Lighting suggestions for outdoor wedding

Hi all,

First post

Thanks for the community. I am shooting my first wedding this summer. This is the location for the ceremony can be viewed here, and here. As you can see the subjects will be backlit on the gazebo during the ceremony.

I want to get my photos right in-camera as much as possible. I don't want to rely on Shadow recovery in Lightroom. I'm thinking flash would be better than holding up a reflector for the whole ceremony and blinding the heck out of the officiant and wedding party. So I will need off camera flash. I have several months to buy and then practice with a setup. Currently all I use is on camera flash. So I need a system. I am thinking to get 4-6 Yongnuo 560-IIIs or IVs (to have a few extras because of YN's spotty quality control) with the integral wireless receiver and another IV or the 560TX transmitter for my camera body. I can then either buy some clamps or stands and try to set them up as inconspicuously as possible. I will be there a few days early and have time to set up and practice, thankfully! if all this fails I'll resort to my trusty 430 exII (yes, I shoot Canon) for on-camera flash.

Yes, I am going to practice a lot this spring. I understand that the YN560 with the 603 transmitter will be manual only and I need to wean my butt off ETTL-II. I am thinking that the 603's ability to change power output per group will be handy as I change angles during the ceremony.

Suggestions and other comments?

Thanks!

Will the ceremony be held during the day or the evening? There's no significant overhead tree cover, so you don't have to worry about dappled light.

If it's during the day, simply expose for the couple in the gazebo and the background will do it's own thing AKA be over exposed. I think you'll actually get a nice look that way.
While people are walking up to the gazebo, you may get some hard shadows, in which case you can probably get away with using fill-flash.

If you're shooting later in the afternoon, you may get lucky in that the light will be low enough to light the couple and everything will be the same exposure.

Most venues don't allow flash during the ceremony, so make sure you check that first!

Me personally, I don't see a huge need for using flash in that situation, but that's because of how I would choose to shoot it.

Mike,

Thanks a lot for your help. Technically everything you're explaining to me makes sense and I can pull that off. Just feels too easy--I don't think it matches my artistic vision for what I want to do. I was thinking that with the backlighting I don't want my subject darker than the background. I had planned to underexpose the ambient light and use flash to make the subjects pop out a little. Wedding will be early afternoon--2 or 3 pm in the high summer.

I will definitely call the venue but I don't see why they would object to us shooting the wedding how I/we want. I will use my 430 ex II for on camera and walking up and down the aisle for the ETTL but if I go with off camera I'm going to probably pick up some YN560 Mark IVs. Then either stands or clamps for the railings.

please keep the comments coming (everybody).

Thanks.

Flash during the ceremony itself is generally a no-no. Even outdoors, especially because you are going to be using direct flash. It's going to be an annoyance from the clients, their guests and the officiates point of view.

So you are going to set up your flashes, find one position and then shoot from there? As soon as you move how your light effects your subject will change, and then when you turn around for guest reactions, the flashes will be in your shot like mini suns.

What will the sun going behind the clouds do for your exposure? Light changes constantly outdoors and your position in relation to the sun will wildly change what you might need.

Under exposing the background and popping the flash on your clients, could start to look like they were getting married hours after they walked up the aisle, that would jar the consistency of the final product as well.

In England we would also be asking, what happens if it rains? Even in the middle of August. But perhaps that isn't a consideration where you are.

A quick google reveals the types of pictures you personally are trying to avoid, but if experienced photographers that are charging $4200 upwards are providing the blown out backgrounds but well exposed clients, they are doing what is possible for the situation they are in.

The white gazebo acts as a giant reflector, which is lighting the clients nicely, shadows are lifted they way you might like them etc.

I think as a whole, adding flash elements into the mix gives you too much to worry about on the day, far too many variables to consider, especially on a first wedding.

