The undercover wedding Part Two

WMBP · 10-30-2009, 07:31 AM

Trishytee,

I often say that wedding photography is just about the hardest kind of photography there is. War photography might be more dangerous, but the photographic opportunities seem to be terrific. Just look through any history of photography and count the number of great war photos. You can count the number of great wedding photos, too - if you can find any.

I go to weddings expecting everything to be bad. I expect somebody important to be on edge. Light will be lousy. Schedule for everything will be rushed. And I also assume that I'll have a problem with some part of my equipment. That's why I bring 5 lenses, 4 flash units, 3 cameras, 2 tripods, and a partridge in a battery tree. (Aside from the partridge bit, those numbers are in fact correct.)

Originally posted by trishytee

Well that was pretty daunting. I don't think I got any really good shots. First the celebrant had them facing the sun and I couldn't really intervene.

Was there a rehearsal and did you attend? This sort of question has to be brought up before the day of the wedding.

But sometimes it just happens. I gather it was an outdoors, afternoon wedding. One answer: fill flash. Another possibility: find an angle where you can shoot from the side and get nice highlighting in their hair. You can't always shoot the bride and groom's faces during the ceremony.

Quote:

Then my flash seems to have a loose conection and did not fire (no one told me) so many shots have shadows.

Well, now you have had that happen to you! Good lesson to learn. When shooting flash during the day, you may have to ask the subjects if the flash is firing - although you should also get used to the way the flash recycles, which is something you can probably watch on the back of the flash unit. If it doesn't recycle, it probably didn't fire.

It's a valuable lesson that we all have to learn: equipment failures are our fault. That's why it's necessary to bring 5 lenses, 4 flash units, 3 cameras, etc. I've had tripods break on me, flashes fail, and lenses stop talking to the camera. I do everything to make sure my equipment is in tip top shape before a wedding because NOT having a problem is definitely the plan. But having backups is next best.

Quote:

I also seem to have no sharp focus? I was on the 'green' metering as suggested here.

Hmmm. I have never shot in green mode on the camera. I would have suggested at least using P. You were using a K20D? Or what? I can't remember.

Quote:

I went onto automatic programme eventually

What's that? You mean P?

Quote:

...and the one under the tree is 1/180 f11 and I think I was too far away for the flash to make a difference (I had a difuser on.

You are correct! Shooting outdoors, in the sunlight, a diffuser is usually pretty pointless. I saw a guy at the Dallas Arboretum - wedding photographer central in Dallas - using a flash pointed up with a Gary Fong Lightsphere on it. Maybe he thought the light would bounce off the trees and the few clouds.

As for your aperture - f/11 is not really an aperture you would use for flash under any circumstances, well, not very often. Remember, aperture and shutter speed have a somewhat different effect when you shoot with flash than when you shoot normally without flash. Shooting with flash, aperture basically controls how much of the light from the flash makes it to the sensor. The shutter speed on the other hand controls how much of an effect the ambient light has. The flash burst is extremely fast and you can't stop it with your shutter speed! The only thing you can do to limit the amount of that burst that makes it to the sensor is close or open the "door" it's going through (i.e. the aperture). Anyway, at f/11, very little of the flash is making it to the sensor. And if you stand too far from the subject, then you're weakening the flash power to start with due to the inverse square rule.

When I'm shooting outdoors in the afternoon, if I can't get out of the bright light, I'll use fill flash. But even then, I usually try some shots with the flash turned off. Just reach up, turn it off, reconsider exposure for available light. Not sure what your ISO was here (doesn't seem to be embedded in the posted image). Anyway, f/11 was a mistake here, with or without flash. With flash, f/11 means the effect of the flash will be reduced to nothing. Without flash, f/11 gives you tons of depth of field - but you don't NEED tons of depth of field here. I'm pretty sure I'd have taken that photo at something close to f/4, perhaps even f/2.8.

Will

autumnsbliss · 10-30-2009, 08:47 AM

I think everyone has given great advice for you to learn from, not much to add from the technical standpoint.

As for editing, here's my advice:

Looking at your pictures I would bump up the exposure a tad bit more, it still looks a bit dark. I would add contrast to bring out more of the color. Mike gave good advice on the diagonal method for cropping. I've learn that black & white pictures are very nice and really can make a picture look classic.

