| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/12/2006 08:53:58 AM · #1 |
So, this is the deal, I got chosen to be the photographer at a wedding, because the guy and his fiance have seen my photos through the family.
I am really freaked out though, because it is a low light church, and I don't see how I am going to get around blurring all the photos.
If anybody has done this, and has some advice, I would appreciate it sincerely. I mean anything would be helpful, like the settings on the camera to...taking certain things for props. Anything, I don't want to screw this up for them. I have the 300 Rebel dslr, if this helps and the standard lens. I am going after the canon 70-300mm this week.
Love ya guys, and thanks in advance for the comments. |
|
|
|
03/12/2006 09:21:18 AM · #2 |
Hi There
I did a couple of weddings before. Tell me - Is everything indoors? Try to get the Bride and groom outdoors and take some shots. Go to wedding sites and get some ideas for photos. Get some photos where the couple are not posing - more natural.
Photograph the decor - people tend to forget - go on MACRO and shoot away.
As Props - try the following - bottle of champaigne, glasses, picnic basket and blanket, one of these nice fluffy umbrellas, Big painting frame etc.
Remember - relax and have fun - take your time. Listen to what the couple wants.
Check out some of my older photos on my site. These were all taken with a small P&S Fujifilm.
|
|
|
|
03/12/2006 09:31:20 AM · #3 |
You are going to have to determine whether you will or will not use flash during the ceremony. It's possible that the church will not allow it, and even if they will, you may prefer not to.
If you're not using flash, you will definitely need a fast lens or two. Visit the church when lighting is expected to be similar to the wedding if possible and figure out:
- What focal length(s) are going to be required for the shots where flash will not be used?
- What are the light levels you'll be experiencing? At your highest usable ISO, what aperture do you need to keep shutter speeds up above 1/focal length?
Now ask yourself, "can I perhaps get away with the 50/1.8 as my ceremony lens?" If so, buy it, it's less than $100. If you need a longer lens that's faster than f/2.8, or if an f/2.8 zoom would be adequate for the lighting, you may try renting.
|
|
|
|
03/12/2006 10:05:17 AM · #4 |
| I would try and avoid the flash if possible. If you have to then try and bounce it. It's amazing how high the roof can be to still get a nice image. Kirbic's recommendation for a good cheap lens in the Canon 50/1.8 is good advice. Well worth having. I also use the Tamron 28-75/2.8 and I love the result. For the price it is good value! |
|
|
|
03/12/2006 10:22:38 AM · #5 |
That Canon 70-300 is not the best lens for a wedding. Not if it's the 3.5-5.6 one. At the 300mm end of things you'll be forced to shoot f/5.6 at probably 1/15th of a second...
So look for a faster lens instead.
My Canon 70-200 2.8 and my Tamron 28-75 2.8 are my two most used lenses for weddings.
The Tamron is an excellent buy - great quality at a decent price, it comes highly recommended by the folks here on DPC.
The Canon 70-200 is a bit pricey (about $1600). But there are places that rent lenses... the one here in town rents it out for $25/day. Not a bad way to go!
The only downside for you is that the 300D at 1600 is a bit noisy. The 350D and 20D are much better low-light cameras than the 300D. So you might want to do some practice at ISO 800 and ISO 1600 just to get a feel for what you'll be getting out of the camera.
|
|
|
|
03/12/2006 08:19:32 PM · #6 |
Ok guys, sorry for the delayed response, i've gotten myself a bit busy.
So the person above mentioned if I do use a flash, try to bounce it. What does that mean? I am very scared of the flash, and I have had it in my mind to try and avoid it, but I don't think I have a fast enough lens yet to avoid it.
Owe...and thank you guys so much for the advice. Priceless, you guys are awesome. |
|
|
|
03/12/2006 08:21:18 PM · #7 |
go buy a Canon 430 EX (about $210) and a Gary Fong's Lightsphere II ($49)
with these two things you'll be able to get excellent pictures even in extremely low light conditions. it won't even look like you have even used a flash
Charles |
|
|
|
03/12/2006 08:27:54 PM · #8 |
Bouncing the flash means that you point the flash in the direction of a light-colored wall or ceiling and use the reflected light to light your subject. It's like using a very large diffuser, and can be very effective when combined with exiting light. You will definitely want to use some sort of diffuser, and a ceiling is free!