When I first started, I did some free weddings, I told myself (thanks to the ill advised internet) that manual shooting was the only way to shoot and to not let the camera do the thinking because it would be wrong. I came back with enough photo's to deliver, but the amount I had to throw away because I was wrong, for various reasons, mostly changing light conditions. It was heart breaking.
I told myself that it was lack of practise and that I would do better the more practise I had. Another wedding, much better this time, but the photo's seemed lacking and I wasn't sure why.
During the third wedding, I had a lightbulb and realised that the problem was the fact that I was so busy with the technical element of picture taking that I was missing the perfect bits of moments, I was too busy chasing the light meter reading which was slowing my reaction down. So I thought right I am going to let the camera chase the meter, I am going to chase the moments! Swapped to aperture priority and I haven't looked back since.
My photos radically improved as a result.
Just have to occasionally check the back of the screen when it is tricky lighting to make sure the camera is right and if not adjusting is just flicking one dial!
Though I do need manual mode for when I put a flash on.

My point is you have an opportunity to not make the same mistake, worrying about the technical element detaches you from the scene in front of you. So in your case adding flashes to the mix is going to do the same.

The acronym K.I.S.S. comes to mind, Keep It Simple Stupid.

Perfect photo's are not the ones with perfect bell curves and technical wizardry, but the ones that evoke an emotion from the viewer.

"Most venues don't allow flash during the ceremony, so make sure you check that first!"

I doubt that would even be an issue. It is not the venue that controls if a flash is used or not.. It is the officiant.

I think using off camera flash will distract you. Even if you have an assistant I think you will be more concerned with you gear vs your artistic vision your trying to capture. If you dont execute the off camera flash properly you're probably going to be recovering from hot flash highlights and snap shot "looks" because your more concerned about flash settings.

You can set your camera in manual mode and do test shots to get the desired under exposed ambient exposure. Then use ETTL flash and compensate the flash exposure. Does the gazebo have white painted ceilings? or unpainted/stained wood?

Just use a joe demb flipit or white foam sheet to help you throw some fill light and if the ceiling is painted white you can throw some light over your shoulder.

I see your concerned about blowing out the background if your shooting available light with no flash.

Your doing yourself a favour by keeping it simple. master bouncing flash and concentrate on capturing moments

scorpio_e wrote in post #17394597
It is not the venue that controls if a flash is used or not.. It is the officiant.

+1 on this and you can also include the bridge and groom in there as well. keep in mind that this is first and foremost a wedding, not a photo shoot, so make sure the three people at the front are okay with you using flash during the ceremony. you are not doing anyone, especially yourself, any favours if you irritate the bridge and groom by having a flash go off repeatedly in their field of view while they are getting married.

AlanU wrote in post #17395091
I think using off camera flash will distract you. Even if you have an assistant I think you will be more concerned with you gear vs your artistic vision your trying to capture. If you dont execute the off camera flash properly you're probably going to be recovering from hot flash highlights and snap shot "looks" because your more concerned about flash settings.

You can set your camera in manual mode and do test shots to get the desired under exposed ambient exposure. Then use ETTL flash and compensate the flash exposure. Does the gazebo have white painted ceilings? or unpainted/stained wood?

I've been wondering this myself. Just tried calling and I will need to call back tomorrow to get ahold of the events coordinator.

Just use a joe demb flipit or white foam sheet to help you throw some fill light and if the ceiling is painted white you can throw some light over your shoulder.

I see your concerned about blowing out the background if your shooting available light with no flash.

Your doing yourself a favour by keeping it simple. master bouncing flash and concentrate on capturing moments

Hmm.. I am wondering if putting a giant white sheet behind the wedding party would look like ass. I'll ask the coordinator about whether that's something that is often done. It might make it easier for the audience to see and would give me more diffuse lighting

The gazebo is only 14'x14'. I wasn't planning on doing a lot of shots standing on there. That would look really distracting given the location of the audience don't you think? I planned on standing on the hill and floating around the seats with my 70-200. I suppose I could get up on the gazebo for a few photos with maybe a 50 or 85mm but I think a 35mm is probably a bad idea because of its distorted perspective.

Yes, the couple have chosen that venue just for the idyllic views of the giant white sheet!

Not using flash at the ceremony is just a common courtesy, so much so that pre digital camera with the capable high ISO's ceremonies were often not covered as the officiates object to flash.

