"Natural Light" Photographers?

I attended my first bridal show in my new market and went around to see some of the "competition". There were three other photographers there but one didn't seem to have any wedding work so I think she's new to wedding. Anywho, I noticed that all three had "Natural Light Photographer" in their bios.

Am I missing something here? I know people have been using this line a lot lately in portraits, but in wedding photography? Doesn't that just tell you "I don't know how to use flash"? I love using natural light but there are very few moments, especially in weddings, when using ONLY natural light is feasible, let alone to get the best outcome. So how does a "Natural Light" photographer shoot a night time reception in a low-light reception hall?

It's been my experience that a large majority of folks who describe themselves as "natural light" photographers don't know hot to properly use their flash. There's very little "natural light" at weddings...at least in this part of the country!

PeaceFire wrote in post #13335248
I attended my first bridal show in my new market and went around to see some of the "competition". There were three other photographers there but one didn't seem to have any wedding work so I think she's new to wedding. Anywho, I noticed that all three had "Natural Light Photographer" in their bios.

Am I missing something here? I know people have been using this line a lot lately in portraits, but in wedding photography? Doesn't that just tell you "I don't know how to use flash"? I love using natural light but there are very few moments, especially in weddings, when using ONLY natural light is feasible, let alone to get the best outcome. So how does a "Natural Light" photographer shoot a night time reception in a low-light reception hall?

My sentiments exactly. Natural light can be beautiful but when mother nature fails, you had better know how to compensate.

I agree because I was one of them.

Then I realised my clients deserved more.

Ambient light is beautiful. But ambient light runs out. Then what?

It's definitely a cop-out with a marketing spin.

It is a funny one... if I was to look at the work I produce a large majority of it is with natural light only. At receptions I crank out the flash but on the whole for when I am shooting what I consider to be my signature shots virtually all are natural light.

I'll be the first to admit I still have a bit to learn with regards to using flash but to be honest my style of shooting doesn't depend on it. I've never really bothered with going down the track of learning about using it in too much depth as I don't feel I need to at this point.

I would however not necessarily describe myself that way in a bio as as Peacefire mentioned it does seem to be used by people starting out. I am however by and large a natural light shooter.

Every single image on the slideshow on my home page is natural light from memory.

This really depends. I am sure if they were beginners, then sure, it was probably an excuse for not being able to use the flash effectively. But there are plenty of "available light" shooters who put out amazing work.

For example, my favorite wedding photographer, Cliff Mautner:
http://www.cmphotograp​hy.com/

He does use flash, but my impression is that he uses it very sparingly.

Anybody can own a camera and get a few good shots. As a professional photographer (and assuming you are already well versed in proper exposure) you must master artificial lighting and posing. These are the only two keys that will separate you from the other "pros" and it must be obvious in your work.

I don't think any good wedding photographer's style *depends* on using flash. The better photographers know to use what will make any given shot great. Sometimes that means turning the flash on for one photo then turning it off for the very next.

Anyone who says "I'm a natural light only photographer" and follows it up with zero caveats is definitely without a doubt trying to nip the flash issue in the bud because they're afraid of it. Natural light isn't always beautiful. It doesn't always flatter. You can't always find it.

nicksan wrote in post #13335450
This really depends. I am sure if they were beginners, then sure, it was probably an excuse for not being able to use the flash effectively. But there are plenty of "available light" shooters who put out amazing work.

For example, my favorite wedding photographer, Cliff Mautner:
http://www.cmphotograp​hy.com/

He does use flash, but my impression is that he uses it very sparingly.

+ 1

Cliff rarely uses flash, he depends on using cameras that can do crazy clean ISO's (D3) and also uses a lot of primes (85, 35, 24 1.4G's)

Truth is there are also other photographers who compensates using a "flash" when proper use of their equipment while knowing its limits can easily cover their bases.

dche5390 wrote in post #13335427
Ambient light is beautiful. But ambient light runs out. Then what?

Ambient light is more often horrible than beautiful. Direct sunlight is ambient, and causes harsh shadows. Tungsten bulbs on the ceiling is ambient, there's not much of it and it's too orange. Dappled light filtering through trees is ambient, it makes people look weird. Even a cloudy day isn't great, it's too flat, quite boring.

When you understand lighting you can make artificial light look like perfect natural ambient light.

I use flash in most of my images.

tim wrote in post #13335498
Ambient light is more often horrible than beautiful. Direct sunlight is ambient, and causes harsh shadows. Tungsten bulbs on the ceiling is ambient, there's not much of it and it's too orange. Dappled light filtering through trees is ambient, it makes people look weird. Even a cloudy day isn't great, it's too flat, quite boring.

When you understand lighting you can make artificial light look like perfect natural ambient light.

I use flash in most of my images.

Right on my brother!

Rittrato wrote in post #13335486
Truth is there are also other photographers who compensates using a "flash" when proper use of their equipment while knowing its limits can easily cover their bases.

They don't use it as a marketing gimmick though. They're just happily clueless. There's no buzzword for "flash the dickens out of everything poorly because the lenses aren't fast enough to shoot without it."

Different strokes for different folks.

I read it as though they take pictures with natural light where available. I see wedding photographers taking full sunlight pics WITH a flash as well. Or kids photgraghers vs pixi. Its kind of their way of saying we prefer NOT to use flash The photos leave a lot to be desired vs natural light. But yes it seems to be the new fashion to be "natural light"