Practice this technique up front, it can be incredibly useful at the reception, where the halls very commonly have white ceilings.
|
|
|
|
03/12/2006 08:59:30 PM · #9 |
Please note that you can't bounce the pop-up flash that is on the camera; you MUST have an add-on flash.
Most folks who really care about the quality of their product take a lot of really expensive equipment to weddings, and there are darn good reasons for ALL of it. Lots of memory, extra batteries, spare cameras, flashes and battery packs, tripods, off camera flashes, on and on and on.
That said, if you are willing to put $500-$800 bucks into additional equipment, you can make a pretty good stab at wedding photos. |
|
|
|
03/12/2006 09:09:45 PM · #10 |
|
|
|
03/12/2006 09:29:35 PM · #11 |
| Is there maybe a chance you can go to the church before the wedding with a couple of friends to model and test your settings and shots? That would be my advice. That way you will get what you want and know the settings in advance! |
|
|
|
03/12/2006 10:07:13 PM · #12 |
you will definitely need a fast lens or two
Or two?
The tips are excellent! I am happy this thread came along. I will be shooting my first wedding next month. Happily, it will be an outside wedding. I have the Cannon 28-50mm lens that I originally got with my EOS Elan II (works well with my 300d), Tamron 28-300mm 3.5-6.3 and I just ordered the 50mm 1.8 along with some extra memory. I will be going for an extra battery or two as well. Does anyone have an opinion of Canon v. other brand batteries?
I have a flash attachment, so I am going well there...I think. I could probably get a better flash, but I am still getting comfortable with that. Someone suggested a fast lens or two? What would be second to the 50mm?
For those of you looking for an inexpensive alternative to the Canon flash attachments, I bought a Promaster 5900 on Ebay for $94.00 with shipping. Originally, I bought it when I was using my ElanII, but it has worked well as a learning tool with my 300D. It included everthing needed to shoot off the camera as well. I am looking forward to upgrading to 430EX in the next couple of months i think.
These are some recent shots done indoors using the Promaster 5900.
   |
|
|
|
03/12/2006 10:07:58 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by faidoi:
Shot RAW. |
One more thing...why shoot RAW? I don't think I have the software to open/edit RAW photos! |
|
|
|
03/12/2006 10:13:41 PM · #14 |
My advice (and fairly cheap) get a Canon 50mm f/1.8 II lens. It will give you amble speed for low light. If you can, get a cheapish Sigme Ef-500 DG ST flash (cheap but efficient).
|
|
|
|
03/12/2006 10:15:40 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by luv2photo:
Originally posted by faidoi:
Shot RAW. |
One more thing...why shoot RAW? I don't think I have the software to open/edit RAW photos! |
What software are you editing with? If you use Photoshop CS or CS2, you can open RAW files.
There is also RawShooter Essentials, which is free and good.
As to why you should shoot RAW, it will give you much more flexibility in post-processing, including some exposure adjustment (even recovery of slightly blown highlights) and a great deal of color balance correction. You should still try to get CLOSE with white balance when shooting, just so the LCD previews look good, but bottom line is with RAW you can apply ANY white balance after the fact without image degradation.
RAW also allows things like vignettig and CA correction in conversion. The demosaicing algorithms in the RAW converters are also significantly better than the in-camera ones (more time and processing power available).
RAW does take a lot more space, and if you're not used to dealing with a RAW workflow, you should not use it for a paid event. A week or two of practice upfront, though and you should be set.
|
|
|
|
03/12/2006 10:19:27 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by luv2photo:
Originally posted by faidoi:
Shot RAW. |
One more thing...why shoot RAW? I don't think I have the software to open/edit RAW photos! |
What software are you editing with? If you use Photoshop CS or CS2, you can open RAW files.
There is also RawShooter Essentials, which is free and good. |
I am using PS Elements. I will look into RawShooter Essentials that you suggested. How much memory will I require if I shoot in RAW? I am expecting to shoot (the way I shoot) 200-300 photos. |
|
|
|
03/12/2006 10:23:22 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by luv2photo:
How much memory will I require if I shoot in RAW? I am expecting to shoot (the way I shoot) 200-300 photos. |
Will require about 2 gigs on the 300D to do 300 shots in RAW.
|
|
|
|
03/12/2006 10:25:06 PM · #18 |
| Check to see if there will be a dress/final rehearsal before the wedding. If you can take some photographs during the rehearsal and review these, this will give you an idea of what camera settings, lens, and flash you may need. |
|
|
|
03/12/2006 10:25:47 PM · #19 |
For 300 photos take 3 gigs. You'll have some space left, but 130-150 per gig (less if you embed a high quality JPEG) is about the best you can expect.