Nagging the events coordinator with every mundane question will not go down well. It might also get fed back to the couple that you are asking the sorts of questions that make you seem incompetent. The most you should be asking is, "can I come down and see the venue?" Even then the coordinator won't give you the guided tour, after all you are not her client.

Using lightroom to pull down highlights and lift shadows is not the end of the world. More work in post processing instead of inconveniencing the clients and guests? It's a no brainer.

Your first wedding is nerve wrecking and you don't want to make mistakes, but even Pro's make mistakes and take hundred of photo's before getting the really good ones.

Check the venue out in person, take a friend and do some back lit photo's, practise back lit photo's in general, work on them in post, see what you come up with.

Do not keep ringing the venue, they will blacklist your name from that location and if they are part of a chain all of those too.

Silver-Halide wrote in post #17395262
Hmm.. I am wondering if putting a giant white sheet behind the wedding party would look like ass. I'll ask the coordinator about whether that's something that is often done. It might make it easier for the audience to see and would give me more diffuse lighting

Don't even think about doing that. You're over thinking the whole thing. Just use a little on-camera flash fill and you'll be fine. If you think you have the skills and tools, you *might* put an off-camera flash off to the side if you need to fill in some shadow area but that's as far as I would push it.

I once had to really push it with my lighting when I shot a wedding in Cancun. The couple didn't want the background to be blown out so I put three lights inside the gazebo. Here's the result

IMAGE LINK: http://s182.photobucke​t.com …-313_zpsd05f6140.jpg.ht​ml

IMAGE LINK: http://s182.photobucke​t.com …-309_zps8f686a75.jpg.ht​ml

IMAGE LINK: http://s182.photobucke​t.com …0121_zps65c5945​4.jpg.html

IMAGE LINK: http://s182.photobucke​t.com …4870_zps346bddd​2.jpg.html

That's awesome! Thanks for posting those up. I was afraid of all my photos looking like that third one. Though I can use shadow recovery and dodge and burn, I just think your second shot looks very professional. That is more of the creative vision I have for the scene.

Ok no silly white sheet.

Thanks all. More ideas welcome.

Silver-Halide wrote in post #17395262
I've been wondering this myself. Just tried calling and I will need to call back tomorrow to get ahold of the events coordinator.

Hmm.. I am wondering if putting a giant white sheet behind the wedding party would look like ass. I'll ask the coordinator about whether that's something that is often done. It might make it easier for the audience to see and would give me more diffuse lighting

The gazebo is only 14'x14'. I wasn't planning on doing a lot of shots standing on there. That would look really distracting given the location of the audience don't you think? I planned on standing on the hill and floating around the seats with my 70-200. I suppose I could get up on the gazebo for a few photos with maybe a 50 or 85mm but I think a 35mm is probably a bad idea because of its distorted perspective.

I'm not sure if you got my suggestion. You know that I'm discussing bounced flash techniques right?? LOL. This.......

http://neilvn.com …lash/bft/NV1_21​25-900.jpg

http://www.popphoto.co​m/files/imce_uploads/f​oam.jpg

http://www.dembflashpr​oducts.com …ads/2014/04/pj_​flipit.jpg

The gazebo is the center stage isolated from the seating which is different from Jim's situation where the seating is in the gazebo. The difficulty is your hired to document while you must not interrupt the "moment". You will be in the "stage" along with bride/groom and party. If they are signing papers in the gazebo you'll have to get'n there.

Seeing that it's a setup specifically for such an occasion is there other local photog's displaying wedding photos from that same gazebo? did they get "up close and personal" or did they remain out of the limelight?

If you remain "out of the picture" the configuration of the gazebo you'll be lower than the gazebo level. Using a long telephoto lens may appear to be "uncle bob's" photo taking photos from the sidelines.

I'd be nice to hear feedback from others on this particular venue. I'm almost wondering if you may have little alternative but to be on the "stage" to fully document the event. This is where you'd need a 2nd shooter to take angles when your documenting closer to the B/G during pivotal moments.

Some photog's take the photo journalistic stealth approach while some may get'n there. It's your style that would determine how you'll document this situation.

