The #1 rule in metering a bridal shot?

[snyper77]

As most of you know, getting proper exposure between the white wedding dress and surrounding faces (mainly the bride's) can be a nightmare. Many times, I find that the face is underexposed while the dress is properly exposed, so I increase the EC level on the RAW file to bright the face, but it blows the dress out. Anyone have some tips for getting proper exposer on white wedding dresses and on the bride's face? Do you meter off her dress or face?? And fill flash?? Thanks!

[picturecrazy]

People do it in many different ways.

Outdoors i shoot for the dress with flash (to light her face), bring up the exposure in Lightroom, and then use the highlight recovery slider to get the dress back.

[cosworth]

That dress can handle 2/3rds of a stop over. Spot it perhaps.

I'll take grainy faces over blown highlights on a wedding any day since most go to print and the noise is gone.

For the money shots where the dress and faces are tough, expose the dress a little hot and then bring the rest together with some creative layering/mapping/masking in CS3.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

always get the dress right. I spot meter for the dress most all the time.

[ChrisLUM]

As my time spend in a digital labs, we rather had seen perfectly exposed whites with detail vs blown out whites that you cannot recover. If the skin is exposed enough you can deal with it in PP. That was our opinion on it.

Chris

[snyper77]

Well, by no means am I trying to "get out" of post processing, but I honestly don't want to do layers and layers... masking, etc. on each photo (which I'm no Photoshop expert anyway). So, you all advise to meter the dress, fill flash the face as best as possible... then maybe use highlight and shadows sliders to find a happy medium? I've found that those sliders can give a very dull, almost burned look to an image. Thanks for any more input you may have. I really appreciate you all.

[Steiglitz]

That dress can handle 2/3rds of a stop over. Spot it perhaps.

I'll take grainy faces over blown highlights on a wedding any day since most go to print and the noise is gone.


If I took your advise, I'd have really bad quality issues with such pics, sure on a print the noise is less noticable, but the faces are often muddy and lack contrast.....faces are what make the shots, and never to be sacraficed for the sake of the dress....

But the good news is that one can get the dress in right, and the faces.....

Someone mentioned a light meter.....No need for a light meter.....that's old habit from film days...leave it home and you'll do better to rely on your histogram.

I do this for indoors:

1. Shoot RAW. Camera in manual mode. Set the aperture for required DOF. Set the aperture for required DOF. Set the speed at 1/15. Set ISO to 400. This takes care of the background. About the 1/15s speed, don't worry as the flash will freeze subject motion.

2. Set the flash to E-TTL. Straight on with diffuser, if bouncing is not available. Use a 2nd slave if required for a large group. Use a flash frame, or get the flash off camera. This will expose the people.

Take a test shot. Adjust aperture for DOF, speed for background exposure, then take another shot (this is your "light meter"). Apply Flash EC as required. Looking at the histogram, expose to the right, but never more then 1/3 over for the highlights, but more then that means the highlights are gone forever.

Make sure the faces are bright. If not bright enough, don't over expose more then 1/3 and recover the faces later in post processing, as a 1/3 stop lift will be fine.

This works great for me. This method is not new...it's called Dragging the Shutter, and it's a skill that all wedding photogs must master.

If required, process the same raw twice, the first exposed for the faces and the 2nd for the wedding dress, then combine them via layers/masks.

[Steiglitz]

always get the dress right. I spot meter for the dress most all the time.

Sure, then bye bye bight faces.....for digital raw, the worse thing one can do is meter on the highlights...this only maximizes noise in the shadows, forcing anti-noise mitigation which removes precious image detail, and often makes for under exposed faces....better to let the camera body take care of the background and the flash take care of the subjects and their clothing...in other words, split of the task of exposure between the body and the flash....

[Ronald S. Jr.]

I must be doing something right!

A shot from a wedding in May, using this method:
192932

[JimAskew]

I must be doing something right!

A shot from a wedding in May, using this method:
192932

Ron,

Very cute kids and well exposed :-)

I'm with you all the way...the first wedding I shot I used "average" metering and with nearly every shot the dress was blown out :cry: Now I spot meter the dress and then if the scene is very bright I set a 1/2 stop minus compensation. This worked just great at my last wedding on 30 June of this year.

[cdifoto]

faces are what make the shots, and never to be sacraficed for the sake of the dress....

Some brides might disagree. They spend a LOT of stress, worry, and money on the perfect dress.

[PuR HART]

"Set the aperture for required DOF. Set the aperture for required DOF."
your camera can do this twice
is this the new MARK IV i have been already hearing about

[Raphael V]

Since most Indians are dark skinned compared to the Americans or Europeans, If I expose for the dress and end up underexposing the already dark faces, I am sure to have a problem in my hand.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Thus far, I've had nothing but caucasian couples. When that changes, I'll change. Thank god for the engagment session, eh?

[xmacvicar]

Crazy, all this talk of exposing for the dress and face for me, seems to be making mountains out of molehills. I have never had a problem getting an underexposed face/dress depending on my metering mode. I usually shoot AV, take a shot at my ideal aperture/shutter and then chimp. If required, i'll dial in some EC and go from there. Rarely is the dress so blown out that its lost detail - a lil 'recovery' slider in lightroom fixes any problems I have in that department!