If you are not shooting RAW now, my advice is to stay the heck away from it unless you have a lot of time to practice. Do what you know, for a serious paid gig, or else spend a lot of time working on it. For goodness sake don't show up a the wedding trying to figure out how to set the camera to RAW... that would be BAAAAAAAAD.
|
|
|
|
03/12/2006 10:26:31 PM · #20 |
RAW files tend to be, on average, about twice as large as large/fine JPEGs, and you will want to archive the RAW files as your "digital negatives" so your hard drive space will be eaten up a bit faster. For RAM, if you have 1GB, you should be good with RawShooter Essentials (RSE) and the RAW files from the 300D. I wouldn't run with much less though; if you do have less, simply experiment and see. I RSE runs well and you're able to make your conversions to JPEG, then you have the same workflow from that point, which you already know works. It should only take a day or two to install RSE, shoot some test RAW files, and get a feel for converting. Getting confident can take a little longer.
|
|
|
|
03/12/2006 10:30:06 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
RAW files tend to be, on average, about twice as large as large/fine JPEGs, and you will want to archive the RAW files as your "digital negatives" so your hard drive space will be eaten up a bit faster. For RAM, if you have 1GB, you should be good with RawShooter Essentials (RSE) and the RAW files from the 300D. I wouldn't run with much less though; if you do have less, simply experiment and see. I RSE runs well and you're able to make your conversions to JPEG, then you have the same workflow from that point, which you already know works. It should only take a day or two to install RSE, shoot some test RAW files, and get a feel for converting. Getting confident can take a little longer. |
I think she meant camera memory :P (Note to luv2photo - kirbic is talking about computer memory here) |
|
|
|
03/12/2006 10:33:29 PM · #22 |
I shoot JPEG only for weddings.
I like to have a LOT of memory for lots of shors.
I'm don't like the extra post-process time required for lots of shots in RAW.
I shoot so many shots that I can delete the bad ones and they will never be missed.
The camera lag time for writing RAW is inpractical for doing weddings.
STAY with JPEG. It will save you a LOT of headaches with doing weddings.
|
|
|
|
03/12/2006 10:36:27 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
I shoot JPEG only for weddings.
I like to have a LOT of memory for lots of shors.
I'm don't like the extra post-process time required for lots of shots in RAW.
I shoot so many shots that I can delete the bad ones and they will never be missed.
The camera lag time for writing RAW is inpractical for doing weddings.
STAY with JPEG. It will save you a LOT of headaches with doing weddings. |
I find that the write time for RAW on the 5D is fast. I do a lot of continous action shooting in RAW. The writing time is complete by the time I take my eye from the eyepiece to look at the preview. That is how quick it is. I know that we are talking about the Canon Rebel here but I thought I would add this information for people who are looking to upgrade and love to shoot RAW. |
|
|
|
03/12/2006 10:37:08 PM · #24 |
I shot a wedding on Friday and I easily took over 800 shots in RAW. Normally I would shoot about 500 but there were 20 members in the bridal party alone. It easily adds up once you start shooting individual shots of them all.
I used about 5gigs worth of memory for all those photos. I just enjoy having the freedom of adjustments to the RAW files once I have taken them, especially if I'm shooting inside a church. As mentioned, Rawshooter Essentials is free and it's damn good. Find it here!
EDIT: Also, just be aware that with a 1gig card you'll get about 160 shots in RAW at ISO 100. As you raise the ISO you will get slightly less shots.
Message edited by author 2006-03-12 22:39:26. |
|
|
|
03/12/2006 10:39:08 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by Judi:
I find that the write time for RAW on the 5D is fast. I do a lot of continous action shooting in RAW. The writing time is complete by the time I take my eye from the eyepiece to look at the preview. That is how quick it is. I know that we are talking about the Canon Rebel here but I thought I would add this information for people who are looking to upgrade and love to shoot RAW. |
The write time isn't BAD with the 300D on 40x cards, but I rarely chimp shots. (35mm upbringing) So, at weddings I'm ALWAYS in the viewfinder. You have to be ready for every shot that comes your way.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/09/2025 12:23:53 AM EDT.
