Lighting suggestions for outdoor wedding

OP, my advice is to get as technical as you're comfortable with, if that's the type of work you want to sell. Are the results "better" than natural light? Who knows. But they are "different", and in my experience, that difference can be what draws people in. There's 100 cameras at a wedding. For me, it's not enough to have "better" photos than the guests, I want my photos to look different.

If you're unsure if you can pull it off, a wedding, especially the ceremony, isn't the place to experiment. But in a field FLOODED with wedding photographers, flash has definitely been my ticket to distinguishing myself from the sea of mediocre photographers in my area.
Jcolman's work is always inspiring when it comes to lighting venues.

Simon brings up an interesting point about a bunch of people bringing point and shoots to a wedding. The issue with off camera flash is those point and shoots might trigger your flash. The good... Their photos will come out dark. The bad... They are killing your batteries and might end up making the flash unavailable while it charges back up while you are taking a photo. This happened to me during a Santa shoot I did a couple years ago. I had my strobes set up and ready to go. Then 3-4 people brought their point and shoots and triggered both of my strobes. I had to wait for them to recycle. I think it might have been their flash setting it off. One thing I noticed is they were complaining that their photos on their camera were dark even though their flash and my strobes went off. I'm not sure of the science behind that.

Make sure to turn off the optical slave and use triggers

douglala wrote in post #17397299
These are awesome. Can you explain where you set up the lights? Did you use strobes or mounted flashes somewhere?

I used flashes on light stands. Cheetah lights to be exact. These are triggered by an on-camera transmitter. I had two on either side of the wedding party and one in the back of the room. All lights had grids on them to limit spill.

Joe Buissink shoots pretty much exclusively in P mode. I defy you to say his work is rubbish or unprofessional.

Plenty of world class photographers, use AV mode, Jeff Ascough being the first name to mind.

Use AV mode in conjunction with auto ISO and set a minimum shutter speed. Cameras that don't have that option, might be better with TV mode admittedly.

Though I highly doubt that outside on a sunny day the camera will pick a slow shutter speed.

jimeuph1 wrote in post #17397769
Joe Buissink shoots pretty much exclusively in P mode. I defy you to say his work is rubbish or unprofessional.

Plenty of world class photographers, use AV mode, Jeff Ascough being the first name to mind.

It always bugs me when people mock the different camera modes. So long as you know what you camera is doing then all TV, AV, M and P have their places and uses. What they're really saying it they haven't figured out how to get the best of that particular mode for themselves.

Personally I shoot AV for 90% of the receptions I shoot. The rest of the time I shoot using liveview on M to set exposures (on the Canons) completely ignoring the metering. I've lost count of the amount of times I've been mocked by other "professionals" because I can't shoot on M without Liveview or and EVF... yet I'd be happy to deliver SOOC my exposures are that consistent.

At the end of the day what mode anyone shoots in is irrelevant... it all boils down to the end result.

Here, Here, Memoriesoftomorrow

Totally agree. You can use anything as long as you know what you are doing and what your camera will do

scorpio_e wrote in post #17398528
Totally agree. You can use anything as long as you know what you are doing and what your camera will do

You don't even need to know what you are doing. You just need to get results. The end product is what matters.

memoriesoftomorrow wrote in post #17398582
You don't even need to know what you are doing. You just need to get results. The end product is what matters.

Well I would say that understanding your craft does have it's advantages.

jcolman wrote in post #17398600
Well I would say that understanding your craft does have it's advantages.

memoriesoftomorrow wrote in post #17398582
You don't even need to know what you are doing. You just need to get results. The end product is what matters.

Getting results that the client is pleased with more often than not means the photographer understands their craft. More importantly they understand how various light sources interact to provide the light to expose the shot.

In this situation, as Jim has illustrated, the off camera lights are filling and balancing the ambient light. Its not difficult but it helps to have an understanding about how to accomplish the balance.

Ideally, photographer added light is not obvious. Its just another light source illuminating the scene.

There's nothing wrong with benchmarking on what others have done. See if you can see what other photographers have done at this venue (clearly not the first wedding there). The venue may have a book with some pictures available for their own advertising. See what others have done. Not sure how local photographers would feel if you wanted to see their shots, but some might have this location in their on-line portfolios.

Food for thought.