AT THE BRIDES REQUEST....HELP...

OOO. I like the graduated ones on stairs. For lighting, I've seen a very high stand with a huge umbrella with slave attached, cord to the camera slightly under. High up is the key and outdoors, if possible. I agree that the 17 distorts too much for my taste, so I use it on the longer end or put on another lens around 30mm. If you need a tall stand with umbrella, they are not too expensive. DOF is something to consider as well. Put everyone in focus.

As long as you're not too close, 17mm's doesn't distort too much, and it has the added advantage of giving you lots of DOF...

Jamie, that's a wonderfully clear shot of the group by the water considering its size. B&G can easily make out their guests.

For the first shot of the guests wedged between the church pews did you use any fill flash to supplement the ambient light?

I don't own a fisheye - I feel they have their place, but am always a bit leary about their use with people. Nonetheless it's obvious you worked hard at these weddings - thanks for sharing!

jamiewexler wrote:
I get this request all of the time. Like everyone said, look for elevation and shoot with the widest lens you can.

None of these will win any awards for exposure (most of them are from very early weddings - you can tell by the lenses )

if you arent using a strobe, or it can keep up, shoot a burst of about 5 images for every angle or whatever, then if somebody is blinking, or looks ugly in one, photoshop the face from one where they arent blinking or look better.

ive done like many group shots this way, if you are good enough at PS it shouldnt be hard.

I have actually seen a photographer shoot a large group in the park with a Ladder. He did have someone holding the ladder and he shot a few.

Thanks! The church aisle shot was all natural light. It was my fourth or fifth wedding and I hadn't yet tamed my artifical lights (so I shot natural whenever I could get handholdable SS's). Shame too, the strong window light from the left blew out the skin on a few of the folks. If I had to shoot it today, I'd have exposed for the highlights and bounced my flash off the ceiling to fill the shadow areas...

Know how you feel - I've been the victim of strong side lighting myself a few times, and in pre-Photoshop days using film ; a baaaaaad situation.

Usually that was using medium format gear, ASA 400 film and some good size Metz units - I'd end up shooting the flash head-on at around f8. It would eliminate much of the side overexposure and make for some nice crisp, facial images. Bouncing would not have worked for me at that ASA, and also considering the dark overhead beams.

But now that I'm starting to use the 5D with the 580 and can get away with higher ISO settings, I'm going to have to rethink some of my approaches. You guys have shown be some methods that I wouldn't have considered before using film.

Stu

well, it's not a wedding, but it is a group of close to 80 people. and at night, no less. this was done @ 1600 with a 10D, 19-35 3.5-4.5 and a 420EX on the second floor deck behind a friend of mine's house. the yard slowly slopes away from the house, so i had to get everyone to scrunch in as close as possible. i wish i'd had better lighting, cause the amount of noise i ended up with is very aggravating...

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

That's an example of why you want natural light, or everyone about the same distance from the light source. You did a good job given your circumstances.

Still, a very good effort; you're able to make out individual faces and it captures the spirit of the event.

I don't know if you shot in RAW or .jpg, but to my eye the folks in the back row look to be maybe just a stop or two darker. Perhaps using the brightness (f-stop equivalent in RAW) control in ACR2 you could brighten them up a bit, or just "dodge" them out a little in PS; just one way to make a nice photo better. But hey, you did a good job in an extreme situation. - Stu

dshootist wrote:
well, it's not a wedding, but it is a group of close to 80 people. and at night, no less. this was done @ 1600 with a 10D, 19-35 3.5-4.5 and a 420EX on the second floor deck behind a friend of mine's house. the yard slowly slopes away from the house, so i had to get everyone to scrunch in as close as possible. i wish i'd had better lighting, cause the amount of noise i ended up with is very aggravating...

take a ton right in a row. and then use photoshop to get one with everyone's eyes open. As you can see with Jamie's last shot, getting 100 people to all have a great face for just one shot can be brutal. Photoshop to the rescue.

Oh my aching mouse button!

This would certainly be a glutton for punishment. You don't want the public to know the extent of your talent and abilities - then they will expect EVERYTHING out of you.....and at a discount, yet. Just kidding . The public seems to think that PS is the holy grail and we can simply wave the magic wand to fix their facial imperfections in mere seconds.

I just paste their head or eyes from another picture. It is quite easy