bmattock
Veteran
Brian Sweeney said:
Bridesmaid? Yikes!
Reluctant Wedding Photographer - HELP!
- Thread starter bmattock
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 64
- Views 5K
Bridesmaid? Yikes!
bmattock
Veteran
Honu-Hugger said:
Well, I'm getting better at being the 'in-your-face-but-polite-and-smiling' photographer!
Took these on Saturday...
http://www.cameramentor.com/chilijam_2005/
I had great responses just by acting as if I had every reason in the world to be where I was and when I was there. It was cool.
Thanks for the advice!
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
oftheherd
Veteran
Bill,
Sometimes, due to the concerns of the clergy, it is understood by all that some photos will have to be staged later as photographing during the ceremony, or at least parts of it, will not be allowed. Of course, you have already mentioned that you will talk to the preacher.
Sometimes, due to the concerns of the clergy, it is understood by all that some photos will have to be staged later as photographing during the ceremony, or at least parts of it, will not be allowed. Of course, you have already mentioned that you will talk to the preacher.
Honu-Hugger
Well-known
Quote: "I had great responses just by acting as if I had every reason in the world to be where I was and when I was there. It was cool."
You've got it dialed, Bill! Your shots of the Chilijam are great.
You've got it dialed, Bill! Your shots of the Chilijam are great.
bmattock
Veteran
oftheherd said:
Oh yes, I have full respect for the preacher - it is his (or her) church - whatever they say goes!
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
bmattock
Veteran
Honu-Hugger said:
Thank you, my friend! I like the one of the guy with the funny hat and the chil pepper in the background - I think his expression is great! The biker-looking dude was scary, but I just marched up to him and stuck a camera in his face - he broke into a smile. Fun, even if I wee'd in my shorts a little.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
N
Natalia
Guest
Bill, when's the wedding?
bmattock
Veteran
Natalia said:
Wedding is in April - bride would like portraits of her in her wedding dress in March, probably a couple of weeks from now. Gives her time to back out if she hates the portraits, eh?
Best,
Bill
bmattock
Veteran
By the way, folks - film choices...
I'm thinking in 35mm, Kodak Portra 160NC and Portra 400NC. Thoughts? There is a VC and even an UC, but for a wedding...I dunno.
For the B&W stuff - I was just going to do Delta 100 / 400 / 3200 (maybe not on the 3200, you guys talked me out of it). I'll process it myself to avoid scratches.
Should I be looking at slide film instead? Less latitude, I know.
For the 120 6x6 shots (portraits) my thought is towards the Kodak Portra 160 NC. What are your thoughts there? Fuji NPH/NPS?
Thanks again for any help!
Bill
I'm thinking in 35mm, Kodak Portra 160NC and Portra 400NC. Thoughts? There is a VC and even an UC, but for a wedding...I dunno.
For the B&W stuff - I was just going to do Delta 100 / 400 / 3200 (maybe not on the 3200, you guys talked me out of it). I'll process it myself to avoid scratches.
Should I be looking at slide film instead? Less latitude, I know.
For the 120 6x6 shots (portraits) my thought is towards the Kodak Portra 160 NC. What are your thoughts there? Fuji NPH/NPS?
Thanks again for any help!
Bill
oftheherd
Veteran
bmattock said:
One of the shorter threads on PP&I:
http://www.popphoto.com/idealbb/view.asp?topicID=27545&forumID=1&catID=4&search=1&searchstring=
After seeing your shot "Tired Warrior", you might want to bring the Canon FL 135 F2.5 with you for the tight portrait shots if you can get a nice outdoor setting.
ijonas
Established
Hi Bill,
I've been asked twice to do wedding photography at two weddings of close friends of mine. The first time there was "pro photographer" doing all the traditional shots: bride+groom, bride+family, mother+groom, group photo, etc. where as I hovered in the background documenting the whole day, with the result being that the couple preferred my shots over the pro's, not because they were better technically, but because they told the story of their most special day.
Equipment used: Canon EOS SLR, 17-35mm, 70-300mm, Kodak T400CN, Fuji NPH.