Your style do you want the well exposed flash "look" with the background detailed? or the "natural" look where you'll probably use spot metering having the subjects perfectly exposed and the background blown out and play with highlights in post to recover some details? are you a prime shooter? or will you use zoom? Lots to think about in aperture selection since you want to have story telling details in the background.

jcolman wrote in post #17395324
Don't even think about doing that. You're over thinking the whole thing. Just use a little on-camera flash fill and you'll be fine. If you think you have the skills and tools, you *might* put an off-camera flash off to the side if you need to fill in some shadow area but that's as far as I would push it.

I once had to really push it with my lighting when I shot a wedding in Cancun. The couple didn't want the background to be blown out so I put three lights inside the gazebo. Here's the result

IMAGE LINK: http://s182.photobucke​t.com …-313_zpsd05f6140.jpg.ht​ml

IMAGE LINK: http://s182.photobucke​t.com …-309_zps8f686a75.jpg.ht​ml

Here's a shot without the lights.

IMAGE LINK: http://s182.photobucke​t.com …0121_zps65c5945​4.jpg.html

I was careful not to blast the guests.

IMAGE LINK: http://s182.photobucke​t.com …4870_zps346bddd​2.jpg.html

These are awesome. Can you explain where you set up the lights? Did you use strobes or mounted flashes somewhere?

jimeuph1 wrote in post #17394333
Flash during the ceremony itself is generally a no-no. Even outdoors, especially because you are going to be using direct flash. It's going to be an annoyance from the clients, their guests and the officiates point of view.

So you are going to set up your flashes, find one position and then shoot from there? As soon as you move how your light effects your subject will change, and then when you turn around for guest reactions, the flashes will be in your shot like mini suns.

What will the sun going behind the clouds do for your exposure? Light changes constantly outdoors and your position in relation to the sun will wildly change what you might need.

Under exposing the background and popping the flash on your clients, could start to look like they were getting married hours after they walked up the aisle, that would jar the consistency of the final product as well.

In England we would also be asking, what happens if it rains? Even in the middle of August. But perhaps that isn't a consideration where you are.

A quick google reveals the types of pictures you personally are trying to avoid, but if experienced photographers that are charging $4200 upwards are providing the blown out backgrounds but well exposed clients, they are doing what is possible for the situation they are in.

The white gazebo acts as a giant reflector, which is lighting the clients nicely, shadows are lifted they way you might like them etc.

I think as a whole, adding flash elements into the mix gives you too much to worry about on the day, far too many variables to consider, especially on a first wedding.

When I first started, I did some free weddings, I told myself (thanks to the ill advised internet) that manual shooting was the only way to shoot and to not let the camera do the thinking because it would be wrong. I came back with enough photo's to deliver, but the amount I had to throw away because I was wrong, for various reasons, mostly changing light conditions. It was heart breaking.
I told myself that it was lack of practise and that I would do better the more practise I had. Another wedding, much better this time, but the photo's seemed lacking and I wasn't sure why.
During the third wedding, I had a lightbulb and realised that the problem was the fact that I was so busy with the technical element of picture taking that I was missing the perfect bits of moments, I was too busy chasing the light meter reading which was slowing my reaction down. So I thought right I am going to let the camera chase the meter, I am going to chase the moments! Swapped to aperture priority and I haven't looked back since.
My photos radically improved as a result.
Just have to occasionally check the back of the screen when it is tricky lighting to make sure the camera is right and if not adjusting is just flicking one dial!
Though I do need manual mode for when I put a flash on.

My point is you have an opportunity to not make the same mistake, worrying about the technical element detaches you from the scene in front of you. So in your case adding flashes to the mix is going to do the same.

The acronym K.I.S.S. comes to mind, Keep It Simple Stupid.

Perfect photo's are not the ones with perfect bell curves and technical wizardry, but the ones that evoke an emotion from the viewer.

I just realized what I have been doing wrong all this time. Thanks!

Letting the camera pick your shutter speed is really bad advice. Shutter priority .. I would be onboard with that. What if your camera thinks 1/8 seconds is the correct speed?

You really need to be able to know how to shoot in all of the modes... Well except P mode *L*