Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Weddings & Other Family Events 
Thread started 18 Jun 2007 (Monday) 16:01
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Position of the Sun

 
Mike ­ T.M.
Senior Member
Avatar
520 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Sep 2005
Location: Canton, OH
     
Jun 18, 2007 16:01 |  #1

Maybe someone in here can help me out? Correct me if I'm wrong, PLEASE. Me and another "semi/pro/consumer Photographer" were discussing, when taking outside formals/groups pictures. I told him I try to place people in shade and if I can't do that, then I try to place them with the sun to their backs. Now, I'm really not worry about sun flare because I shoot with a hood and position my self to where it wouldn't be a problem. But my buddy swears that this is wrong, which I've been shooting this way for a few years now and never once had a problem. He, says the "pros" shoot with the sun to their back, which I understand that. I mean the sun is a nice fill for the face but at the same time it's hard to tell the couple, group not to squink when you are taking the picture. So, please help me address this to my friend, and if I'm wrong I'll let him now as well,but....I don't think I am.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
picturecrazy
soft-hearted weenie-boy
Avatar
8,565 posts
Likes: 708
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Alberta, CANADA
     
Jun 18, 2007 16:07 |  #2

There's no right or wrong answer. For group formals, the shade is best. Front lighting (sun to YOUR back) causes people to squint and puts dark shadows under noses and glasses, often making them look like football players.

Sun to THEIR back lets you use the sun as a rim/hair light and requires YOU to light up everyone properly. I prefer this method myself.


-Lloyd
The BOUDOIR - Edmonton Intimate Boudoir Photography (external link)
Night and Day Photography - Edmonton Studio Family Baby Child Maternity Wedding Photographers (external link)
Night and Day Photography - Edmonton Headshot Photographers (external link)
Facebook (external link) | Twitter (external link) |Instagram (external link) | Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Phil ­ V
Goldmember
1,977 posts
Likes: 75
Joined Jan 2005
Location: S Yorks UK
     
Jun 18, 2007 16:30 |  #3

There is no right or wrong, BUT;

These people have gone out and bought nice outfits, they've had haircuts and they've spent a long time preparing for this day, do you really want to take pictures of them squinting into the sun?


Gear List
website: South Yorkshire Wedding photographer in Doncaster (external link)
Twitter (external link)Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Atl-Fotos
Member
169 posts
Joined May 2007
Location: Atl GA
     
Jun 18, 2007 16:58 |  #4

I'm with Loyd. I like the sun to their back with fill flash to lite'm up...


Ron
It's all fun & games until the shutter stops working....
My Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Roy ­ Mathers
I am Spartacus!
Avatar
40,001 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 1261
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Hertfordshire, United Kingdom
     
Jun 18, 2007 17:24 |  #5

I did wedding photography for thirty years and, where possible, always did group shots either in the shade or with the sun at their backs. I also used this technique with the 'smaller' shots ie bride and groom. With fill flash, it gives a great effect, with the sun acting as a free rim light. Plus the fact that it stops the guests with P&S getting any shots:lol:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jjmucker
Goldmember
Avatar
1,920 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2006
Location: scotland, glasgow
     
Jun 18, 2007 18:48 as a reply to  @ Roy Mathers's post |  #6

Here is a prime example. This was the kids first holy communion and i took them all out here after the ceremony. I had no shade for them so i had no choice to have the sun behind them. if the sun was at my back all of their faces would have been squinting big style and it would have been terrible.

You can still see the kids face slightly squinting as most kids do anyways, to be fair to him though it was super bright. (you see, we are just not used to this weather all the time here in glasgow :D )

i generally expose for the sky and have my speedlight fill them in. ususally at full power depending on how bright it is.

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i109.photobucke​t.com/albums/n55/jjmuc​ker/fill.jpg (external link)

5D3 x 2,5DII,30D,15,24,50,85​,100,24-70,70-200.
Website :

Glasgow Wedding - Portrait Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CatchingUp
Goldmember
Avatar
1,842 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 399
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Texas
     
Jun 18, 2007 19:02 |  #7

I'm no expert, but the expression 'sun at their back' could be a relative term when you don't specify the time of day. Mid-late afternoon can work fine...but later on in the early evening...a setting sun at their backs is likely to produce that glare effect, regardless of the size of your hood.

I found that out shooting some local ball teams.

And that is what makes this profession/hobby so 'interesting'...not to mention challenging. ;-)a


Tony
I use Canon gear...have several bodies and lenses and am quite pleased with them.

"A person's gift will make room for itself."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jjmucker
Goldmember
Avatar
1,920 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2006
Location: scotland, glasgow
     
Jun 18, 2007 19:14 |  #8

CatchingUp wrote in post #3400153 (external link)
I'm no expert, but the expression 'sun at their back' could be a relative term when you don't specify the time of day. Mid-late afternoon can work fine...but later on in the early evening...a setting sun at their backs is likely to produce that glare effect, regardless of the size of your hood.

I found that out shooting some local ball teams.

And that is what makes this profession/hobby so 'interesting'...not to mention challenging. ;-)a

Thats true. if the sun was lower then you would probably get some glare. the image i posted hasnt so this is why i had the "sun at their back". this was taken around 2pm if i remember correctly.

regardless of anything, most case you would never have the sun facing them, especially on days like the day i took that image, unless of course they were in the shade


5D3 x 2,5DII,30D,15,24,50,85​,100,24-70,70-200.
Website :

Glasgow Wedding - Portrait Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kamra ­ 1
Member
Avatar
112 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Whittier, CA
     
Jun 18, 2007 20:19 |  #9

Lloyd said it best. One thing to watch for when sun is at their backs is not have them facing a bright wall which the sun would bounce off and cause squinting. Always look for that great looking rim light. It won't always be present but it sure makes your photos pop with separation.


Tony

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
50,999 posts
Likes: 364
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Jun 19, 2007 03:16 |  #10

Squinting bad.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Alan ­ W
Member
Avatar
113 posts
Joined May 2007
Location: Kent UK
     
Jun 19, 2007 07:44 as a reply to  @ tim's post |  #11

Either in shade or the sun behind them for me. I also use a lightweight aluminium stepladder for the larger group shots which gives and interesting perspective and gives a better view of persons in the second / third rows. This technique is also helpful for avoiding flare when the sun behind them is low.


2 x 5D - EF 24-105 f4 L IS - EF 85mm f1.8 USM - EF 50mm f1.4 - 580EX - 480EX

http://www.kentwedding​photo.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,912 views & 0 likes for this thread
Position of the Sun
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Weddings & Other Family Events 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is shuadchaun
968 guests, 311 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.