The second wedding was more difficult, because I had top billing, the only photographer was me. All I can say is that it is bl**dy hard work, and the good pros certainly deserve their money. Not so much because they're technically better photographers than you or I, but their level of organisation and ability to control groups of people to get the desired results, when most of these people would rather just get to the reception to get drunk and be merry, is just well-honed and the product of experience.
At the end of the second wedding I was wreck, utterly exhausted as I'd spent the whole running around, whilst the whole day was unfolding around me. The fact that a chocolate wedding cake began to melt halfway through the formal portrait shots didn't help matters.
Equipment used: Canon EOS SLR, 17-35mm, 70-300mm, Bessa R2, 50mm Nokton, 35mm Color Skopar Pancake, Kodak T400CN, Fuji NPH, Fuji Neopan 1600.
My advise to you would be to:
- understand the venue(s) where the day is taking place, making notes of what film(s) and lenses you'll be using in each of the venues
- create a "shotlist" with all the formal portraits listed on them, all which are documented in the usual wedding photography books
- brief you're wife/assistant, because she's going to be responsible for arranging the groups of people for the formal portaits, the ones would rather be partying than posing. I didn't have an assistant and it was a nightmare.
- if at all possible, use a DSLR. I wouldn't dream of shooting another wedding on film, and spending the next 4 weeks scanning in 500 photographs, doing basic adjustments in photoshop, and then organising them into print sizes. A DSLR just excels at this type of work, believe me!
I don't want to sound negative. I absolutely enjoyed the weddings I've shot for friends. Both weddings turned out to be successes, but for different reasons. But its hard work, that will keep you busy long after the couple's special day and people's hangovers have passed.
My 2 pennies,
Ijonas,
I've been asked twice to do wedding photography at two weddings of close friends of mine. The first time there was "pro photographer" doing all the traditional shots: bride+groom, bride+family, mother+groom, group photo, etc. where as I hovered in the background documenting the whole day, with the result being that the couple preferred my shots over the pro's, not because they were better technically, but because they told the story of their most special day.
Equipment used: Canon EOS SLR, 17-35mm, 70-300mm, Kodak T400CN, Fuji NPH.
The second wedding was more difficult, because I had top billing, the only photographer was me. All I can say is that it is bl**dy hard work, and the good pros certainly deserve their money. Not so much because they're technically better photographers than you or I, but their level of organisation and ability to control groups of people to get the desired results, when most of these people would rather just get to the reception to get drunk and be merry, is just well-honed and the product of experience.
At the end of the second wedding I was wreck, utterly exhausted as I'd spent the whole running around, whilst the whole day was unfolding around me. The fact that a chocolate wedding cake began to melt halfway through the formal portrait shots didn't help matters.
Equipment used: Canon EOS SLR, 17-35mm, 70-300mm, Bessa R2, 50mm Nokton, 35mm Color Skopar Pancake, Kodak T400CN, Fuji NPH, Fuji Neopan 1600.
My advise to you would be to:
- understand the venue(s) where the day is taking place, making notes of what film(s) and lenses you'll be using in each of the venues
- create a "shotlist" with all the formal portraits listed on them, all which are documented in the usual wedding photography books
- brief you're wife/assistant, because she's going to be responsible for arranging the groups of people for the formal portaits, the ones would rather be partying than posing. I didn't have an assistant and it was a nightmare.
- if at all possible, use a DSLR. I wouldn't dream of shooting another wedding on film, and spending the next 4 weeks scanning in 500 photographs, doing basic adjustments in photoshop, and then organising them into print sizes. A DSLR just excels at this type of work, believe me!
I don't want to sound negative. I absolutely enjoyed the weddings I've shot for friends. Both weddings turned out to be successes, but for different reasons. But its hard work, that will keep you busy long after the couple's special day and people's hangovers have passed.
My 2 pennies,
Ijonas,
Last edited:
bmattock
Veteran
Brian Sweeney said:
You know, that's one of the sweetest lenses I ever used. I have an available-light portrait of my wife's cat Fiona that will just melt your heart. Every whisker in perfect focus, the background so OOF that you'd think it was a melted painting. So sharp I could shave with it. I *love* that lens, thanks for reminding me!