Originally posted by trishytee:

I like the pic better now it's lighter, but I have to say I'm not that keen on the blue flowers, but she loves them so I might clone in some more. What is IMO?

Not a fan of over photoshopping a picture. I would leave it be.

HGMonaro · 10-30-2009, 03:46 PM

Originally posted by trishytee

What is IMO?

In My Opinion

Usually used when making a point about something that others could have a different view of

Taff · 10-30-2009, 05:49 PM

I feel bad for you, the bride and the groom

And to be honest, from you r previous post the day before the wedding it was quite obvious you were not ready for it!

trishytee · 10-30-2009, 08:02 PM

Mike that diagnal cropping looks amazing but I think it will be some time before I can get Lightroom. But thanks. I totally agree Peter about the flowers and Jen's feelings. Yes, I certainly do seem to have focussed on the tree, though I was in 'multi segment' the green one as recommended by someone here. Though most my shots seem to be slight fuzzy which is a bit sad. My flash is actually AF400FTZ and is hot shoe mounted. I think the reason I got it cheap was the loose connection, but now that I know it is there, it is not a problem to keep my thumb on it. I just now need to get an understanding of how it is different to the on board flash. Thanks every one for the input, it is greatly appreciated.

trishytee · 10-30-2009, 08:19 PM

Aww Taff, don't feel bad for us. jenny and Ulf are delighted with the pics. They had no one at all to take shots so they are happy (even if I am not.) You are right I was not ready, I have done two others all automatic with on board flash for fill and got lovely results. But I am now determined to overcome this.

Mike Cash · 10-31-2009, 03:28 AM

Originally posted by trishytee

But I am now determined to overcome this.

That's the spirit.

1. Learn
2. Do
3. Repeat

Taff · 10-31-2009, 06:38 AM

i agree trish, keep your spirit up

you can keep ya weddings cause i dont like em.

Taff · 10-31-2009, 06:40 AM

Originally posted by Haakan

Hi Trishytee,

I did a quick try on one of your images,
Best regards,
Haakan

why do people just REDO other people's picture without requesting before hand, it is just plain rude.
(forgive me if request was made by PM)

Haakan · 10-31-2009, 08:04 AM

Taff,
Certainly not my intention to be rude. I have had great help though from other members when they have shown me way to improve my pictures by giving examples of post processing changes.

Have removed my previous post in order to not offend anyone.

Best regards,
Haakan

cwood · 11-01-2009, 03:51 PM

Originally posted by Haakan

Taff,
Certainly not my intention to be rude. I have had great help though from other members when they have shown me way to improve my pictures by giving examples of post processing changes.

Have removed my previous post in order to not offend anyone.

Best regards,
Haakan

Some other photography forums have a setting associated with a user account that says "Image Editing OK" or Image Editing NOT OK". Most people (no matter how good they are) will allow editing of their images. It is one of the most valuable lessons any of us can learn - to see how someone else would make the same picture look entirely different. It may be better or worse but in either case it cost you nothing and you gained something from the experience.

I don't know if it has been suggested as an upgrade to this forum or not but it would certainly be worth while. For right now most reasonable people would recognize that you did not have malicious intent when you tried your own edit on someone else's image so don't worry too much about it.

Haakan · 11-02-2009, 11:34 AM

Thank you kunik,

I can assure I did not have any malicious intent. As I stated in my (now deleted) post I thought that the images did a very good job of capturing the happiness of the couple (which is the most important part), and just wanted suggest that some of the technical issues that the OP said she encountered could perhaps to some extent be masked by some post processing.

My mistake of not asking first though.

