Sunset & Silhouettes

[PIXI_666]

Hi all,

I have a wedding this weekend and the couple asked me to get some sunset shots, mainly the usual "Kissing with sunset in background" ones. I tried this last weekend at my brother's wedding....but unfortunately they didn't really come out. I want to get the silhouette effect ALONG with a strong sunset in the back with nice shot of couple with features standing out (If you get what i mean?)

Anywya i couldn't achieve this for some reason (Whether i was under pressure and forgot all logistics to taking such simple shots). I need a bit of help as to how to get these 2 effects...without me not getting them then freaking out because they really want these shots - its a bit easier when im photographing sunsets with NON moving things lol it works better! But these are living breathing humans lol

Any ideas??????

Del

[tim]

To have the people dark use partial metering, meter the sky and lock your exposure with *, recompose, shoot. If you want to see details of the couple turn your flash on and let it expose the people, which it'll do about right automagically.

Sorry to say this, but this is really simple stuff, you should really understand your equipment before you tackle weddings.

[PIXI_666]

LOL....see.....i want to be able to do this without getting too technical - is there a simpler answer? Sorry - i dont have a light meter.

[CyberPet]

Your camera has a built-in lightmeter ;)

[tim]

LOL....see.....i want to be able to do this without getting too technical - is there a simpler answer? Sorry - i dont have a light meter.

That is the simple answer, if you don't understand it you have no business doing weddings. That may come across as harsh, but I believe it's fair. Metering a background is trivial, turning on your flash is trivial, exposure lock is trivial. It's a no-brainer IMHO.

[PIXI_666]

Sorry then for being offended.......

[tim]

What part of my explaination don't you understand?

It occurs to me that when you hit the * button with a speedlite turned on the preflash is done then. Because of that i'd probably aim quite close to the couple when metering the sky, I think that'd work best so ETTL knows how strong to make the flash.

[PIXI_666]

Sorry Tim....

I have a hard time with a LOT of technical talk, i always have and always will, my eyes see stuff written then 2 hrs later my brain kicks in and i realise what people are talking about - call me blonde, i guess everyone else does lol

After reading the last post you left, i do get what u mean now, i have my camera in my head and now i see what you mean with locking exposure on the sunset sky then taking the shot.

Im still getting used to my camera, i know its dangerous playing with peoples special moments, but thats why im practicing day in day out and finding more information out before i go through with it.

I think i have the features part down pact with the flash, i did do this the other weekend with a couple, unfortunately the sunset wasn't as vibrant. Its the silhouettes i am tryign to grasp - but i think i have it now.

Sorry for the misunderstanding....i shouldn't take things to heart and i did, it's a tough business, i feel i don't really have the right to be doing wedding photography, but when people ask me and they trust me, i feel i have to deliver - i haven't advertised my business once, but it's snowballing and i can't help but go through the experience.

Del

[tim]

Well good luck :) Do practice - at sunset if you can, or put people in the shade in the middle of the day and meter the sky behind them. It's easy when you have a bit of a play :)

[PIXI_666]

I might have to have a "Play" sorry again...i take it down to a slow learning curve lol

[ricohcam01]

I might have to have a "Play" sorry again...i take it down to a slow learning curve lol

Hi there:

If I may.

Switch to M mode

Meter the back ground

Set your flash at a stop up from f/stop of meter

For example if the meter is f16 then the flash will read f11

Focus and take the shot.

I hope this helps.

[PIXI_666]

Thanks ricoh...hopefully theres some kind of sunset tonight rather than it being overcast and sun being blocked by clouds so i can try this out!!

[tim]

Meter the back ground

Set your flash at a stop up from f/stop of meter

For example if the meter is f16 then the flash will read f11


I think this need additional explaination, most especially how to "Set your flash at a stop up from f/stop of meter". I would've though that step would require a flash meter and a bit of mucking around. Running in Av mode, setting exposure compensation down one stop, and relying on ETTL would seem to be easier to me.

[PIXI_666]

LOL

*Confused* but will practice tonight and see what i come up with, thought it might be easier, im sure it IS but getting my head around it sometimes takes a while...

[cmM]

http://www.cmmvisions.com/images/oct29mc/oct29mc330.jpg

You don't need to meter anything specifically, you don't need exposure lock, you just need to properly expose the image for the elements where you want details.

[bonneyda]

I don't think anyone asked what camera body and lens you have.

[subtle_spectre]

I don't think anyone asked what camera body and lens you have.

Or how the Cf's are set...which could make a difference on which button to hold down.