Only problem is, it is a FL mount lens, not an FD mount. I think I can use it on an FD body, though. Hmmm. Have to try it.
Thanks for reminding me!
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Honu-Hugger
Well-known
I remember reading that Portra NC was designed with wedding photography in mind; I believe Kodak bills it as "Neutral Contrast" but the trade has taken to calling it "No Contrast." At any rate, it is ideal for wedding photography because of the range of contrast usually encountered. I've never shot a wedding but shoot NC often -- I like it and can recommend that it will not give you any unpleasant surprises, an easy film to shoot.
P. S. "Natural Color" is what Kodak calls it, and NC is supposed to be well corrected for skin tones, too.
P. S. "Natural Color" is what Kodak calls it, and NC is supposed to be well corrected for skin tones, too.
Last edited:
DougK
This space left blank
For color print film I think Portra is the way to go. If you choose to use a slide film as you mentioned earlier, you may want to consider something like Agfachrome. It produces much more natural colors than Fuji or Kodak and renders more accurate skin tones, although in this day of over-saturated colors it can look as if it's a bit washed-out .
doubs43
Well-known
Bill, you're getting lots of good advice. Now you have to sift through everything to arrive at a master plan and "Plan B".
You might think about a list of posed shots that you consider a "must" with lots of available light shots as the opportunities present themselves. Go over the possible list of posed shots with the Bride and let her decide what she wants and doesn't want.
ijonas hit the nail on the head; weddings are HARD work and you'll earn your non-fee! 😀
I know you'll do well and this is a good way for you to break into the business.
Walker
You might think about a list of posed shots that you consider a "must" with lots of available light shots as the opportunities present themselves. Go over the possible list of posed shots with the Bride and let her decide what she wants and doesn't want.
ijonas hit the nail on the head; weddings are HARD work and you'll earn your non-fee! 😀
I know you'll do well and this is a good way for you to break into the business.
Walker
S
Sean Reid
Guest
Hi Bill,
Who talked you out of shooting ISO 3200? Consider shooting T-Max 3200 but check the lighting ahead of time and see if you can pull it to ISO 1600 and reduce the development. I find 800 or 1600 to be the minimum I'd want to work with for available light ceremonies indoors. You'll never regret having the extra stop. As for flash during the ceremony...would you want a flash exploding in your face while you took your vows? I wouldn't.
Best,
Sean
Who talked you out of shooting ISO 3200? Consider shooting T-Max 3200 but check the lighting ahead of time and see if you can pull it to ISO 1600 and reduce the development. I find 800 or 1600 to be the minimum I'd want to work with for available light ceremonies indoors. You'll never regret having the extra stop. As for flash during the ceremony...would you want a flash exploding in your face while you took your vows? I wouldn't.
Best,
Sean
S
Sean Reid
Guest
BTW, one nice thing about shooting at a wedding is that people expect you to be making pictures so you don't need to stop and explain to them what you're doing. You can be freer for that reason.
Cheers,
Sean
Cheers,
Sean
FrankS
Registered User
Bill, definitely NO to slide film or any of the high contrast colourful VC or UC films! Portra 400 or the Fuji NPH. I don't think I'd bother with 100 speed film.
doubs43
Well-known
Sean Reid said:
While I've encountered Ministers who have given me permission to use flash during the actual ceremony, I've always refrained from using it. In the majority of cases, the Priest/Minister has forbidden flash once the Bride reaches the Alter.
Most churches are lit well enough to get a shot from the center isle floor (here's where a TLR really shines), or in front of the center pews if there's no isle, using a long shutter speed. Things at the Alter generally move slowly enough that many opportunities for such a picture will be found. A similar shot from a balcony can also be taken as well as a wide angle shot from the balcony to include the guests.
Each building is different and some can be a genuine challenge finding enough room for much of anything. Larger churches generally will have lots of room and places with a decent background.
Walker
Similar threads