Best regards,
Haakan

(I like your idea of having a setting where one can allow that ones images can be post processed by other members. As I said, I have myself learned much from other members showing me alternatives to how I have processed an image)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Wedding- What can I do with these? Please Help	OrenMc	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	10	08-31-2010 06:11 AM
Cheap Wedding Photographer Part II Judge Joe Brown	joodiespost	General Talk	64	03-15-2010 10:13 PM
People Wedding	cwood	Post Your Photos!	3	10-23-2009 02:31 PM
First wedding	TYOsborn	Post Your Photos!	10	05-16-2009 11:17 AM
Wedding by Me	JCSullivan	Post Your Photos!	3	06-25-2008 10:27 PM

10-30-2009, 07:31 AM	#16
WMBP Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,482	Trishytee, I often say that wedding photography is just about the hardest kind of photography there is. War photography might be more dangerous, but the photographic opportunities seem to be terrific. Just look through any history of photography and count the number of great war photos. You can count the number of great wedding photos, too - if you can find any. I go to weddings expecting everything to be bad. I expect somebody important to be on edge. Light will be lousy. Schedule for everything will be rushed. And I also assume that I'll have a problem with some part of my equipment. That's why I bring 5 lenses, 4 flash units, 3 cameras, 2 tripods, and a partridge in a battery tree. (Aside from the partridge bit, those numbers are in fact correct.) Originally posted by trishytee Well that was pretty daunting. I don't think I got any really good shots. First the celebrant had them facing the sun and I couldn't really intervene. Was there a rehearsal and did you attend? This sort of question has to be brought up before the day of the wedding. But sometimes it just happens. I gather it was an outdoors, afternoon wedding. One answer: fill flash. Another possibility: find an angle where you can shoot from the side and get nice highlighting in their hair. You can't always shoot the bride and groom's faces during the ceremony. Quote: Then my flash seems to have a loose conection and did not fire (no one told me) so many shots have shadows. Well, now you have had that happen to you! Good lesson to learn. When shooting flash during the day, you may have to ask the subjects if the flash is firing - although you should also get used to the way the flash recycles, which is something you can probably watch on the back of the flash unit. If it doesn't recycle, it probably didn't fire. It's a valuable lesson that we all have to learn: equipment failures are our fault. That's why it's necessary to bring 5 lenses, 4 flash units, 3 cameras, etc. I've had tripods break on me, flashes fail, and lenses stop talking to the camera. I do everything to make sure my equipment is in tip top shape before a wedding because NOT having a problem is definitely the plan. But having backups is next best. Quote: I also seem to have no sharp focus? I was on the 'green' metering as suggested here. Hmmm. I have never shot in green mode on the camera. I would have suggested at least using P. You were using a K20D? Or what? I can't remember. Quote: I went onto automatic programme eventually What's that? You mean P? Quote: ...and the one under the tree is 1/180 f11 and I think I was too far away for the flash to make a difference (I had a difuser on. You are correct! Shooting outdoors, in the sunlight, a diffuser is usually pretty pointless. I saw a guy at the Dallas Arboretum - wedding photographer central in Dallas - using a flash pointed up with a Gary Fong Lightsphere on it. Maybe he thought the light would bounce off the trees and the few clouds. As for your aperture - f/11 is not really an aperture you would use for flash under any circumstances, well, not very often. Remember, aperture and shutter speed have a somewhat different effect when you shoot with flash than when you shoot normally without flash. Shooting with flash, aperture basically controls how much of the light from the flash makes it to the sensor. The shutter speed on the other hand controls how much of an effect the ambient light has. The flash burst is extremely fast and you can't stop it with your shutter speed! The only thing you can do to limit the amount of that burst that makes it to the sensor is close or open the "door" it's going through (i.e. the aperture). Anyway, at f/11, very little of the flash is making it to the sensor. And if you stand too far from the subject, then you're weakening the flash power to start with due to the inverse square rule. When I'm shooting outdoors in the afternoon, if I can't get out of the bright light, I'll use fill flash. But even then, I usually try some shots with the flash turned off. Just reach up, turn it off, reconsider exposure for available light. Not sure what your ISO was here (doesn't seem to be embedded in the posted image). Anyway, f/11 was a mistake here, with or without flash. With flash, f/11 means the effect of the flash will be reduced to nothing. Without flash, f/11 gives you tons of depth of field - but you don't NEED tons of depth of field here. I'm pretty sure I'd have taken that photo at something close to f/4, perhaps even f/2.8. Will

10-30-2009, 08:47 AM	#17
autumnsbliss Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Illinois Posts: 25	I think everyone has given great advice for you to learn from, not much to add from the technical standpoint. As for editing, here's my advice: Looking at your pictures I would bump up the exposure a tad bit more, it still looks a bit dark. I would add contrast to bring out more of the color. Mike gave good advice on the diagonal method for cropping. I've learn that black & white pictures are very nice and really can make a picture look classic. Originally posted by trishytee: I like the pic better now it's lighter, but I have to say I'm not that keen on the blue flowers, but she loves them so I might clone in some more. What is IMO? Not a fan of over photoshopping a picture. I would leave it be.

