RF weddings

Even a leicia/Canon/Nikon rfdr is quieter than a OMn SLR, for during the service shots. The bride and groom wont complain when they see the shots...

Noel
 
The Couple Of the Moment have to truly be "into" the RF/PJ-style of photography for their wedding shoot. It helps to talk it out in detail beforehand, and go over certain crucial details (such as whether they or family members are okay with just b/w or if the mother of the bride will go to pieces if there aren't a few color shots).

I don't "do" weddings. It's too much of a hassle, needing to play photographer and psychologist at the same time. I tell people, plead with them, not to ask me to shoot their wedding (even though my younger sister thanks me for being the "second photographer" for her wedding years back, when the outfit that "officially" did the deed promptly went bankrupt shortly afterward, leaving my photos as the only document of the event for years; e-mail me if you want to know all the gory details). But they find me anyway, and twist my arm mightily (and it's always the bride...why is it always the bride?).

The good news is that, at least the last two times out, I got to do it my way; a pair of RFs, mostly b/w (chromogenic), and very much in the PJ style, with a few liberal flourishes of my own. I know of (and have worked for), a few NYC wedding photogs who charge a ton for their work, and for good reason. But I work on a smaller scale, and without an assistant (kind of a bad idea, but when you do this reluctantly, and on a shoestring, good help can be tough to find on short notice), so it becomes a high-wire act that I hope to do only a handful of times in the course of a decade. But when a great image comes forth, it seems all worth it.



attachment.php


- Barrett
 
Last edited:
Love shooting weddings with a rangefinder

Love shooting weddings with a rangefinder

Hi, been lurking around for quite awhile on this forum, and saw this thread and thought I would finally make the jump and do my first post.

I'm a wedding photogrpaher and shoot all my weddings with at least one rangefinder, normally the Leica MP loaded with Kodak 400CN. Fantastic film btw.

If you would like to see my wedding rangefinder work, check out www.39eastimages.com

The black and white images are mostly shot on a rangefinder...actually, I think all of them are shot on a rangefinder.

I love shooting with my leica because it feel so liberating. Just exposure and focus and the moment. Perfect for the fast pace of wedding photography. I mostly use the 21, 35 and the 50 with the occasional 75. But once i go beyond that, I tend to use the Canon SLR instead just because i find it easier to frame.

If you'd like to try, I'd say bring along a second photographer to cover your liability, and then shoot away. once you're confident, it's no problem going solo.

I would certianly encourage people to try a rangefinder at weddings. It's a relaly liberating way to shoot.
 
Everyone else is undoubtedly sick of seeing these, but here they are.

http://www.pbase.com/miranc/wedding

They had a real photographer so I had the freedom to just take whatever I wanted -- also, the fact that I was part of the wedding made access to personal moments a non-issue. The rangefinder photos were mostly taken with an M3 and 50mm lens (a few were taken with a 90mm). My brother and his wife prefer the photos I took to the ones taken by the official photographer, or they are just saying so to make me happy.

I enjoyed it but I would never in a million years want to do this for a living. I watched the real photographer, who put in a really, really long day and it's truly grueling work.
 
good that this thread comes along.

I've been recently asked to do a wedding on a "shoestring budget" (the formals will be done by a pro thank god!) And they looked at my stuff and wanted to have it done in B&W and no flash. I am thinking of taking an M2 with cron and Bessa with Ultron 35mm, and digital SLR as a backup. i am really nervous and have been reading up alot about shooting weddings. I also dont know what it will be like using 2 RFs under stress. Or changing film quickly in an M2. But I am really looking forward to it. It will be a good test, i think.
 
I'm a professional wedding photographer and I use at least one of my M4s at just about every wedding. As a tool to capture images, for what it does and how well it does it, RF are a viable useful tool. It just takes years and four or five dozen weddings to feel truly confident in using them (and loading them *while the bride is coming down the aisle*!) but technical proficiency is required for a professional wedding shooter. They are not my main cameras, but their keen timing, responive handling, quiet shutter have added only good things to my shooting. Plus, at some weddings, Nobody, and I mean Nobody thinks to argue (or Block!) with the guy with the BlackPaint M4 around his neck.
 