[PIXI_666]

Rebel 300d (American model even though i live in Australia) an 18-58mm and a 90-300mm at the moment

Backup for now is a Canon eos 500 film trying to get a 20d soon!!

[tim]

IMHO the camera body is irrelevant, so long as it's an EOS digital, they all work pretty much the same. I think it's reasonable to assume no CFs are set.

http://www.cmmvisions.com/images/oct29mc/oct29mc330.jpg

You don't need to meter anything specifically, you don't need exposure lock, you just need to properly expose the image for the elements where you want details.

That doesn't expose the people, which is what PIXI said she wanted. To do that you need need to lock the exposure on the background, as the people need to be in focus.

[PIXI_666]

Actually i wanted both, but all suggestions are coming in handy...i do like that silhouette shot...that's the first one i want the most, but more close up on the faces...and secondly ill get the exposed shot which i think i achieved last time just not as well as i wanted it too!

SO all suggestions are great...(Is this why i got so confused with your answer Tim????)

[tim]

Yeah it's easier to do it cmM's way if you want a dark silhouettes :)

[bonneyda]

You also didn't say what external flash you were using (if any). But I would try AV mode (use a tripod). Use "evaluative" metering mode, set the aperture for your desired "blur" you want in the sunset but check to see if the "flash warning symbol" isn't blinking, then take the shot. Ask your subjects not to move for a second after the flash because the shutter may stay open momentarily after the flash. If you are using the "on board" flash, you may have to move up closer to the subjects. And I would use your 18-58 lens if possible. Hope this isn't too confusing.

[tim]

Given that the sky will be quite bright and the flash will illuminate the subjects, a tripod probably won't be necessary. Av mode is what i'd use though.

[CyberPet]

That is the simple answer, if you don't understand it you have no business doing weddings. That may come across as harsh, but I believe it's fair. Metering a background is trivial, turning on your flash is trivial, exposure lock is trivial. It's a no-brainer IMHO.

Tim, that was a totally uncalled for comment. Honestly!!! You have no right telling people who belong in the business or not. Have you forgot that you once were a beginner too and didn't know all about the TECHNIQUE, but had the eye and the talent to actually take great images. These type of images is not "standard" in anyway, as you might put it. And digital camera's is not something that everyone understand, without even reading the manual.

You too were a newbie, and you should actually be a bit more graceful about this. You did ask very newbie questions too once, remember?

[CyberPet]

We're talking about a fill-flash situation here. This is a great link to understand it a bit more. The 300D have EV right? And if you use a 550EX or 580EX the flash itself has FEL, so you can compensate the output from the flash if it's *too much* or too weak.

Good pdf-article to read about fill-flash.
http://www.popphoto.com/article.asp?section_id=4&article_id=706

Love your photo cmM, Gorgeous colors!

[tim]

Tim, that was a totally uncalled for comment. Honestly!!! You have no right telling people who belong in the business or not. Have you forgot that you once were a beginner too and didn't know all about the TECHNIQUE, but had the eye and the talent to actually take great images. These type of images is not "standard" in anyway, as you might put it. And digital camera's is not something that everyone understand, without even reading the manual.

You too were a newbie, and you should actually be a bit more graceful about this. You did ask very newbie questions too once, remember?

It may have been a bit harsh, if i've caused offense I apologise. Everyone starts somewhere, I asked lots of questions too, but by the time I went pro I understood exposure and how to use my camera.

I stand by the sentiment of my comment, if you don't understand exposure well enough to achieve this shot off you shouldn't be charging for your services, or you should at least make people aware of your experience.

[PIXI_666]

One thing is clear....i understand exposure, just didn't understand what was being talked about. Petra has given me a PM and has explained totally what you were saying, and now i understand. Like i said - im a simpleton with terms.

I am nowhere near being classed as a Pro, for me being a PRO is working in the industry full time...im a freakin apprentice really when i think about it, i started from the bottom with a 35mm compact film camera...got to a manual pentax, developed and processed my own photo's. I used film right up until August 05, so i find it hard getting used to all of the things on digital...that's why i have a backup film camera in case anything i don't understand is on my film and i can use that if i get stuck.

I have been taking photo's as a hobby for 12 years, i was 14 when i studied photography at high school, the problem i have is digital, it's hard to all of a sudden throw most of your film knowledge out the window for this big digital SLR that has built in functions and wierd buttons.

Like i said...maybe what you wrote Tim was "Simple" terms for you, for me i find it hard, Petra explained it to me simply and now i know what you mean. I get all my experience from practice, i sit down and read a book or 2 every now and then, but im a hands on girl, i never EVER grasped studying well. I guess thats why simple terms for me are easier to understand.

