My first wedding shots - low light

Finally!

I was allowed to do some shooting at my friend's wedding. I had comfort being just a 'backup' photographer, so I wasn't that much stressed, but I also missed some moments trying not to get in a way of the 'pro'.

The lightening was terrible. Even with ISO800 and quite fast lens (2.8) most of the shots are blurred. Lesson learned: ISO800 and 20D results in awful noise. I tried to rescue some shots with Noise Ninja, but now they look like... hmm.. artistic, or simply plastic :/

I'd be pleased to hear some critics from you, and I'm sure I'll be back with more questions.

http://notart.dj.pl/Ad​am/

Well; for shooting as a guest, you sure did a lot!

I'm about in the same boat as you for WP experience, but allow me to take a stab at a few comments.

Did the guy smile at all? haha Nervous I'm sure.

Like you said, poor lighting. f2.0 can be tricky.

Can you boost the saturation? It's like looking at The Matrix, except it's Septia instead of green. Maybe it's a color balance thing - surely the under-exposure doesn't help that.

Anyway; very clean photography. Distinct lack of extra backs-of-heads and missing limbs! A few of the outdoor ones could benifit from flash, but good catches, esp. the one of her running.

Question: How are you hosting these? Very clean!

Personally, I dont like Noise Ninja. I much prefer Neat Image because it looks more natural when sorting out noisey low light shots.
Apart from WB you did an good job for a guest

THX

Adam is a very serious man. It's difficult to shoot him smiling. I think I even wasn't trying

I tried out DxO Optics, and I think it looks a bit better than after Noise Ninja (blame me, not software).

About cut limbs. I'll have to 'unlearn' applying 'default' crop (13x18). In most cases it effects in lost details.

Simple viewer is free to download from theirs web site. It's available as template for google picasa, which makes it very useful and simple to use.

mdomarus wrote in post #2467781
Finally!

Lesson learned: ISO800 and 20D results in awful noise. I tried to rescue some shots with Noise Ninja, but now they look like... hmm.. artistic, or simply plastic :/

http://notart.dj.pl/Ad​am/

Why????
This is my setup for most of my weddings. Only time I am not using ISO 800 is for formals, or also with the REBEL XT. Also I have never used Ninja, some noise reduction in CS2 has been enough for me.


By the way. I see very nice pics there. You did a Good job.

Hmm.. I'll have to spend some time fiddling with that noise. DxO did a great job, so the RAW material isn't lost. It's just a matter of technique.

BTW, did you experience a pattern of noise? It looks like a horizontal stripes.

What you have to realise is that you ONLY see the best on this forum its not often that the pro's here will let you see there average shots so please do not be hard on yourself, your pictures are ok a little better pp and you will not be upset with them. pick your best that you like and post it for some of the folk here to play with you will be amazed.

Martin.

mdomarus wrote in post #2468562
Hmm.. I'll have to spend some time fiddling with that noise. DxO did a great job, so the RAW material isn't lost. It's just a matter of technique.

BTW, did you experience a pattern of noise? It looks like a horizontal stripes.

OK. I prepared another version, I hope, more natural.

updated gallery

Dont be afraid to use a higher ISO.. it does no good if your images are underexposed at 800 and you have to lighten them.. it still leaves you with noise. Rather go higher and you dont have to lighten them or maybe only a little. You can reduce some of the noise... and noise actually often adds to the pic.

Nice.

Martin

mdomarus wrote in post #2469032
OK. I prepared another version, I hope, more natural.

updated gallery

for low light, and the situation, I liked them....I need to kick my iso up also..I spent alot of time in the last wedding playing witht he history to lighten them up. I think that is where my noise came into play. But all in all the bride and family were very happy.

I'm glad to hear it wasn't that terrible. It's quite possible I'll get some practise on my family's comming weddings, and then, who knows? I won't pretend, I wouldn't like to start shootings weddings more seriously
At the moment I'm trying to sell my Sigma, and I'd like to buy Canon 17-55 2.8IS instead. Thank you all for comments!

mdomarus wrote in post #2469032
OK. I prepared another version, I hope, more natural.

updated gallery

I think this is worlds better than the first set. Great job! Guess half the battle is in the presentation.

Who did your web page? I'd be interested in obtaining a similar template. It's a very good manner in which to present your images.

liza wrote in post #2476503
Who did your web page? I'd be interested in obtaining a similar template. It's a very good manner in which to present your images.

Ditto. It sort of looks like a Flash presentation. Very clean.