them. Then I'll do a layered group shot, where some people are standing on a step, some are standing on the ground, some are kneeling, and some are sitting. if it's a very large group, I may do two or three layered shots and skip one of the earlier poses I mentioned.

I really really like layered shots, not only because they gets lots of attention (brides and photographers love them) but also because it allows you to get closer up on the wedding party. Negative space is great, but sometimes you just want a nice shot with the subjects filling the frame, and with big wedding parties, often a layered shot is the only way to go.

The biggest problems I see with people doing group shots are 1) Not putting people close enough to each other (nothing worse than a big huge gap in the middle of a group shot), 2) Not enough variation in posing, 3) Symmetry (it doesn't have to be exactly symmetrical, but if you've got two people sitting on the left side and no one sitting on the right side, it's going to look off), and 4) Putting people in uncomfortable or awkward positions for their gender. For example, a girl is not going to look good down on one knee, and a guy is not going to look good sitting on his hip. It's important to learn how both men and women look best sitting, standing, kneeling, crouching, leaning, hugging, etc, and utilize those poses appropriately.

I really really really don't like to use flash outside of receptions, so for me fill flash is a worst-case scenario. During most weddings, I don't use it at all, and I never ever ever use direct flash as fill (and I never use fill outdoors). If I use it, then I'm bouncing it over my shoulder, and only because the available light is either too dark to use, or it's creating unflattering shadows on faces.

I only sell flushmounts from Forbeyon and WHCC hinged page pressbooks.

Christopher Hitchens. Sadly I missed the boat on that one :(

Honestly it really depends on the shot and the look I am trying to get. Often I like to go brighter than what would be considered perfect exposure, but then other times I like to do more darker and dramatic. A "perfectly exposed" image is not always my end goal - for example, if I am taking a bridal portrait in direct sun, I'm going to expose for the highlights on the dress with the intention of bringing the shadows up in post. There are tons of different exposure settings you can use in any given lighting situation that would still result in a beautiful image, so just keep that in mind when thinking about exposure. It's less about "doing it right" and more about making a beautiful image.

For the most part, I overexpose as much as I can without blowing important highlights, such as faces or wedding gowns. However I would never say that is "right" or "proper" it's just what works for me.

Another thing I have learned is that being able to "see" proper exposure comes with a lot of practice, shooting, and looking at well exposed images. I have noticed that people who are relatively new to the industry will take a photo that is very underexposed, and they won't realize it. To them, that photo is well exposed. When I look back at some of my first images, it just kills me to see how dark and shadowy some of them are, but at the time I thought they were perfect. As I learned more and began to pay more attention to the difference between my photos and the photos of photographers I admired, I started to become more aware of exposure and light and color, and I started to be able to better recognize what was right and what wasn't. So I think a big part of learning to hit exposure dead on is not learning to read a histogram (which I have NEVER found to be useful at all) but instead training your eyes and your brain to be able to recognize what proper exposure looks like.

Sorry such a long reply, I hope that helps!!

see below

With EM, you get three options for when someone orders a print:

1) EM takes care of everything and fulfills the order
2) You take care of everything and fulfill the order
3) EM notifies you of the order, you upload a cropped and edited full res file, and EM fulfills the order from there

I use option 3, so I get a chance to make tweaks to images that are order before they are printed and sent out to the customer.

I use the 50 1.2 almost exclusively for the getting-ready portrait of the day and formal shots. I use a 70-200 2.8 for most of the ceremony stuff (except for the obvious stuff like the super wides or the tilt-shift shots). I use a 50 for the reception "events" (first dance, toasts, cake cutting) but I use a 35 f2 for the reception dancing shots. However I should mention that I never shoot wide open - so if the lens is a 1.2, the lowest I will go is 1.4, or more often, 1.6.

As for noise, I am not at all afraid of high ISO. I regularly shoot at ISO 4000 and higher, if the environment requires it. The 5D Mark II handles noise fabulously, and what Canon can't do, Lightroom usually can. I don't bump the ISO up unnecessarily, but it doesn't really bother me to shoot a whole reception at 2500 or something in that range, if I absolutely had to.