Thanks for all the info guys, i do appreciate it, but maybe some people are right by calling me a blonde slow learner lol :)

Oh and i have a 580ex ext flash.

Thanks

[tim]

Best of luck :) Hope there's no hard feelings, i'm pretty brusk sometimes.

[CyberPet]

Best of luck :) Hope there's no hard feelings, i'm pretty brusk sometimes.


Noooo??? Really??!!! :D :D :D :D

You guys are way to geeky sometimes ya know... it's so much easier to explain how it works, than some geeky talk. ;)

[PineCone]

I'm new to this forum and reading the posts thus far written i'm now thinking it might not be such a good idea for me to ask and seek for help here if other people who are considered "experts" or "pros" are so unwilling to put themselves in the light of how novices are drowned with technicalese. I too am slow at understanding technical language. What others would consider easy and light reading are often difficult for me to grasp. Besides, I thought the whole point of this forum is for enthusiasts and lovers of the art of photography can come together and support each other in every aspect of the word without fear of ridicule or insult

[tim]

I'm new to this forum and reading the posts thus far written i'm now thinking it might not be such a good idea for me to ask and seek for help here if other people who are considered "experts" or "pros" are so unwilling to put themselves in the light of how novices are drowned with technicalese. I too am slow at understanding technical language. What others would consider easy and light reading are often difficult for me to grasp. Besides, I thought the whole point of this forum is for enthusiasts and lovers of the art of photography can come together and support each other in every aspect of the word without fear of ridicule or insult

That's the idea, my point was that you should pass yourself off as a pro unless you really understand what you're doing. I'm usually helpful and if not inoffensive then less offensive than on this thread ;)

[CyberPet]

PineCone, Please don't think that... Tim is a good help, but he can get too technical sometimes (and I think he's learning that part too, right now). Tim is eager to help and relay *his* knowledge to others, but it might sometime be a bit over the head of them, and there lies the problems in communication. I yell at him, becauase I know him well enough to tell him off without him taking it too personal. He did applogize and found out that he might have misunderstood how he was misunderstood. (OK that was an interesting sentence, did anyone but me understand it? :D )

So, please... ask ANY question and don't feel afraid it's too dumb. There's no dumb questions, only dumb answers.... and we've seen examples of that here, as we will see in the future. Today it was Tim that goofed up, tomorrow it might be me, or someone else. But remember that part.... there's no dumb questions, just dumb answers.

Welcome to the forum!!!! :D

[CyberPet]

Tim, about the "pro" part.... define pro for me. To me a pro is someone working full-time as a photographer, it doesn't mean (to me) that just because you're a "hobbyist" or a "part-time shooter" you don't know what you're doing.

So perhaps you mean that one shouldn't take water over your head, meaning that don't take on more than you can handle. And that's acting professional, even if it's not the word most of us use as "professional".

I'm no pro, since I don't work with this every day, but I sure know what I'm doing and what I'm taking on when I go and shoot a wedding. I also know that I'll never know it all, I'll ALWAYS have to learn something new. It's when you think you know it all, that's when you'll stagnate and really become a BAD photographer. The beauty is that life always has something to teach you, and that's what makes it worth to live!

[tim]

To me a professional photographer is someone who regularly accepts money for their photographic services. I don't really care about part time/full time thing, I call myself a professional even though i'm part time (though in one week i'll be working full time on my photography business). There's always something new to learn, if you stop learning you'll go stale. I thought my first answer was pretty straightforward!

I knew that my original post was harsh, I didn't exactly goof up, I said what I meant to. Being subtle doesn't always sink in, and this way people got my point right? I just have to work out how to give my point impact without being quite so offensive, maybe I can get lessons from Bob ;)

The only stupid question is the one left unasked. I happily answer questions asked by anyone, and I have and probably will continue asking my fair share of stupid questions :)

[ricohcam01]

I think this need additional explaination, most especially how to "Set your flash at a stop up from f/stop of meter". I would've though that step would require a flash meter and a bit of mucking around. Running in Av mode, setting exposure compensation down one stop, and relying on ETTL would seem to be easier to me.

Hey Tim:

When I shot a lot of 120 I used this technic all the time. I still use it with my 5D and my 10D. For me it is the quickest way to get a great resault. I always shoot in M and Raw just in the case I am out a bit.

I would suggest you give it a go. I am gonna try your way as well.

Thanks for the advise.

[magmac21]

Just wanted to say Pixi 666 that I had a look at your website and there are a few images that are better than those seen on many professional photographers sites. Particularly in the wedding and portrait sections so it can only get better if you keep at the techinal side of things.