[BaliHai]

I was in a class taught by Long Island wedding photographer Doug Gordon and his method was to spot meter under the eye of the lightist skinned person and use that reading. I've been doing it and have been happy with my results most times. He must be doing something right as he is a much sought after photographer, speaker and teacher

[JimAskew]

I was in a class taught by Long Island wedding photographer Doug Gordon and his method was to spot meter under the eye of the lightist skinned person and use that reading. I've been doing it and have been happy with my results most times. He must be doing something right as he is a much sought after photographer, speaker and teacher

That is an interesting concept. I'll have to give it a test try at my next event :)

[motogeno]

Ron,

Very cute kids and well exposed :-)

I'm with you all the way...the first wedding I shot I used "average" metering and with nearly every shot the dress was blown out :cry: Now I spot meter the dress and then if the scene is very bright I set a 1/2 stop minus compensation. This worked just great at my last wedding on 30 June of this year.
I would take loosing a little detail in that dress any day for a properly exposed face (and I bet she would too). No offense, but those faces are too dark for my taste. And I don't have a problem, unless I'm in the direct sunlight, getting the dress close enough that no info is lost and still getting the face right with no fill flash (although sometimes I will dodge a bit in the face). Spot metering for the highlights in the dress is just wrong - that's why they make grey cards and not white cards, or if you like just meter the palm of your hand (if caucasian).

[snyper77]

The photo posted on the last page where the brides face was a little dark, what could have been done to improve it? Obviously, it was metered off her dress (good exposure), so, would you say "fill flash" to improve the shot?

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Yes snyper77, but flash is usually frowned on during the ceremony. I don't see that he had much choice.

Sometimes, the dodge tool can be used (carefully). This is in no way a formal attempt, just a quick and dirty.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v611/remulac/couple.jpg

[JimAskew]

Yes snyper77, but flash is usually frowned on during the ceremony. I don't see that he had much choice.

Sometimes, the dodge tool can be used (carefully). This is in no way a formal attempt, just a quick and dirty.



Ron's right...no flash was allowed during the ceremony. This was shot with my 30D and my 17-55MM EF-S IS.

The lighting in this ceremony was a challenge all the way. This was a Mormon wedding and photography is not allowed in the chapel. So, the B&G opted to use the ajacent "meeting hall." The meeting hall is a large general purpose room with very tall ceilings, a stage in the middle of one side, and basketball hoops at either end. The lights were numerous recessed fluorescent fixtures which gave off a very harsh light. Depending on where you were standing there was shadows from the lighting that could not be avoided. I set my WB to fluorescent and metered from the dress. As is in all situations there has to be a comprise...my shooting position was behind the groomsmen so I could get a good view of the B&G and the bride's face. After testing and chimping the test shots (we did the rehersal at 11AM and the wedding at 1PM the same day, and rehersed without the bride as she did not want to see the groom until the ceremony...we used her Mom as a stand in), I selected the approach described.

For the rest of the day and outdoors I was able to use fill flash as needed.

Ron, I like your dodge approach...I am going to try a couple of more with that approach.

[JimAskew]

I would take loosing a little detail in that dress any day for a properly exposed face (and I bet she would too). No offense, but those faces are too dark for my taste. And I don't have a problem, unless I'm in the direct sunlight, getting the dress close enough that no info is lost and still getting the face right with no fill flash (although sometimes I will dodge a bit in the face). Spot metering for the highlights in the dress is just wrong - that's why they make grey cards and not white cards, or if you like just meter the palm of your hand (if caucasian).

Motogeno,

No offense is ever taken for contructive criticism. I value the input recieved here and try the many ideas offered by others not only to my posts but to many others I review here as well.

See my response to Ron above. Given the situation I had for the ceremony I was pleased with the results...of course more PP will always help as Ron just demostrated. I also think selecting another angle to shoot the ceremony from might have helped as well...you never stop learning.

To see some more fromn this set...click on the link below:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=342551

Note: please do not respond to this link as it has run its course with good feedback :) I offer it so if interested you can see a few more from the wedding of this wonderful young couple.

Again, thanks for your input...

[motogeno]

Motogeno,

No offense is ever taken for contructive criticism. I value the input recieved here and try the many ideas offered by others not only to my posts but to many others I review here as well.

See my response to Ron above. Given the situation I had for the ceremony I was pleased with the results...of course more PP will always help as Ron just demostrated. I also think selecting another angle to shoot the ceremony from might have helped as well...you never stop learning.

To see some more fromn this set...click on the link below:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=342551

Note: please do not respond to this link as it has run its course with good feedback :) I offer it so if interested you can see a few more from the wedding of this wonderful young couple.