10-30-2009, 03:46 PM	#18
HGMonaro Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Melb. Aust Posts: 840	Originally posted by trishytee What is IMO? In My Opinion Usually used when making a point about something that others could have a different view of

10-30-2009, 05:49 PM	#19
Taff Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Perth Western Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,612	I feel bad for you, the bride and the groom And to be honest, from you r previous post the day before the wedding it was quite obvious you were not ready for it!

10-30-2009, 08:02 PM	#20
trishytee Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Mandurah Perth Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 221 Original Poster	Mike that diagnal cropping looks amazing but I think it will be some time before I can get Lightroom. But thanks. I totally agree Peter about the flowers and Jen's feelings. Yes, I certainly do seem to have focussed on the tree, though I was in 'multi segment' the green one as recommended by someone here. Though most my shots seem to be slight fuzzy which is a bit sad. My flash is actually AF400FTZ and is hot shoe mounted. I think the reason I got it cheap was the loose connection, but now that I know it is there, it is not a problem to keep my thumb on it. I just now need to get an understanding of how it is different to the on board flash. Thanks every one for the input, it is greatly appreciated.

10-30-2009, 08:19 PM	#21
trishytee Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Mandurah Perth Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 221 Original Poster	Aww Taff, don't feel bad for us. jenny and Ulf are delighted with the pics. They had no one at all to take shots so they are happy (even if I am not.) You are right I was not ready, I have done two others all automatic with on board flash for fill and got lovely results. But I am now determined to overcome this.

10-31-2009, 03:28 AM	#22
Mike Cash Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Japan Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,950	Originally posted by trishytee But I am now determined to overcome this. That's the spirit. 1. Learn 2. Do 3. Repeat

10-31-2009, 06:38 AM	#23
Taff Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Perth Western Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,612	i agree trish, keep your spirit up you can keep ya weddings cause i dont like em.

10-31-2009, 06:40 AM	#24
Taff Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Perth Western Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,612	Originally posted by Haakan Hi Trishytee, I did a quick try on one of your images, Best regards, Haakan why do people just REDO other people's picture without requesting before hand, it is just plain rude. (forgive me if request was made by PM)

10-31-2009, 08:04 AM	#25
Haakan Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Stockholm Photos: Gallery Posts: 182	Taff, Certainly not my intention to be rude. I have had great help though from other members when they have shown me way to improve my pictures by giving examples of post processing changes. Have removed my previous post in order to not offend anyone. Best regards, Haakan

11-01-2009, 03:51 PM	#26
cwood Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: California Posts: 851	Originally posted by Haakan Taff, Certainly not my intention to be rude. I have had great help though from other members when they have shown me way to improve my pictures by giving examples of post processing changes. Have removed my previous post in order to not offend anyone. Best regards, Haakan Some other photography forums have a setting associated with a user account that says "Image Editing OK" or Image Editing NOT OK". Most people (no matter how good they are) will allow editing of their images. It is one of the most valuable lessons any of us can learn - to see how someone else would make the same picture look entirely different. It may be better or worse but in either case it cost you nothing and you gained something from the experience. I don't know if it has been suggested as an upgrade to this forum or not but it would certainly be worth while. For right now most reasonable people would recognize that you did not have malicious intent when you tried your own edit on someone else's image so don't worry too much about it.

11-02-2009, 11:34 AM	#27
Haakan Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Stockholm Photos: Gallery Posts: 182	Thank you kunik, I can assure I did not have any malicious intent. As I stated in my (now deleted) post I thought that the images did a very good job of capturing the happiness of the couple (which is the most important part), and just wanted suggest that some of the technical issues that the OP said she encountered could perhaps to some extent be masked by some post processing. My mistake of not asking first though. Best regards, Haakan (I like your idea of having a setting where one can allow that ones images can be post processed by other members. As I said, I have myself learned much from other members showing me alternatives to how I have processed an image)