[PIXI_666]

Thank you magmac i appreciate those comments, personally i get excited with some of my shots (I said some!) because i am my worst critic like all photographers and artists, so i don't class my photo's better than anyones, in fact i would scrape the bottom of the barrel haha.

The wedding that is posted on my site was my first...it was 2 years ago and all i did was use my Canon eos 500 film, all on auto settings with the internal flash, they were al scanned in terribly...so for you to say they are nice really shocks me :)

But thank you for your kind words, it was really nice of you :) and yes i PLAN to get my studying under way once i get these main weddings finished up and sorted out! (People are happy enough with their results so far so ill keep at it until i get around to reading some more up on this!)

Del

[CyberPet]

Tim, but you were also assuming that Del didn't know anything about photography... which made your comment very out of line, since you might have taken the time to find out what she really knows, and perhaps just re-worded things and it'd had helped her more than some snide remark.

I wouldn't call myself professional even if I get paid (which I do) for shooting weddings. That's giving me a status which I have no right to claim.

[tim]

Tim, but you were also assuming that Del didn't know anything about photography... which made your comment very out of line, since you might have taken the time to find out what she really knows, and perhaps just re-worded things and it'd had helped her more than some snide remark.

I wouldn't call myself professional even if I get paid (which I do) for shooting weddings. That's giving me a status which I have no right to claim.

I didn't mean to say she didn't know anything, just that a pro should know enough to do this shot. I'm done with this discussion, it's not helping anyone, I didn't mean to offend, just to get a point across.

Del, I love the one on your website with the couple sitting on the tree, it's fantastic!

[kawter2]

I sugest making sure you dont cut the couple off at the waist.. so get low and try to get a brighter background for the majority of the body

I like to place the subject between the camera and the sun. If you meter the sky, you should come out ok

eg.
http://www.ericcotter.com/dwf/favsfeb1/NOCROTCH.jpg

[Ross McT.]

Just make sure that you have a back up plan incase the weather goes to the pits...

[cmM]

That doesn't expose the people, which is what PIXI said she wanted. To do that you need need to lock the exposure on the background, as the people need to be in focus.

Do you understand the concept of silhouettes? Read the thread title, read the original post (which asked for either), and then come back with those typical smart @ss comments of yours.

[tim]

Do you understand the concept of silhouettes? Read the thread title, read the original post (which asked for either), and then come back with those typical smart @ss comments of yours.

You need to read the first post again yourself. The thread title says "silhouettes", but the post asked for both silhouettes and how to properly expose the people as well as getting the sunset. Del explained that again in a post on page2.

[PIXI_666]

Well guys i reckon im sorted with both ways of exposing subjects and silhouetting them, they were really simple questions with simple answers back - but i needed a push in the right direction to make sure of things so thanks everyone!I mean i learnt all this in high school but have just forgotten it since it was 7 or so yrs ago.

Maybe the post should be finished up here? Has been a bit of difference of opinions in here and i don't want to cause any arguments between anyone...

Thank you all once again for your kind help :)

Del

[tim]

I'm glad we solved your problem Del. This thread is probably a candidate for locking.

[defordphoto]

I'm glad we solved your problem Del. This thread is probably a candidate for locking.

I think this thread is just fine the way it is. People can learn from it -- from both sides.

I saw this thread when it first started and have been kinda watching it. Del strikes me as very new and green, but with the energy of a nuclear power plant. :)

I wish you luck Del. Remember to experiment ONLY before or after a wedding with regular people. Never experiment at a wedding.

We are not locking this thread.

[tim]

Never experiment at a wedding.

My version of that is "never experiment at a wedding until you have you have the shot done". I play around at weddings, but only after I know I have that particular shot done well and I think with a little experimentation I can make a great shot. I never make the B&G wait for me though, I do it without them if I have time then bring them in.

[defordphoto]

Also, if you have an idea, use some friends, or trees or blow-up dolls or something and experiment freely.

In all my years at this art I have learned most from the failures. But, they were failures while experimenting. And way back in the days of film and NO one-hour processing.

If I was to shoot a wedding, and I avoid them like the plague, I would use only tried and true methods.

[PIXI_666]

Thanks Jim :)

I guess being described as a nuclear power plant is a good thing?? HAHAHA! No i take that with a sense of pride, if you think i have big potential then that is a big compliment to me :)

I am new to the business of photography, i have been doing it as a hobby for quite some time, only 3 years ago i was starting to be paid for my services, and even then it wasn't a lot of money. But this year i feel is THE year to get sorted!!