Again, thanks for your input...
No problem, and please don't think I'm knocking your photography - you have good shots in the link. But my approach is to always meter for my subject's skin to be exposed properly, and then do what I can with the dress. If you meter for white you will underexpose your shot as a meter always assumes in spot mode that it is reading from neutral grey. By the way, Ronald's save of the faces in the shot doesn't read true. I shoot most of my shots without flash at weddings, hence the fast lenses. Fill flash is also going to fill light on the dress and you still have the same problem. The only thing fill will do is eliminate harsh shadows, but you still have the problem of darker skin tones and reflective white dresses.

[MDJAK]

Unfortunately I'm a dope when it comes to this metering stuff.

Want me to tell you what I've done to get good exposure while not losing detail in the dress?

I got the Mark III with highlight priority mode. It is amazing at conveying detail in the dress while properly exposing the face.

me :)

(See, sometimes equipment can help a helpless photographer like me. )

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Marky does weddings now?

[airfrogusmc]

I used to meter the dress (spot) and open two stops from the reading. Puts the dress up two stops from 18% gray should hold detail, keep the dress white and not let the faces get to dark depends on the lighting. If that doesn't work there always fill but don't let the dress get more than a couple stops over 18% gray or you won't hold it.

[airfrogusmc]

Yes snyper77, but flash is usually frowned on during the ceremony. I don't see that he had much choice.

Sometimes, the dodge tool can be used (carefully). This is in no way a formal attempt, just a quick and dirty.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v611/remulac/couple.jpg

Try the magic wand tool and quick mask to clean up with the eraser tool then levels or curves. It'll give you more control dodging.

[Steiglitz]

Some brides might disagree. They spend a LOT of stress, worry, and money on the perfect dress.


But you forget....they spend much MORE stress, worry and money on their faces!

[snyper77]

Ok, another question: When I take a reading (pressing the rear button near your thumb on the body), does the camera take into effect the flash output as well? Or is it metering "as if no flash will be shot"? If it is meters "as if there is no flash", then the shot will be overexposed (naturally) if you go by this reading, then add flash to the metered reading.

[Ulfius]

Ok, another question: When I take a reading (pressing the rear button near your thumb on the body), does the camera take into effect the flash output as well? Or is it metering "as if no flash will be shot"? If it is meters "as if there is no flash", then the shot will be overexposed (naturally) if you go by this reading, then add flash to the metered reading.

But the flash also meters and adjusts it's power depending on the available light. This is the way Canon does it - I believe Nikon is different. The mode you're in can also affect the flash to ambient ratio that the camera decides on.

[Tee Why]

Ok, another question: When I take a reading (pressing the rear button near your thumb on the body), does the camera take into effect the flash output as well? Or is it metering "as if no flash will be shot"? If it is meters "as if there is no flash", then the shot will be overexposed (naturally) if you go by this reading, then add flash to the metered reading.
In AV and Tv mode, locking your exposure does not take into account the flash and metering is solely on ambient light. The flash if fired will fill in for shadows (ideally). Yes, you can get overexposure, hence I'd recommend using FEC to compensate.

I recently took a few shots at my friends wedding and ran into this problem as well. I preferred to expose for the face and like a little lighter exposure on the face to get rid of blemishes and such and of course this overexposed the white dress and flowers. Got some back in PS (used DPP as I'm not a fan of muddy colors from LR and RSP in comparison to DPP) by selecting the white part and darkening it. I've heard from Popphoto.com that using "average" instead of "E-TTL" for flash metering helps in weddings where the bride wears white. I forgot to try this though.

Nice to know this is still a somewhat debated topic, whether to expose for the face and blow the dress or expose for the dress and under expose the face. I'm not sure if there is a perfect solution though.

[JimAskew]

... Nice to know this is still a somewhat debated topic, whether to expose for the face and blow the dress or expose for the dress and under expose the face. I'm not sure if there is a perfect solution though.

This has been an informative and thought provoking thread. I've picked up a couple of ideas to test out at my next practice shoot. I appreciate all who have contributed here :)

[jgogums]

Yeah...I'm enjoying the thread also...I'm really trying to figure out this white dress/face exposure situation. I've read myself into confusion b/w this and the lighting forum. Like someone posted earlier...many different approaches.
One thing I haven't seen too much about when people give tips on how they meter is what metering mode they are in.

I understand the concept of having the camera expose for ambient light and fill flash for the subject but if you are "metering for the face" or "metering for the dress" is it assumed you are in spot metering mode? If you are metering one of these areas in something other than spot, then aren't you probably metering additonal areas in addition to the face or dress?

I've been doing the meter background/sky & recompose method in evaluative mode and letting the flash do it's thing in ETTL on the bride/groom. In this case I'm not metering either the dress or the face right? I shoot RAW and use ACR 4.1(montiors calibrated with Pantone Huey) for adjustments. Still learning by reading PP books and here...but my skin tones/white balance leaves much to be desired.

Thanks...I'm not making a statement...I'm stating I'm confused!!:p

[mkuriger]

for the creative types (like me lol) it's always fun to take multiple exposures and use photomatrix pro to fit them together. I usually set the bracketing to shoot 2/3 under, 0, and 2/3 over. on the 5 fps mode I can get some pretty great results. (this only works if the subjects are standing still however)

have a great day!
~Mike~