Melanie: I never tire of your images, and, believe it or not, never saw many of these images before. Wonderful.

lubitel: It's all about the pacing. Since your're not the "go-to" photographer, you're in a better position than you know. Don't worry about going a mile a minute: that's the principal photographer's job. Your "mission", such as it is, should be to get the interesting stuff the main guy is overlooking to get the "regular" wedding stuff. Your're not competing with him/her, you're on your own, with your "take" on things. Bring your vision to the occasion, and with as little fear as possible. Some of the most beautiful surprises (and not just for you) can come from such an approach.


- Barrett
 
I'm not a professional, but was asked to shoot a wedding last month as principal photographer and used an M7 and R-D1s with a 50 and 35: www.pbase.com/lloyd_chan

It was about one third film and two thirds digital, purely available light. The couple gave me carte blanche to do anything I wanted. Weddings are all about people and fleeting moments and that is where RFs excel.
 
Wonderful and informative replies, I thank all of you, and I shall, after this reply, follow the provided links. Recently, a client (and good acquaintance) requested I use an analog cam at her upcoming wedding, and besides two SLRs I intend to take along the Bessa R2a, whereby, unlike Noserider, I am not a pro wedding photog, and the couple of weddings I did capture were taken with a DSLR, taking pics at weddings of friends of friends who didn't have the funds to hire a pro. Anyway, I strongly believe I'm going to shy away from using the RF during the wedding ceremony, will use it now and then during the post-wedding bash. As Melanie wisely suggests - this is a fantastic idea - using a RF as a wedding guest would endow me with experience while documenting the actual ceremony in a more relaxed way than if I was the hired photog. Happy photography to all!

PF


Wedding photo of Claudia - my modest tribute to Sergio Larrain, á la Valparaiso
 

Attachments

  • claudia.jpg
    claudia.jpg
    108.5 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Lloyd Chan said:
I'm not a professional, but was asked to shoot a wedding last month as principal photographer and used an M7 and R-D1s with a 50 and 35: www.pbase.com/lloyd_chan

It was about one third film and two thirds digital, purely available light. The couple gave me carte blanche to do anything I wanted. Weddings are all about people and fleeting moments and that is where RFs excel.
Click to expand...
FABULOUS work, Lloyd! And, right you are. There's a whole lot of heart in your pictures.

I have to say that I've seen more good wedding photography in this thread alone than what I've seen in too many "pro" portfolios. (But, given this group here, why should I be surprised?)


- Barrett
 
As someone who shoots weddings regularly I would concur with "Noserider" regarding being comfortable enough to truly perform a wedding with an RF cam.

The ideal situation is similar to Melanie's where the couple has already hired a pro and you are there as a "guest" to do your shooting. That said, I know a number of pros that would definitely be irked at someone shooting in their line or, perhaps, even shooting their set ups - not that this happens but it's something to be wary of.

I would love to try one of the weddings as a second shooter and only use my M7 and M2 but, when a couple is usually paying a lot of money (upwards of $3500+) I don't like leaving anything to chance.

Dave
 
I did what I called budget weddings long ago in NYC for friends and friends of friends and made enough to pay for GAS relief. I had a 9 to 5 job so the rent and food was covered elsewhere, but I did not want for new toys during the period I was doing them.

I used my M4-P with a 21/2.8, 35/2 and 90/2 leica lens trio. This was back in the mid 80’s so CV was not around as an option. While I still had an extensive Nikon SLR system, I did not use it because of size and noise. I found that I could get the shots with a M4-P and a 90/2 without being too noticed and distracting.