Thanks :)

[defordphoto]

Thanks Jim :)

I guess being described as a nuclear power plant is a good thing?? HAHAHA! No i take that with a sense of pride, if you think i have big potential then that is a big compliment to me :)

Just as long as it's directed properly! :) I haven't seen any of your shots, but you do have the energy level to make something happen.

Stay focused.

[PineCone]

i'm really glad everything's worked out well in this thread :) Everyone had their say and is better understood. Now i'm thinking i'm really glad i joined this forum after all :)

[mizuno]

Awwwwwww...

GROUP HUG!

http://forums.ratedesi.com/images/smilies/grouphug.gif

[tim]

I obviously wasn't offensive enough - i'll try harder next time ;) :p :D

[defordphoto]

Hey hey! No kissing! Get a room! :lol:

[PIXI_666]

hahahaha!!!!

Well....i can't say i have any blow up dolls to "EXPERIMENT" with....hahaha!!!! But yes i will be experimenting with probably my hubby and my puppies to try and stillg et some nice shots! Im on my way to the city so ill probably be driving into the sunset (Awww) so i might stop and experiment then again too...if i dont get it by the wedding, ill tell them (They know im only an amateur - they approached me after i said that i didn't really know if i should!) point is...i will elt them know i haven't mastered it but will try, and if it doesnt work ill PS work it and maybe that will work out??

Either way i think i get it and ill try tonight!!!!

Thanks guys!!!!

[PineCone]

Tim good one :))

[CyberPet]

http://www.ericcotter.com/dwf/favsfeb1/NOCROTCH.jpg

That's beautiful!! I am lacking one of those killer Silhouettes in my portfolio and this is a great candidate for a great idea - if I get more waterfront (non-winter ones) shoots!

[CyberPet]

PineCone, glad you feel that way!

Tim, yeah you're slacking... you better wise up and that quick... you might lose your status as the big-evil-guy-from-NZ :D

[::John::]

I stayed in a hotel in Canberra and, as luck would have it, there was a wedding reception booked in the hotel for Saturday afternoon.

I was interested to see the bride and broom arrive with the photographer who had TWO assistants and, between them all, 5 cameras - all with different lens/flash combinations. There was a load of Canon L glass on display but I couldn't identify the cameras (we weren't close enough).

[queenbee288]

I'm new to this forum and reading the posts thus far written i'm now thinking it might not be such a good idea for me to ask and seek for help here if other people who are considered "experts" or "pros" are so unwilling to put themselves in the light of how novices are drowned with technicalese. I too am slow at understanding technical language. What others would consider easy and light reading are often difficult for me to grasp. Besides, I thought the whole point of this forum is for enthusiasts and lovers of the art of photography can come together and support each other in every aspect of the word without fear of ridicule or insult

It usually is a very supportive forum. Tim just gets a little "brusk" sometimes. I understood when I realized he is an engineer. LOL We forgive him because he almost always comes through with the help you need and he gives so much to this forum. So, don't give up on us because of one bad moment.

[queenbee288]

To me a professional photographer is someone who regularly accepts money for their photographic services. I don't really care about part time/full time thing, I call myself a professional even though i'm part time (though in one week i'll be working full time on my photography business). There's always something new to learn, if you stop learning you'll go stale. I thought my first answer was pretty straightforward!

I knew that my original post was harsh, I didn't exactly goof up, I said what I meant to. Being subtle doesn't always sink in, and this way people got my point right? I just have to work out how to give my point impact without being quite so offensive, maybe I can get lessons from Bob ;)

The only stupid question is the one left unasked. I happily answer questions asked by anyone, and I have and probably will continue asking my fair share of stupid questions :)

Tim, I took a look at PIXI's wedding photos she took recently and I gotta tell you, from the way she forms her questions (no offense intended) I was really surprised. They were pretty darn good! I think it is just the way she communicates her questions sometimes.

[tim]

Del does take some very nice photos :)

[BrittanyElise]

Eh, didn't really read much - just saw the photos and loved them. The main photo on the intro page of this website (http://www.grazierphotography.com) is one of my favorites. I love the silhouette and how the sheer design shows through. Fantabulous

[PIXI_666]

LOL this is an OLD post lol how did it get dug up??? hahaha

[JMHPhotography]

LOL this is an OLD post lol how did it get dug up??? hahaha


lol... do you ever have a post dug up from the ancient past and realize how much you've learned since then?

[song4themoon]

I read half of it, realized it was an old post... NOW I want to see the images that resulted in this :D