While lots of folks here shoot existing light, I did flash and found it worked wonderfully. I used an external sensor on the body and the flash held in my left hand (Vivitar 283 and remote sensor). I was able to paint the light to give me the shadows I wanted (with a little practice mind you) and get a look that was wonderful. Also, because there was no mirror blackout, I was able to see expressions in peoples faces to know if I got a good shot or not. IMHO very important at weddings. While I had a Leica winder (they called it motor, it was a winder) I rarely used it. The tabs on the 35/2 ‘Cron allowed me to shoot one handed (right hand) without problems.

Eventually I added a M6 and the M4-P became the second body. Only once did I need to use the second body (preloaded with film) because of timing. I watched for the flow and rewound before the end of the roll from time to time. Film is cheap compared to lost moments. Besides, you do not pay for proof prints for empty frames at the end of a roll. Understanding the order of stuff is critical to being ready. Yeah, bottom loading sucks, but the M4-P is much fast to load than a M3, it worked out for me.

I almost never used my 21 for anything other than establishing or big space shots. I always carried a backup, either a second body when I got my M6 or a second system (Nikon FTn and some glass). Never needed it, but I felt better.

B2 (;->
 
I shoot weddings - mostly using 5Ds, but I have taken the Rd-1 for some getting ready shots, etc... And at my brother's wedding, I only used my MP - mom forbid me from being a photographer that day so the MP was a good compromise.

I think using a Rangefinder is good but like a poster said, you have to make sure the couple is aware and comfortable wtih the style.

I also don't think it is the best way if you are on a budget. The costs of film and developing are more if you are shooting film as opposed to digital.

I know several photographers who charge a premium to shoot film along side of digital.
 
dcsang said:
The ideal situation is similar to Melanie's where the couple has already hired a pro and you are there as a "guest" to do your shooting. That said, I know a number of pros that would definitely be irked at someone shooting in their line or, perhaps, even shooting their set ups - not that this happens but it's something to be wary of.
Click to expand...

I did shoot some of the pro's setups without getting in her way. I stood behind her or shot after her -- you can tell which ones I shot from behind or to the side because everyone's posing but they're not looking at my camera. I did this because it was the best opportunity to get more formal portraits without asking everyone to spend even more time to do them as they are time consuming enough. The paid photographer didn't appear to mind and was very curious about my cameras, especially the Rolleiflex. It didn't occur to me that she might have been miffed but I wasn't particularly concerned if she was, as she was being paid an up-front fee, she was there to do a job and was not part of the wedding party of family, as I am.

At that, she missed some obvious shots that I'm glad I was able to get (and no, she didn't miss them because of me). For example, she spent a lot of time posing my brother and his wife by a large pond but her choice of shots was really odd, like one where she put them on the far side of the pond and shot from the near side so they looked like ants in the actual photo, that kind of thing. There's one shot I have up on PBase of them at a slight distance looking back over their shoulders, and the pond in the background, which to me was a totally obvious shot to the point of being cheesy. It ended up being one of my brother's favorites from the wedding.

http://www.pbase.com/miranc/image/69880139 (my apologies for the bad scan and moire pattern from the negative touching the flatbed)

That said, it turned out that the more formal portraits I took that turned out best were the ones I set up myself, like that pond photo or this one:

http://www.pbase.com/miranc/image/69880140

Not sure what the moral of this story is, and maybe it sounds mean, but the feelings of the paid photographer are not among my top priorities when my brother is getting married and I have a camera in my hand.
 
My neighbor is a wedding photographer. And his photos are terrible.

I sometimes try to buy one from his window display, but he knows I'm laughing and he refuses.

Favorites are: girl alone rolling on a haystack, guy alone fondling bicycle, and couple in park in front of hosepipe with water apparantly coming out of his ear.
 
lubitel said:
why is using M7 "leaving it to chance"?

I saw a website of jeff aschough who uses a pair of leicas for weddings. His photos are just stunning.

http://www.jeffascough.net/main.html
Click to expand...

Jeff according to his recent interview on photo.net has now switched to Canon 5Ds for his wedding work, though he is keeping his Leica glass when they make a digital rangefinder to his liking.

That being said his rangefinder work is beautiful
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom